Amen Thompson is the Rockets' REAL franchise player

PPG are for kids and casual fans and highlight and celebration droolers like you

"TS% is a madeup/estimated stat"

LOL

 

"Just like"? You have completely lost your mind.

 

Nah bro, apparently an average of real numbers is exactly the same as when you base an estimate on a fictional player and make up magic numbers that sound clever to people who never played sports!

 

I'm not saying every contrived stat is completely useless, but we must keep our heads screwed on when discussing them.

 

I read the Moneyball book, and I'm inclined to believe those kinds of "metrics" have more use in that actual situation than overall player evaluation. Moneyball isn't "how do we see who the greats are" it's "how do we find super cheap players with niche abilities that we can leverage to outperform the individual players by creating a composite team of lots of different niches that overachieve as a unit." Never as valuable as true factual numbers, but situationally valuable if you're trying to find statistical outliers than may (not will, MAY) produce over-the-odds results if you then identify ways to leverage those anomalies. Morey leveraging Beard's insane ability to draw fouls is a very key example of this. The problem is that Rockets fans especially are metric obsessed because Morey was successful with his own "money ball" era pre-Harden and kept us somewhat competitive during those years against all odds. They've convinced themselves he's the biggest genius ever and all convoluted algorithms define all sports - they're almost never used in the rest of the world, it's a fairly American phenomenon outside of American dominated sports (most other countries US sports barely register as "pro sports" - baseball being the main one where the US model runs throughout, predictably.) There's a reason teams are starting to pull back from the over-analytical/moreyball/metrics approach, it's a fad, and it's passing, thankfully.

 

Oh yeah TS% where Michael Jordan ranks in the hundreds and Rudy Gobert is top 5? Nice hill to die on dumbass.

 

PPG is a ratio (or rate) dividing two measured numbers of different units. No different than measuring velocity. Velocity and PPG are mathematical comparisons.

While that makes it a “stat”, it’s quite a leap to say WS does the same thing, just with more inputs. It doesn’t.

WS/WAR/BPM are model-driven with assumptions baked-in. PPG is a measured rate. Quite different classes of stats.

As comparison to velocity: In history, velocity was used in models proved incorrect, later. Likewise, there will come a time when Video-based stats ( still in its embryonic stage) will finally prove how flawed boxscore adv stats are, and we will look back on this era as a silly use of constructed models…one that robbed Harden of an MVP, btw.

fwiw: TS% is also a ratio. Pts / total shooting attempts​

 

Jaren Jackson Jr, Bam Adebayo, Pascal Siakam, Chet Holmgren, CJ McCollum, Evan Mobley, and Scottie Barnes are all somewhere in the 18-22pt range and get max deals and it's notable that Mobley, Barnes, JJJ, Bam, and Chet are all "all NBA defense"/DPOY caliber players just like Amen. There is NO rule that says a player can't get a max if they don't shoot above x% from three - and the reason why there is no rule is because it doesn't ****ing matter. You can be valuable on the court and not a great shooter. Cherry picking two stats to prove a point is beyond ridiculous.

Just for fun here are stats comparing 4 players seasons including an MVP candidate, a DPOY candidate, an All Star, and Amen....and everyone on this list is shooting well below league average from 3. I omitted 3pt percentage here because you already called out Amen's 3pt percentage above and strategically it doesn't matter if someone is shooting 2%, 22% or 32% - defenses choosing to double on another higher efficiency player will always give you that shot and if their pts are overall all in the ballpark of each other(they are), then it doesn't really matter. So looking at these players - what sticks out?

Player A --- Player B --- Player C --- Player D
MPG - 29.1 --- 37.3 --- 31.8 --- 34.9
FG - 5.1 --- 6.9 --- 6.2 --- 7.5
FGA - 9.8 --- 13.1 --- 12.8 --- 15.7
FG% - .522 --- .529 --- .479 --- .475
2P - 4.1 --- 6.6 --- 5.1 --- 5.8
2PA - 7.0 --- 11.6 --- 9.8 --- 10.8
2P% - 579 --- .568 --- .519 --- .536
eFG% - .576 --- .541 --- .520 --- .528
FT - 1.5 --- 3.8 --- 3.2 --- 3.3
FTA - 1.9 --- 4.9 --- 3.9 --- 4.2
FT% - .802 --- .779 --- .802 --- .781
ORB - 1.2 --- 3.0 --- 1.3 --- 2.4
DRB - 5.1 --- 4.8 --- 5.9 --- 5.9
TRB - 6.2 --- 7.8 --- 7.2 --- 8.2
AST - 2.0 --- 5.3 --- 2.5 --- 6.1
STL - 1.7 --- 1.5 --- 2.3 --- 1.3
BLK - 0.8 --- 0.6 --- 0.8 --- 1.5
TOV - 1.2 --- 2.4 --- 1.5 --- 2.8
PF - 1.9 --- 2.2 --- 2.0 --- 2.0
PTS - 12.8 --- 18.0 --- 16.5 --- 19.9


...look - I don't take too much stock in the stats telling the whole story - how we utilize players is VERY impactful to stat lines both offensively and defensively. Amen's scoring numbers this year come with far more usage than players on more stacked teams - he generally more TOs as a result but his shot diet including efficiency at self creation which is a lot harder than playing with a team of creators who find you open and you just gotta finish the play(like how we use Jabari). I don't agree that there is some defensive magic that Scottie Barnes brings that makes WAY more valuable than Amen but I do agree that Barnes plays a completely different role in his defense than Amen does in his and you may think one is more valuable than the other based on your prioritization of team needs.

Barnes is basically schemed to play more of a Draymond super helper role - put him on a less impactful player and let him read defenses and disrupt team actions. When you are playing a team that has lots of off ball movements and specific plays - that is SUPER helpful. Amen is typically schemed to be a primary on ball defender and he is VERY disruptive at that. Draymond quarterbacking a defense vs Amen face guarding Steph Curry at 90ft - those are entirely different roles defensively. I would imagine a guy like Barnes is likely better against a GS or Indy(when they were healthy) type team while Amen might find more success relatively at curbing huge offensive explosion nights from guys like SGA, ANT, Brunson, etc. Ideally Bari or Tari becomes more of a defensive quarterback paired with Amen as the point of attack defender, but the reality is neither of those guys are fast enough processors to play that role(see the KD "r****ded" comments) so I think that is a real gap on this team and maybe Udoka learns to utilize Amen more in that role too - I think he is capable but that's not how Udoka uses him today.

Bottom line is if you think Amen is NOT a max player then who are the non max players not on Rookie deals you would rather have than Amen? If you have a POV for who makes more sense please share it but saying "no way" without giving a POV just makes you a troll in which case you can kindly shut the **** up while grown folk are talking.

What's that saying - "if you are not part of the solution, then you are the problem"?

 

@The Cat

Can you ask Stone if just uses PPG when deciding Amen's extension so Tilman can save his hard earned $

 

Its not simply TS% = Total Points / (FGA + FTA)
But

Formula
The standard formula for true shooting percentage is:
TS% = Total Points / 2 X (FGA + 0.44 X FTA)

• TS%: True Shooting Percentage
• PTS: Points Scored
• FGA: Field Goal Attempts
• FTA: Free Throw Attempts
• 0.44: A coefficient used to estimate the number of possessions used by free throws, accounting for and-ones, technical fouls, and three-shot fouls. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

Key Aspects of TS%

• Efficiency Metric: A higher TS% indicates a more efficient scorer.
• Context: While 60% or higher is generally considered elite, it is best used alongside volume to distinguish between role players and high-volume stars.
• Why 0.44? While not perfect for single-game samples, the 0.44 multiplier is considered accurate for large samples to estimate the number of possessions used by free throws. [1, 2, 3, 4]

High-Efficiency Players (Examples)

• NBA: Stephen Curry and Kevin Durant are frequently cited as elite, with career percentages often above 60%.
• WNBA: Players like Sylvia Fowles and Jonquel Jones have recorded high career true shooting percentages. [1, 2]

Difference from Other Metrics

• FG% (Field Goal %): Only measures 2-point and 3-point shots made.
• eFG% (Effective Field Goal %): Adjusts for 3-pointers being worth more than 2-pointers but does not include free throws.
• TS%: The most comprehensive, including all scoring methods. [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]

 

You’re conflating “estimated” TS% with true TS%

the formula you showed is an estimate used to derive TS% from a box score. But make no mistake, you can calculate a true ratio for pts per shot attempts each game from the pbp where you don’t need the .44 coefficient.

Math-wise, TS% is no different than eFG%, it merely counts shooting fouls too

Since we know what was and-1, what was three fts for fouling a 3pt shooter, what was technicals, the stat no longer needs the .44 estimator.

this isn’t mathematically debatably. TS% is a ratio. Just because we want to use the estimator so we can compare eras before play by play, doesn’t take away from that math fact.

 

I’m smarter than everyone here and my opinion is the best

 

You're missing the point again. I never said I don't want Amen or I want somebody else instead of him. All I don't want to do is give a ****ing massively limited offensive player a max contract in an era where the CBA means you have be very frugal to build a competitive team. How hard is that really to understand? Y'all are ****ing absolute batshit crazy, straight up.

 

You're fighting a losing battle, these people are so bad at math they really can't understand that the word "ESTIMATE" instantly makes it completely different than something based on actual numbers and changes it from an objective reality, into a subjective opinion with an inherent assumption forming part of the calculation.

 

Ah you're one of those "metric" opinion types, I'll just stick to objective facts that don't need an opinion

 

I'm confused. How are the TS% numbers we see calculated? I've always thought the .44 factor is there and it's an estimate (though a very accurate estimate by empirical data).

 

The ones we see do have the estimate, but that then adds an element of subjectivity. What heypartner's saying is that the .44 doesn't need to be in the calculation, and removing it gives a more objective statistic overall akin to EFG% but including the foul shouts made using the actual possessions in the game rather than the blanket .44 estimate.

edit just to clarify as I realise I missed context - the 0.44 is to estimate the number of possessions used by free throws, you can replace that with the actual numbers and then the estimate is not needed. (Oh look, he understands math, and all you metrics dumbasses didn't put that together! shocking.)

 

Okay, so that's a theoretical TS% that does not exist now. You'd have to calculate each FTA differently according to its real possession context. I guess with AI technology, it could and should have been done.

 

Yeah the estimate is more for speed of calculation than accuracy in truth, and as HP said, it allows you to compare era to era because you're using the same blanket estimate number (which again, reduces the accuracy and adds a level of subjectivity - albeit a much more valid and useful one than most of the "catch alls" which literally just have weighted assumptions based on whoever designed the formula/algorithm - those are sketchier because how you weight the variables will massively skew the "metric" and can be easily manipulated to push the subjective narrative of which part of the game the author considers more important than others.) Nobody will because most of these things aren't actually that important so they don't need too much accuracy, but you could create an "accurate" TS% for every game where you have perfect recording of every play and that would give a completely objective statistic with no estimate as part of the calculation.

 

Deleted