You don't really see it. It's something I thought about before seeing it out there but a quick Google search shows that PPS is looked at by others too. Some use Effective FG%, which accounts for 3s as well as 2s made. The EFG% formula is (FGM + 0.5 * 3PM) / FGA. Kind of similar, but I like using PPS (including FTM) and let's call it True PPS (excluding FTM), like in the above examples with Sears and Estrada. I just want to know, how much did someone score and how many shots did it take to get there? Are they truly efficient or only scoring more because they're getting significantly more opportunities, perhaps more chances that could go to someone else who shoots fairly often with a higher PPS? I use 1.50 as pretty good rule of thumb - so if someone's scoring 30 pts on 20 shots (1.50 PPS) or 20 pts on 13 shots (1.54 PPS), that's pretty efficient and very valuable. But if someone is taking 18 shots to get to 20 points (1.11), maybe a staff can say, "Hmm, maybe we can give that guy around 13 shots and give those other five shots to others who may be more efficient in small doses." Hard to say since these things all fluctuate for each player, from game to game. But then, that's what averages are for, just as average PPS or average True PPS could be used. Bottom line though, and the reason I look at this ratio is, who's getting the most out of shots rather than simply putting them up and maybe hurting their team with too many misses?triplec2195 wrote: ↑Tue Dec 19, 2023 7:46 pm That PPS stat I never heard off but a further microscopic stat that has serious relevance kind of giving more detailed clarity to shooting percentages. A kid can score 20 a game compared to a kid scoring 15 but does he have to take that many more shots to get those extra 5 points. A good stat IMO in a world full of crazy analytics.
A few times Hofstra home games I was covering in the Jenkins era, I tracked Hofstra's passes on every possession because I had a feeling that good things (which I considered to be a basket or drawing FTA whether those were made or not) resulted with more passes and bad things (which I considered to be an empty trip with no points, whether from missed shots of TOs) happened with fewer passes. Sure enough, when they passed X number of times in the front court (I think it was 3 or more), "good things" happened at a way higher rate than when they didn't (I think it was 2 passes or less).
- Happy Leap Day again today!).