I've always felt that TS% is not the way to evaluate guys in HD because FTs are factored into the percentage but FTs do not correlate to jumpshots in HD (I like eFG% better).  If you're evaluating a guy to see how much distro he should get, I would probably use a formula that uses some of the factors of TS%, but you'd also need to incorporate TOs (a negative side-effect of distro).  Also, for the +/- setting of a player, finding his 2pt% and 3pt % can be very helpful.  I got really into metrics a couple months ago and have since created a couple spreadsheets (now one master one) with about 10 different formulas which include some of the well-known metric stats as well as some of my own modified formulas designed specifically for HD.  I highly recommend doing this if you enjoy statistics because it's honestly tons of fun.

Tkimble... I agree.  While I haven't gone to the lengths you have (math isn't my strong point) I do track both TS% and EFG% and use a combination of those, along with 2pt, 3pt, and FT% to adjust distro (with the idea that in HD, more 3pt, equals far fewer FT% which helps poor FT shooting guards).  I have been tinkering with trying to figure out PER in HD, but it's proven a headache for me.   I'd love it if you'd be willing to share your spreadsheets or formulas but in the interest of fair play and competition, fully don't expect you to share your hard work with anyone.

I won't be sharing my spreadsheets or my own formulas (although I did outline generally what I look at for distro above), I would recommend looking at the Prouty Rating (I think WIS might use a version this for POY), Efficiency, Hollinger game score (not my favorite, but it can be helpful), and PPR.  While I don't rely on any of these, they all helped me formulate (pun intended) my own ideas.  Also, I would recommend looking into tracking your own teams offensive and defensive efficiency.

This is driving me nuts, The numbers I get or just a tad off from what you are getting when calculating TSP and I don't know why. I also looked at Donner's TSP for the last 2 seasons and I came up with 53.6 for this season and 60.1 for last season which just makes me dislike TSP even more. Reason being is the system actually penalizes you for shooting a lot of free throws at least when you are around the 75% range. If you look at Donner's #s from last season and this season, last season he scored 600 points while shooting 55.2% from the field on 415 shots and went 142 for 192 (6.2 attempts per game)  from the line for 74% in 31 games. This season he's scored 664 points on 461 shots while shooting 53.4% while making 172 of 224 FTs (7.47 APG) from the line for 76.8% in 30 games which from an efficiency stand point looks remarkably similar but according to TSP he's down about 6.5% this season. The main cause for the dip is that he's taking almost 1.3 more FTs per game. Now when you look at PPS last season he was at 1.446 and this season he's at 1.44 exactly which makes a lot of sense to me. Any system that discredits points because they came in a different way is one that I don't like.

Posted by kmasonbx on 3/11/2011 3:25:00 PM (view original):

If you want to base things on performance Brown isn't even close to John Donner, even ratings wise it's close, although I'd give Brown the edge http://whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=13655&pid=1710927. However based on performance Donner is the best player in Knight D3, 22.1ppg, 8.7 rebounds, 1.4 blocks, 53.4% from the field and 76.8 from the line, 1.44 points per shot and a true shooting % of 72.3. Donner is easily the best big man I've ever had at D3.

I just want to point out that Petit's raw stats were almost identical to Donner's.  And his per minute stats are a little bit better across the board with better percentages.  Just saying.

Very nice player, didn't expect to see another big on the level of Donner. It's scary how similar their #s are.

Posted by kmasonbx1 on 3/11/2011 5:43:00 PM (view original):
This is driving me nuts, The numbers I get or just a tad off from what you are getting when calculating TSP and I don't know why. I also looked at Donner's TSP for the last 2 seasons and I came up with 53.6 for this season and 60.1 for last season which just makes me dislike TSP even more. Reason being is the system actually penalizes you for shooting a lot of free throws at least when you are around the 75% range. If you look at Donner's #s from last season and this season, last season he scored 600 points while shooting 55.2% from the field on 415 shots and went 142 for 192 (6.2 attempts per game)  from the line for 74% in 31 games. This season he's scored 664 points on 461 shots while shooting 53.4% while making 172 of 224 FTs (7.47 APG) from the line for 76.8% in 30 games which from an efficiency stand point looks remarkably similar but according to TSP he's down about 6.5% this season. The main cause for the dip is that he's taking almost 1.3 more FTs per game. Now when you look at PPS last season he was at 1.446 and this season he's at 1.44 exactly which makes a lot of sense to me. Any system that discredits points because they came in a different way is one that I don't like.

The thing is your system doesn't make much sense because it's not weighting free throws in the denominator. 

I can have a guy who shoots like shaq, 50% from the line. He takes 100 shots all season, scores 400 points overall,100 from the shots he took, the other 300 from taking 600 fta and hitting 300 of them. His pt/fga would be 4.0, which is higher than every player we have discussed here. Would you say this guy, who shoots 50% from the field and 50% from the line is more efficient than your C.

If you want to use your system, you have to weigh in the free throws as a possession of some sort. TSP does that because the denominator is 2(fga+.44fta). .44 is an estimation weighing free as less than one full possession because you can score a basket, get fouled, and still take an extra free throws. If there is no point after, fta would be weighted at .5 per fta and this equation makes perfect sense, both mathematically and logically.

And I really fail to see how TSP penalizes you for taking alot of FTs. If your player is a C, as long as the FT% is higher than the fg%, the FTs are raising his TSP. For 3pt shooters, in order for FT to raise TSP, the FT% has to be higher than the EFG. This again, makes perfect mathematical and logical sense. 

I've actually been playing around with a custom offensive efficiency rating, but I've had a hard time deciding how much to value free throws.  I'm not much concerned with the fact that they might be associated with another shot attempt.  I think that I value that factor significantly less heavily than the fact that every time my player is shooting free throws he's also generating fouls for the opposing team.  So far I haven't had time to compile data to try to find the approximate value associated with that, but I figure it can actually be fairly substantial.  Of course, that's non-linear as well.  PF Donald Petit averaged over 7.5 FTA/game for Rochester this past season, and enough of them were and-1s that he was likely generating well over 4 shooting fouls per game alone.  That equates to a lot of time on the bench for opposing bigs.  On the other hand, my SG Clifford Taylor shot a better percentage but on under 2.5 FTA/g.  I would certainly argue that the marginal value of any given free throw being taken by Petit was greater than that of a free throw taken by Taylor even though Taylor was a bit more likely to make his, not because of the points but because of the associated personal foul.  Of course, trying to come up with an equation to fairly assess that value is entirely possible but not something I have time to mess around with right now.

Posted by dahsdebater on 3/11/2011 7:51:00 PM (view original):
I've actually been playing around with a custom offensive efficiency rating, but I've had a hard time deciding how much to value free throws.  I'm not much concerned with the fact that they might be associated with another shot attempt.  I think that I value that factor significantly less heavily than the fact that every time my player is shooting free throws he's also generating fouls for the opposing team.  So far I haven't had time to compile data to try to find the approximate value associated with that, but I figure it can actually be fairly substantial.  Of course, that's non-linear as well.  PF Donald Petit averaged over 7.5 FTA/game for Rochester this past season, and enough of them were and-1s that he was likely generating well over 4 shooting fouls per game alone.  That equates to a lot of time on the bench for opposing bigs.  On the other hand, my SG Clifford Taylor shot a better percentage but on under 2.5 FTA/g.  I would certainly argue that the marginal value of any given free throw being taken by Petit was greater than that of a free throw taken by Taylor even though Taylor was a bit more likely to make his, not because of the points but because of the associated personal foul.  Of course, trying to come up with an equation to fairly assess that value is entirely possible but not something I have time to mess around with right now.

You can modify the TSP formula by dropping the weight on the free throws in the denominator with an exponential function. Or if you want to make it easier and just be linear, then say for players with 200FTs or less, .44. For 200-300 .40, for 300-400 .35. 400-500 .29, etc. Free throws definitely need to be weighted such that they count as possessions. When you set them to zero with the simple Pts/fga, the example I pulled up above shows up.

And P.S. Even with the simple pts/fga formula, which clearly favors high volume low % ft shooters, Weddington is still sporting a cool 1.5.

Posted by tianyi7886 on 3/11/2011 7:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kmasonbx1 on 3/11/2011 5:43:00 PM (view original):
This is driving me nuts, The numbers I get or just a tad off from what you are getting when calculating TSP and I don't know why. I also looked at Donner's TSP for the last 2 seasons and I came up with 53.6 for this season and 60.1 for last season which just makes me dislike TSP even more. Reason being is the system actually penalizes you for shooting a lot of free throws at least when you are around the 75% range. If you look at Donner's #s from last season and this season, last season he scored 600 points while shooting 55.2% from the field on 415 shots and went 142 for 192 (6.2 attempts per game)  from the line for 74% in 31 games. This season he's scored 664 points on 461 shots while shooting 53.4% while making 172 of 224 FTs (7.47 APG) from the line for 76.8% in 30 games which from an efficiency stand point looks remarkably similar but according to TSP he's down about 6.5% this season. The main cause for the dip is that he's taking almost 1.3 more FTs per game. Now when you look at PPS last season he was at 1.446 and this season he's at 1.44 exactly which makes a lot of sense to me. Any system that discredits points because they came in a different way is one that I don't like.

The thing is your system doesn't make much sense because it's not weighting free throws in the denominator. 

I can have a guy who shoots like shaq, 50% from the line. He takes 100 shots all season, scores 400 points overall,100 from the shots he took, the other 300 from taking 600 fta and hitting 300 of them. His pt/fga would be 4.0, which is higher than every player we have discussed here. Would you say this guy, who shoots 50% from the field and 50% from the line is more efficient than your C.

If you want to use your system, you have to weigh in the free throws as a possession of some sort. TSP does that because the denominator is 2(fga+.44fta). .44 is an estimation weighing free as less than one full possession because you can score a basket, get fouled, and still take an extra free throws. If there is no point after, fta would be weighted at .5 per fta and this equation makes perfect sense, both mathematically and logically.

And I really fail to see how TSP penalizes you for taking alot of FTs. If your player is a C, as long as the FT% is higher than the fg%, the FTs are raising his TSP. For 3pt shooters, in order for FT to raise TSP, the FT% has to be higher than the EFG. This again, makes perfect mathematical and logical sense. 

This example is very extreme and would never happen. Nobody would ever take 6x the FTAs then they take shots, so it's not realistic and therefore doesn't work when talking about PPS.

Posted by tianyi7886 on 2/7/2011 2:30:00 AM (view original):
Has there ever been an 800+ rated d3 player? I have a player that is currently 715 (gained 60 in his JR year) and probably will end in the 750-770 range w/o a RS. If he had a RS, he might come close to 800. Has there been one over 800?

Here's the player:
http://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=1667231

Think Ferrel is at least in the same ballpark as this guy, after accounting for DUrability/Work ethic and taking them out of the equation. . .

I use a slight modification of the efficiency stat to be able to see how valuable players are without penalizing them for not playing much. It's not perfect but it helps me because I'm a little slow with this game sometimes. I use the other metrics you guys are talking about as well, but I don't really pay as close attention to them, mainly because I'm still not used to them.

Posted by tianyi7886 on 3/11/2011 4:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by coach_billyg on 3/11/2011 3:57:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 3/11/2011 3:55:00 PM (view original):
Your C is at 59.34% in TS%, Weddington is at 73.13%. aejones's player is at 60.33%.

Your "pt per shot" overstates a low post players value because they draw more shooting fouls, so they can be scoring points (2 free throws) and using up a possession w/o logging a shot attempt. 

but drawing a foul is pretty valuable, so while pt per shot is overestimating the value of an offensive player by not logging a shot attempt, i think it is effectively offset by the value of drawing a foul, on average.

Fair enough. I agree drawing fouls are valuable, but aejones bumped this thread from a month ago to prove that his player is very efficient offensively. I simply don't think he is that efficient and doesn't justify the huge distro. And personally, no matter how many fouls you draw with a bigman (unless it's something absurd like 25 fouls and the opponent's entire team fouls out), there's no way for a bigman to beat the offensive efficiency of a 3 pt shooter going at a 50% clip from 3pt land. 

I bumped this actually. Ran across it last night while looking for something else.

Posted by kmasonbx on 3/11/2011 8:39:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tianyi7886 on 3/11/2011 7:35:00 PM (view original):

Posted by kmasonbx1 on 3/11/2011 5:43:00 PM (view original):
This is driving me nuts, The numbers I get or just a tad off from what you are getting when calculating TSP and I don't know why. I also looked at Donner's TSP for the last 2 seasons and I came up with 53.6 for this season and 60.1 for last season which just makes me dislike TSP even more. Reason being is the system actually penalizes you for shooting a lot of free throws at least when you are around the 75% range. If you look at Donner's #s from last season and this season, last season he scored 600 points while shooting 55.2% from the field on 415 shots and went 142 for 192 (6.2 attempts per game)  from the line for 74% in 31 games. This season he's scored 664 points on 461 shots while shooting 53.4% while making 172 of 224 FTs (7.47 APG) from the line for 76.8% in 30 games which from an efficiency stand point looks remarkably similar but according to TSP he's down about 6.5% this season. The main cause for the dip is that he's taking almost 1.3 more FTs per game. Now when you look at PPS last season he was at 1.446 and this season he's at 1.44 exactly which makes a lot of sense to me. Any system that discredits points because they came in a different way is one that I don't like.

The thing is your system doesn't make much sense because it's not weighting free throws in the denominator. 

I can have a guy who shoots like shaq, 50% from the line. He takes 100 shots all season, scores 400 points overall,100 from the shots he took, the other 300 from taking 600 fta and hitting 300 of them. His pt/fga would be 4.0, which is higher than every player we have discussed here. Would you say this guy, who shoots 50% from the field and 50% from the line is more efficient than your C.

If you want to use your system, you have to weigh in the free throws as a possession of some sort. TSP does that because the denominator is 2(fga+.44fta). .44 is an estimation weighing free as less than one full possession because you can score a basket, get fouled, and still take an extra free throws. If there is no point after, fta would be weighted at .5 per fta and this equation makes perfect sense, both mathematically and logically.

And I really fail to see how TSP penalizes you for taking alot of FTs. If your player is a C, as long as the FT% is higher than the fg%, the FTs are raising his TSP. For 3pt shooters, in order for FT to raise TSP, the FT% has to be higher than the EFG. This again, makes perfect mathematical and logical sense. 

This example is very extreme and would never happen. Nobody would ever take 6x the FTAs then they take shots, so it's not realistic and therefore doesn't work when talking about PPS.

Performance measurement statistics are suppose to hold up to extreme data. TPS and EFG hold up perfectly under extreme circumstances.

How about let's use a couple of real life examples to examine your PPS:

1) Dwight Howard, 2007-2008 Season:
FG: 583/974 (59.9%), FT: 529/897 (59%), PT Total = 1695. PPS = 1695/974 = 1.74. Recognize how big of an effect the FT had. 30% of Howards points came from the line and yet, the 897 FTA are not taken into effect by your PPS calculation in the denominator. 

2) Charles Barkley, 1989 - 1990 season:
FG: 706/1177 (60.0%), FT: 557/744 (74.9%), PT Total = 1989. PPS = 1989/1177 = 1.69. 

So Dwight Howard is more efficient than Charles Barkley even though he shoots .1% lower in FG% and 15.9% lower in FT%? Yep, this metric clearly works.

And now lets test out PPS with some guards and people who don't shoot over 50% from the field.

1) Allen Iverson, 2007-2008 season:
FG: 712/1556 (45.8%), 3PT: 95/275 (34.5%), FT: 645/797 (80.9%). PT Total = 2164. PPS = 2164/1556 = 1.39

2) Steve Nash 2002-2003 season:
FG: 518/1114 (46.5%), 3PT: 111/269 (41.3%), FT: 308/339 (90.9%). PT Total = 1455. PPS = 1455/1114 = 1.31

So again, PPS has AI as more efficient than Steve Nash, even though Nash has a .7% edge in fg%, 6.8% edge in 3pt%, and 10% edge in ft%.