Steve Novak wound up the preseason averaging 12.57 mpg, 6.9 ppg, 1.43 rpg and shot 14 for 29 (48.3 percent), all three-point shots. He did manage to have a couple of games when he attempted three free throws, most likely a result of being fouled while attempting a three-point shot. He did have one game in which he did not score. He did play in all seven of the preseason games for the Clippers. I just thought of sharing these stats with this board since he was traded away by the Rockets due to him not being part of the team's plans for this season.
Yep. If you check the box scores of all seven of the Clipper preseason games, you'll notice that the numbers in the two columns of FGM-A and 3PM-A duplicate each other in his line. He would likely have not been traded away by the Rockets if he would have added a lot more to his game besides just spot up and shoot three-pointers.
Yeah, like defense. He seems like a great guy but I don't miss him on the Rockets. He was a defensive liability.
But on the other hand, shooting at a 48% from 3pt land is pretty impressive, theres a handful of cats that cant even shoot at a .45% from 2 point territory in the pre-season. I'm kinda gonna miss novak...if he added defense in his repertoire, we could have had a Bruce Bowen (in addition to Shane).
Novak came in last night at scrub time. That should tell you what the Clippers think of him. As a rookie, Novak looked pretty good in preseason but he cratered when the real games started. He's still just a borderline NBA player. If he gets meaningful playing time during the regular season, let's see how he does.
Someone with knowledge figure out his TS %. I can't remember the formula for it, but if he's shooting almost 50% from 3 point land his TS% must be through the roof.
Yeah, like defense. He seems like a great guy but I don't miss him on the Rockets. He was a defensive liability.
Formula seems pretty arbitrary. I don't really care about TS% anyway. It tells you how efficient you are I guess, but it's easy to be efficient when you're a role player, compared to a guy like T-Mac who gets doubled and his the #1 focus of defenses. From ESPN.com's Hollinger player rating page: TS% True Shooting Percentage calculates what a player’s shooting percentage would be if we accounted for free throws and 3-pointers. TS% = (Total points x 50) divided by [(FGA + (FTA x 0.44)] Where does the (x 50) and (FTA x 0.44) come from? Seems totally arbitrary.
steve's a dead eye 3pt shooter that is his game there is no need for him to try to do things that is outside of game. hopefully he will get some time on the clippers but i think he will always be a situational player. oddly enough i think his height is the problem because he is 6'10 from getting more minutes. he would always have to be a forward and the other forwards in the league are way too strong for him. i bet if he was a bit shorter he would probably be able to get some more minutes since guarding sg/sfs would be a bit easier for teams to help out on compared to a PF or C underneath. i am hoping he has a great year though for the cliipers
okay so if I do that.. I don't get the high number I suspected. He scored 48 points in the preseason 48x50= 2400 he took 6 fts 6 x.44 = 2.64 took 29 shot attempts... so 2400/(29 x 2.64) = 31.35 because he gets so few attempts the fact that he shoots at such a high rate doesn't effect his TS%. I am guessing.
Not totally arbitrary. FTA * 0.44 = approximation for number of trips to the foul line (historicaly evidence shows that to be very accurate over a significant stretch of games) FGA + FTA*0.44 = total shot attempts, including field goals and trips to the foul line points / (FGA + FTA*.44) = points per shot attempt 0.5 * [ points / (FGA + FTA*.44) ] = Just scaling it so out brains can process it more easily (looks more like FG%). This factor is indeed arbitrary. So, you have .50 TS% if you score approximately 1 point per shot attempt. League average is usually between .53 and .54 TS%. League leaders are typically above .60 TS%.
Points per shot makes so much more sense. It's a very simple, effective method to determine a player's scoring efficiency. 48/29 = 1.655 points per shot. That's a pretty staggering scoring rate. If Novak never adds another OFFENSIVE dimension to his game, as long as he scores at this rate, he would have to be considered quite offensively efficient. The question is how much does he give back at the other end. You can't measure that statistically. And all his stats are skewed because he plays in garbage time. I have to accept the fact that multiple coaches have deemed him not good enough to play (JVG, RA, and now Dunleavy). Which leads me to believe he is not even a defensive deterrent. If he could play any kind of defense at all, he'd be getting 20 mpg with his scoring efficiency.
So, his TS% is (.5)*48/(29 + 2.64) = .76 TS% That's great, but notice that every single shot he took was a 3-pointer. That means he's not creating for himself, but relying on others to create the shot for him. So, when he's open at the 3-point line, and he has time to catch and shoot, he's awesome. No one ever doubted that. But how often will he be left open while he's on the court? And when he's not catching and shooting, how much is he hurting the team?
I completely agree. Hollinger's TS% is flawed, just like his PER is. What's wrong with PER is it skews the number to players who get less minutes per game. What's wrong with TS% is that the % will change with a higher volume of FT attempts shot at the same FT%...wtf? TS% will not change with more 3s attempted at the same percentage, nor will it change with more 2s shot at the same rate. But more FTs at the same rate does change the answer. The FT part of the equation is definitely arbitrary. Note however, if you eliminate FTs from the TS% equation (including subtracting made FTs from TPs), then TS% equals your FG% had you shot only 2ptrs. (You have to divide your answer by 100 to get a percentage though.) BTW: I don't know why the formula says X 50. It should be X .5 or "divide by 2". You divide by 2 because that's the TP value of a made 2ptr. If a field goal was worth 4, you'd divide by 4...and so on.
^^ more clarification. 2s and 3s are tightly coupled in that equation. If you eliminate FTs, the volume of 2s vs 3s attempted does not change your answer, if you continue to shoot them at the same rate. The FT part of the equation changes all that. For most all players, shooting more FTs at their rate increases the TS%, whereas shooting more 3s or 2s at the same rate will decrease it.
I'm not sure I understand. TS% won't necessarily increase with a higher volume of FT attempts at the same FT%. Take Shaq, for instance. If he shoots 60% on FGA, and 50% on FTA, then his TS% will go down with more free throw attempts. Which makes sense. Most players shoot free throws significantly better than they shoot field goals. So, yeah, if they're able to get themselves to the line more, then that should improve their efficiency. That's why coaches like players who get to the line. If we assume that for most players FTs are more efficient than 3s or 2s, then what you describe makes sense. If you increase your efficient shot attempts (FTs), your overall efficiency should go up, and if you increase you relatively less efficient shot attempts then your overall efficiency should decrease.
