What true shooting percentage measures
True shooting percentage is points scored per shooting possession, expressed on a scale where 50% means one point per attempt. It exists because raw field goal percentage is close to meaningless in a sport with three different shot values.
Consider two players who each take ten shots. One makes five two-pointers for 10 points; the other makes four three-pointers for 12 points. Field goal percentage says 50% against 40% and picks the first player. True shooting percentage says 50% against 60% and picks the second, because the second scored more. Add free throws and the gap widens further: a player who draws twelve fouls a game generates points that field goal percentage cannot see at all.
The design goal is a single number that lets you compare a rim-attacking guard who lives at the free throw line, a spot-up shooter who never gets fouled, and a post player who takes only high-percentage twos. All three have identical arithmetic applied to them, and the one who converts possessions into points most efficiently comes out on top.
The formula, and where 0.44 comes from
The denominator is the interesting half. True shooting attempts estimate how many scoring possessions a player consumed: TSA = FGA + 0.44 × FTA. Field goal attempts each use one possession, so they count fully. Free throws do not, because most trips to the line produce two shots from a single possession.
If every trip produced exactly two free throws, the coefficient would be 0.5. It is lower than that because some free throws end a possession that also contained a made field goal — an and-one produces one free throw attached to a shot already counted in FGA — and because technical and flagrant free throws attach to no possession of the shooter's own. Empirical work on NBA play-by-play data settles the average near 0.44, and that figure has been the convention since Dean Oliver's Basketball on Paper popularised possession estimation. NCAA men's basketball under the older one-and-one bonus rules is usually estimated with a slightly higher coefficient, around 0.475, because a missed first free throw ends the trip after one attempt.
The numerator is simply points. Multiplying the denominator by 2 rescales the result so that a player who makes every two-point attempt and takes nothing else scores exactly 100%. That is why TS% can exceed 100%: a player who goes 4-for-4 from three has 12 points on 4 attempts, giving 12 ÷ 8 = 150%.
Effective field goal percentage is the simpler cousin: eFG% = (FGM + 0.5 × 3PM) ÷ FGA. It fixes the shot-value problem by counting a made three as one and a half makes, but it ignores free throws entirely. Use eFG% when you want to isolate shooting from foul-drawing; use TS% when you want total scoring efficiency. When a player makes no threes, eFG% and field goal percentage are identical by construction.
Worked example: a 2,000-point season
A high-usage scorer finishes a season with 2,000 points on 1,400 field goal attempts and 450 free throw attempts, making 700 field goals of which 200 were three-pointers.
- True shooting attempts. 1,400 + (0.44 × 450) = 1,400 + 198 = 1,598.
- Divide. 2,000 ÷ (2 × 1,598) = 2,000 ÷ 3,196 = 0.625782 → 62.58%.
- Points per attempt. 2,000 ÷ 1,598 = 1.252, which is exactly twice the TS% as a decimal, as it must be.
- Effective field goal percentage. (700 + 0.5 × 200) ÷ 1,400 = 800 ÷ 1,400 = 57.14%.
- Raw field goal percentage. 700 ÷ 1,400 = 50.00%.
- Free throw rate. 450 ÷ 1,400 = 0.321 — about one free throw attempt for every three shots.
Check the line for internal consistency. Made field goals account for 2 × (700 − 200) + 3 × 200 = 1,000 + 600 = 1,600 points, so the remaining 400 points must be made free throws — 400 of 450, an 88.9% free throw rate. That reconstruction is exactly what the calculator performs to warn you when a line cannot be right.
Notice the spread across the three measures: 50.0% field goal, 57.1% effective field goal, 62.6% true shooting. The 7.1-point step from FG% to eFG% is the value of the 200 threes. The 5.4-point step from eFG% to TS% is the value of the free throws. A player with the same 50% field goal percentage but no threes and no fouls drawn would sit at 50% on all three.
How to read a true shooting percentage
League-average true shooting percentage in the NBA has climbed steadily with three-point volume, and in recent seasons has sat in the mid-to-high 50s. Against that backdrop, 60% is efficient, 55% is roughly average, and 50% is inefficient for a high-volume scorer. The number carries no meaning on its own — always pair it with usage.
That pairing is the central discipline. A bench player who takes six shots a game and posts a 64% TS% has an easier job than a primary option who takes twenty-two and posts 58%, because defences do not build game plans around the first player. Efficiency and volume trade against each other, and the standard way to read them together is to plot usage rate against TS% and ask whether a player is above the line their shot volume implies.
Also read the components. A 60% TS% built on a 55% eFG% with a low free throw rate describes a shot-maker. The same 60% built on a 51% eFG% with a free throw rate of 0.45 describes a foul-drawer whose efficiency depends on how the game is officiated — a real vulnerability in playoff basketball, where whistles get swallowed.
Finally, note what TS% does not include: turnovers. A player who scores efficiently but coughs the ball up on a fifth of their possessions is not efficient overall. Points per possession or offensive rating fold turnovers in; true shooting percentage deliberately does not.
What each shooting line is worth in true shooting percentage
| Shot diet | Makes per 10 attempts | Points | TS% | eFG% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| All twos | 5 | 10 | 50.0% | 50.0% |
| All twos | 6 | 12 | 60.0% | 60.0% |
| All threes | 3 | 9 | 45.0% | 45.0% |
| All threes | 4 | 12 | 60.0% | 60.0% |
| All threes | 5 | 15 | 75.0% | 75.0% |
| Half twos, half threes | 5 (3 twos, 2 threes) | 12 | 60.0% | 60.0% |
A 33.3% three-point shooter and a 50% two-point shooter both score exactly one point per attempt — the break-even that makes 50% TS% the reference line.
Mistakes that produce a wrong true shooting percentage
- Leaving the 2 out of the denominator. Without it you have computed points per attempt, which is a valid statistic but is on a completely different scale — 1.25 rather than 62.5%.
- Using 0.5 instead of 0.44 for free throws. The lower coefficient accounts for and-one attempts and technical free throws, which do not each consume a possession.
- Adding free throws made to the numerator separately. Points already include them. Adding again double-counts.
- Applying the NBA coefficient to NCAA men's play under one-and-one rules. A missed first free throw ends the trip, so the average attempts per trip is lower and the coefficient is higher, usually estimated near 0.475.
- Comparing TS% without usage. Efficiency falls as shot volume rises. A 64% bench scorer and a 58% primary option are not ranked by the number alone.
- Treating TS% as overall offensive efficiency. It ignores turnovers, assists and offensive rebounds entirely. It measures shooting, not offence.
Where the 0.44 comes from
Possession estimation in basketball originates with Dean Oliver's Basketball on Paper and the broader work that produced the four factors of winning. The coefficient on free throw attempts is an empirical average of how many free throws a scoring possession produces, and it changes when the rules change: a league with no and-one attempts and no technical free throws would sit at exactly 0.5. Because it is an estimate rather than a count, true shooting attempts are approximate — which matters for a five-game sample and not at all for a season.
TS% inside the four factors and beyond
Effective field goal percentage is one of Dean Oliver's four factors of winning basketball, alongside turnover rate, offensive rebounding rate and free throw rate. That framework is why eFG% survives despite ignoring free throws: the free throw component is accounted for separately, so eFG% is deliberately kept narrow. True shooting percentage is the version that merges the shooting and free throw factors into a single scoring-efficiency number, which is more convenient for evaluating a player and slightly less useful for diagnosing a team.
To move from shooting efficiency to offensive value you need two more things. Usage rate says what share of the team's possessions a player ended while on the floor, which is the volume half of the trade-off. Offensive rating — points produced per 100 individual possessions — folds in turnovers, assists and offensive rebounds, and is the closest single number to a player's overall offensive contribution.
The same structural idea drives efficiency metrics across sport: define the opportunity count carefully, weight each outcome by what it is actually worth, and divide. Slugging percentage weights hits by bases; passer rating weights four passing rates and caps each one; save percentage counts stops over shots faced. The failure mode is always the denominator, and in true shooting percentage the denominator is an estimate rather than a count, which is worth remembering before you take the third decimal place seriously.
Key terms
- True shooting attempts (TSA)
- FGA + 0.44 × FTA — an estimate of the number of possessions a player used to score, counting free throws at less than a full possession each.
- Effective field goal percentage (eFG%)
- Field goal percentage adjusted so a made three-pointer counts as one and a half makes. Ignores free throws.
- Free throw rate
- FTA ÷ FGA. How often a player gets to the line relative to how often they shoot — a proxy for rim pressure and foul-drawing skill.
- Usage rate
- The share of a team's possessions a player ends while on the floor, by shooting, turning the ball over or drawing a shooting foul. The volume counterpart to TS%.