APBRmetrics

When a player gets a shot attempt on an and-1, it’s a “free shot" in that if it goes in it counts as a field goal made and attempt, but if it doesn’t go in it doesn’t count as a field goal attempt as you can’t punish a player for missing a shot he was fouled on. Therefore a player’s field goal % can be improved not by necessarily being a more efficient shooter, but by being fouled more and getting more free shots. For example take these two players:

Player A: Unofficially has 300 “and-1 attempts” (putting the shot up after the foul) and 50 of them go in. Therefore his FGM and FGA are increased by 50

Player B: Attempts 50 and-1 attempts and 25 of them go in. His FGM and FGA are increased by 25.

Player B is better at making shots after he gets fouled, however his FG% is not as improved as much by and-1s as for Player A.

While it’s unlikely to make a massive difference on the final numbers for most players, should and-1s field goal makes not be counted as part of FG%?

It could be seen as another reason why FG% is pretty much a meaningless concept in the 3-point era.
Those unmade and uncounted FGA each become 2 FTA, so the total shot attempts (TSA) are still counted when you calculate TS%

Mike G wrote: ↑Mon Jan 20, 2020 8:07 pm It could be seen as another reason why FG% is pretty much a meaningless concept in the 3-point era.
Those unmade and uncounted FGA each become 2 FTA, so the total shot attempts (TSA) are still counted when you calculate TS%

Yea but you still have a higher chance on “converting" on those 2 FTA than just your shooting efficiency (FG% and FT%) indicates, since you get two chances to score, the free shot + 2 FTAs if you miss, but only the latter counts. So there could still be a situation where a player’s shooting efficiency is not quite as good as his TS% because his number is being inflated by having a high volume of free shots. Then again since TS% has to use the “close enough” number of .44 to account for 2pt fouls vs 3pt fouls it was never going to be 100% accurate, and indirectly, we understand part of being efficient is drawing a lot of fouls which is to the and-1 players benefit

Dr Positivity wrote: ↑Mon Jan 20, 2020 12:53 am Player B is better at making shots after he gets fouled, however his FG% is not as improved as much by and-1s as for Player A.

And for all we know, B has a better FT% than A. But it doesn't much matter if you shoot .900 or .600, if you seldom get to the line.
You could estimate how often players got hacked while shooting, but the foul wasn't called. If it happens too often, the player might be reluctant to go where contact is likely. And if the refs are more sympathetic, he should exploit that.

If you make 80% at the FT line, then getting fouled is very good for your team. If you also make the shot, that's even better. Seems it works out about the way it should, statistically.