Ok, you COULD manage one, got me. Please post the countless other ways you had in mind. Are you still standing by your FG% is useless statement. You failed to address that point. You'll never admit you exaggerated or were wrong in any kind of way. You already bypassed the other 2 points. btw- Don't need to know posters. Just simply respond to words on a screen. I'm man enough to address ALL points during a conversation AND admit when I'm 100% correct. You, like most posters, disappear/bypass facts then act all high and mighty.
If you want to know other metrics that bad that I have written on, go to my other threads in my signature below . Yes I still beleive FG% is a useless stat especially when we talk about the rockets basketball. The rockets either shoot FT's, close shots or 3's. And their are metics which account for the extra point in 3's and the amount of FT's taken by a team. FG% should never be used in an argument over a players effiency for those reasons. Also what parts did I skip over as u say it I did not skip over anything.
... when NOT 100% correct _____ Be real, Voice (your majesty [giving respect to a longtime poster, I guess]). You read 10 sentences then ONLY responding to 5 words, then act like you're high and mighty. No surprise though
No you don't because FG% is a factor in any stat measuring overall shooting %s. Again, FG% isn't everything, but does play a factor and is NOT useless.
when people these days ask, is this player an effienct shooter from the field, if your talking about the pro level, then FG% should not be used as it doesn't factor in the bonus of the 3 point shot and free throws, what do you not understand. The only people that use FG% are those who write for the bleacher report or crappy espn journalists
Of course, FG% doesn't factor in 3PA/3PT% and/or FTs specifically... OF COURSE it doesn't. But it does factor in ANY overall shooting efficiency theory. It's really pretty simple, FG% is not USELESS... and it's definately not useless when discussing overall shooting %'s. It's simple as Dr Suess, but you won't admit it you exaggerated. Real talk, I expect that type of dishonesty from a guy with 20 posts such as myself. Do better
So are you saying morey and his office full of statistical analysts use FG% over the more useful other shooting metrics? Or that at the Sloan sports and analytics Confrence the brightest brains in sports stats are wasting their time and should just use FG%. Step aside Murray, this guy knows his stuff
Step aside, Honesty... because this Aussie won't admit anything. I'VE ALREADY SAID FG% IS NOT EVERYTHING. Said it multiple times in this very conversation. Forget much? You're just not big enough to say "YES I did exaggerate when I said FG% is USELESS". ....... When every overall shooting % stat uses FG% as a variable. You DO eat green eggs and ham.... you just lie and said you didn't.
I do agree with you to some extent their, if I was seeming forthright, it's just when newbies try and use stats which frustrate me like FG% I may go over the top. Welcome aboard MATE, may we never derail anouther thread again On the topic of the thread, if they have MCW where is the Victor Oladipo
Decent response, I guess. Although you should agree 100 (not merely "some" extent) as FG% is used in any overall shooting efficiency stat. MCW has come out hard. Quaduaple-double (almost) his first game career game.... leading the in steals. Needs to improve his shooting... FG% lol... and eFG... and TS.
So how did they measure potential? ... Oh, it's just the opinions of a bunch of media guys. They even project Harden will be injured because of his style of play. Really? How many games has Davis actually been out already because of injuries?
It's a good thing he did too. If he didn't pump up his value right before the draft then there is a good chance either the Hornets take him to pair with Davis or the Blazers pick him instead of Leonard. I am surpised he fell to 9th. What if that was Morey's plan all along? We'll never know. They chose the perfect time to make this list too with Harden recently coming off an injury. It makes Pistons, Pacres, and Hornets fans proud to have a player with a better PER than Harden 20 games into the season despite his injuries. Why is it not too early to make this list, but too early to make the top 25 NBA players this season? Is it because Kobe wouldn't make the list at all while Dwight and Harden would both be top 20 according sole determining factor (PER) they used?
What's the point of looking at just the last 5 games for Harden, talk about a tiny sample size. Harden's performance so far is basically on par with his performance last year.
my bad, didn't realize how much Hayward's shooting has fallen off a cliff as of late. I remember comparing their stats 10 games into the season and Hayward had a pretty sizable lead across the board. i still stand by my assessment of Hayward over Parsons. Parsons has the luxury of playing with two superstars and as a result gets a lot more easy buckets. Parsons will have a couple of nice drives each game, but for the most part he finishes in transition and shoots wide-open 3s. For most of the season, Hayward was the number 1 option and the only playmaker before Burke came back.
