Allie Ziebell #1 in country in True Shooting %

[Gael]

According to Bart Torvik. If you click on the top of other stat columns to sort them, Allie also appears as #2 in Effective Field Goal % and #5 in Offensive Rating in the country.

 

[Gael]

This perhaps suggests that Allie should be set up for shots more often in the offense.

 

[EricSD]

Now if she only could hit 11 3's in a game. Slacker!!! 😂

 

[Pharos]

KMLish

 

[Gus Mahler]

According to Bart Torvik. If you click on the top of other stat columns to sort them, Allie also appears as #2 in Effective Field Goal % and #5 in Offensive Rating in the country.

Would you be willing to give us a quick definition of true shooting percentage?

 

[From Canada]

Would you be willing to give us a quick definition of true shooting percentage?

True Shooting Percentage (TS%) measures a player's overall shooting efficiency, with 3-point shots counting for more. For example, if a player scores 6/10 on 2-point shots (12 points, 60%) and 4/10 on 3-point shots, it will count as the same (12 points and 60% instead of 40% will be awarded). Free throws are also taken into account. I have attached another table of advanced team statistics. If you place your cursor at the top, on TS% or the others in the same row, a tooltip will appear with a short definition.

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/connecticut/women/2026.html#all_players_advanced

 

[DEpup]

This perhaps suggests that Allie should be set up for shots more often in the offense.

It's more like she has to have the confidence to take shots. She passes up too many shots IMO.

 

[Next 12]

Allie is a natural born shooter of 3's. She is second on the team behind Azzi with 40. More playing time, more 3's. Allie will definitely take over Azzi's spot as the shooter and will Definitely become an even outrageous shooter and May break Uconns record of 10. I can see 14 or 15 3;s from her. She IS A NATURAL!!!!! I would LOVE to see it happen in the NC Tournament. GO ALLIE!!!!!! GO HUSKIES!!!!!!

 

[Topdawg]

Let us not forget that in the McDonald’s all American game during her last year in high school, Allie won the 3-point contest beating the best women and men.

 

[Cuango]

It's more like she has to have the confidence to take shots. She passes up too many shots IMO.

I think Geno may have to have a word with everyone to keep an eye out for Allie. I say this because I’ve seen her open quite a lot without getting so much as a sniff! I’m not implying anyone is freezing her out, just that she is not actively looked for like Azzi. Part of it also may be that she is simply not as good as Azzi at moving without the ball. (Few are) I think she has now demonstrated that she can be a serious weapon/game changer though and needs to shoot more.

 

[Gael]

Would you be willing to give us a quick definition of true shooting percentage?

TS% is an attempt to have a more comprehensive stat than FG% to measure player's overall shooting efficiency when you combine her 2pt shooting, 3pt shooting and FT shooting. 3pt shots are weighted more than 2pt shots and FT shots are weighted less.

The formula and its simplification are:

 

[Gael]

The formula and its simplification are:

The formula gives Allie a much higher TS% than Azzi, who is #69 in the country, primarily because Allie is shooting 75% on 2pt shots while Azzi is shooting 52%.

I don't see why UConn couldn't run more stuff to free up Allie for more 2pt and 3pt shots. Yes, that would require Allie to be effective in moving without the ball and using screens and picks.

 

[Skeets]

I think Geno may have to have a word with everyone to keep an eye out for Allie. I say this because I’ve seen her open quite a lot without getting so much as a sniff! I’m not implying anyone is freezing her out, just that she is not actively looked for like Azzi. Part of it also may be that she is simply not as good as Azzi at moving without the ball. (Few are) I think she has now demonstrated that she can be a serious weapon/game changer though and needs to shoot more.

I agree. The same with Shade. UConn simply doesn't run stuff for these 2. If UConn runs something that doesn't work, they may get the ball passed to them as the second or third option. Otherwise, they are left with crumbs that fall off the table.

 

[HuskylnSC]

If you put the ball in my hands down 2 with 5 seconds to play, Allie and Azzi are both open, at that moment I'll call time out to check with Torvik about what I should do. Actually, at any point in the game, my emotions take over and who I trust determines the pass and I trust ...A...

 

[jabstep]

UConn's starting 5 scoring is geared toward Azzi and Sarah. When one is off, like Sarah was in the first half of the Marquette, the others job is to take over. If that doesn't work, they look for another option where the coaches think we have the best match-up to score. Allie when on the floor, helps spread the defense just like Azzi does. When we run our high post offense with guards cutting off the elbow screens it keeps the corner defenders from helping on anything in the paint. If they do try to double down, it opens the kickout three-ball shot from the corner. So just having Allie on the court helps make the offense work because it keeps the defense honest about helping in the paint.

 

[JoePgh]

I agree. The same with Shade. UConn simply doesn't run stuff for these 2. If UConn runs something that doesn't work, they may get the ball passed to them as the second or third option. Otherwise, they are left with crumbs that fall off the table.

I generally agree with you, except that I think this is by design and is directed by Geno. Sarah and Azzi are the most talented scorers on the team, and if it is possible to get them a good shot, that is what the team is instructed to do. If the effect of this is to make the defense unbalanced by its excessive focus on these two players, that will open up either Allie or Ashlynn, and (by design) that is when they get their "crumbs". When this occurs, their shot opportunities should be even higher-percentage than those available to Sarah and Azzi.

It was mentioned above that Allie is shooting 75% on 2-point attempts while Azzi is shooting 52%. The unstated conclusion seemed to be that, ergo, Allie is a more accurate 2-point shooter than Azzi. But this is distorted by the fact that Azzi, by design, is taking a high volume of 2-point shots, including some very difficult ones, because she makes 52% of them, whereas Allie gets layups when the defense forgets to guard her. If Allie took as many 2-point shots as Azzi, and with the same degree of difficulty, I guarantee she would make far less than 52% of them.

 

[JoePgh]

TS% is an attempt to have a more comprehensive stat than FG% to measure player's overall shooting efficiency when you combine her 2pt shooting, 3pt shooting and FT shooting. 3pt shots are weighted more than 2pt shots and FT shots are weighted less.

The formula and its simplification are:

View attachment 117163

OK, I'll bite and ask a question about this formula. What is the basis of the "0.44" weighting of free throw attempts in the denominator of both formulas? I would think that it should be 0.5, since the free throw, if made, would be worth exactly half as much as a 2-point field goal. I see that "0.5" is used in the numerator, so why not in the denominator?

 

[VaConnFan11]

According to Gemini...

In the True Shooting Percentage (TS%) formula, the .44 constant is a statistical coefficient used to estimate the number of scoring possessions that result in free throws.

While it might seem logical to use .50 (since most free throws come in pairs), that would only be accurate if every trip to the line resulted from a standard shooting foul on a two-point attempt.

The .44 multiplier accounts for the fact that not all free throws consume a full possession or come in pairs:

• And-ones: A player scores a basket (which counts as an FGA) and is fouled, receiving one "bonus" free throw that does not use an additional possession.
• Technical Fouls: These are "gravy" shots that do not use a team possession and are often shot by players who didn't even draw the foul.
• Three-Shot Fouls: Fouls on three-point attempts result in three shots for a single possession, which would mathematically require a coefficient of .33 for those specific plays.
• Flagrant Fouls: These also involve unique possession outcomes.
  
  
  Origin and Accuracy
• Research and testing of NBA play-by-play data determined that approximately 44% of all free throw attempts represent a used possession. While it is a "league-wide average" that can vary slightly by player—for example, a player like James Harden who draws many three-point fouls might actually have a "true" coefficient closer to .41 or .42—the .44 constant has proven to be surprisingly accurate for season-long and career data

 

[NycUcWbbFan]

OK, I'll bite and ask a question about this formula. What is the basis of the "0.44" weighting of free throw attempts in the denominator of both formulas? I would think that it should be 0.5, since the free throw, if made, would be worth exactly half as much as a 2-point field goal. I see that "0.5" is used in the numerator, so why not in the denominator?

Advanced Analytics is partly built on normalizing comparisons by grounding metrics on per possessions/ per 100 possessions.

• The number of possessions can be exactly calculated using play-by-play info;
• For backwards compatibility for historical games that only have U.S. boxscores, and for ease of calculation, estimation procedures are used;
• Some quirks of U.S. boxscores are missed FGA’s with awarded FTAs as well as FTAs with no associated FGAs (e.g. technical fouls, some flagrant fouls, etc.);
• The 0.44 factor was originated by Dean Oliver (and used in the NBA) while the 0.475 factor was originated by Ken Pomeroy for MCBB (source) for the purposes and limitations above. They were developed by regression to the applicable games.
• There are many estimated possessions formulas, but Dean Oliver’s and Ken Pomeroy’s are the most widely used.

The denominator of TS% is not exactly an estimated possessions formula. For example, it omits non-scoring possessions (TOV) and the ORB correction to FGAs.

• The formula redounds to PTS / (2 x Total FGAs), where PTS per possession can be 1, 2, 3, 4, 4+;
• The most prevalent PTS per FGA is the 2-point shot;
• Hence TS% more comprehensively compares points proficiency between different types of players with the “2” in the denominator.

 

[Gael]

Hence TS% more comprehensively compares points proficiency between different types of players with the “2” in the denominator.

"2" would be in the denominator of the TS% formula if the numerator were "PTS." "2" is not in the version of the formula I posted because the numerator is "0.5 • PTS." Both versions are mathematically equivalent because 0.5 is the same as ½.

 

[Kat]

Shooting percentage numbers that also don't consider the amount of shots a player takes are pretty useless. There has to be a minimum number of shots taken for a player to be considered #1 in the country.

 

[Gael]

Shooting percentage numbers that also don't consider the amount of shots a player takes are pretty useless. There has to be a minimum number of shots taken for a player to be considered #1 in the country.

That's a reasonable viewpoint. Because TS% is a blend of 2P, 3P and FT shooting, one would have to set a minimum number of shots in all three categories. That would be quite arbitrary.

Torvik, as I understand his stat table that I posted in the OP, has an arbitrary cutoff filter for all players for all stats of 16 MPG of playing time. Allie averages 18.6 MPG. That's not the same as having a minimum shots cutoff, but it is a global way to filter away minor players from all his stats.

I'm not that familiar with Torvik's complex site, but I assume that the MPG filter can be adjusted and that other filters can be implemented.