True shooting percentage is a single scoring-efficiency figure that answers one question: how many points did this player produce per scoring attempt, counting threes as worth more than twos and counting trips to the free throw line as attempts too. This true shooting percentage calculator takes points, field goal attempts and free throw attempts and returns TS%, the true shooting attempt total behind it, points per attempt, and how many points the performance added or cost against a baseline you supply.
Arb Digital publishes free statistics tools across sport and business, and this one is built to be reproducible rather than merely quick. The free throw coefficient and the comparison baseline are both exposed as inputs, because the two most common reasons two people disagree about a TS% figure are a different coefficient and a different baseline, not a mistake in the arithmetic.
TS% and eFG% Are Not the Same Statistic
This is the distinction to get straight before anything else, because the two figures are constantly confused. Effective field goal percentage adjusts field goals only. It credits a made three-pointer as one and a half made twos and divides by field goal attempts, and free throws never enter it at all. True shooting percentage includes free throws, both in the numerator, because free throw points are points, and in the denominator, through the true shooting attempt term that adds a fraction of free throw attempts to field goal attempts.
The consequence is that a player who draws a lot of fouls and converts them will show a TS% well above their eFG%, while a player who never gets to the line will show the two close together. Neither figure is a better version of the other; they answer different questions. If you want the field-goal-only view, use the effective field goal percentage calculator.
If you want total scoring efficiency including the line, this page is the one. Both are defined in the NBA's official stat glossary, which describes TS% as a shooting percentage that factors in the value of three-point field goals and free throws in addition to conventional two-point field goals, and eFG% as adjusting field goal percentage for the extra value of made threes.
How to Use It
- Enter total points. Everything the player scored, from the field and from the line, without separating them.
- Enter field goal attempts. Twos and threes together. Do not split them — TS% does not need the split, which is one of its conveniences.
- Enter free throw attempts. Attempts, not makes. Missed free throws consumed part of a possession and belong in the denominator.
- Leave the coefficient at 0.44 unless you are reproducing a figure computed with a different one, in which case enter that value.
- Set a baseline from your own source to see the points-added figure, which converts an efficiency gap into a number of points over the sample you entered.
The Formula and How It Is Calculated
True shooting attempts are TSA = FGA + 0.44 × FTA. True shooting percentage is TS% = PTS ÷ (2 × TSA). The factor of two in the denominator is what makes the result read on the same scale as a conventional field goal percentage: a player scoring exactly two points per true shooting attempt lands at 100 per cent, and ordinary performances therefore land somewhere in the fifties or sixties rather than near one.
Points per true shooting attempt, shown in the grid, is simply PTS ÷ TSA — the same information without the doubling, and arguably the more intuitive form, because it is measured in points. Points added against a baseline is (TS% − baseline) × 2 × TSA, which is the number of extra points the player produced relative to what the baseline efficiency would have produced on the identical number of true shooting attempts. The definitions used here follow the published sabermetric-style basketball definitions catalogued in Basketball Reference's statistics glossary.
Where the 0.44 Comes From, and Why It Is Not Exact
Free throws do not map one-for-one onto possessions. A two-shot foul consumes one possession across two attempts. A three-shot foul consumes one across three. An and-one adds a single attempt to a possession that already produced a made field goal. A technical free throw consumes no possession at all. Missed free throws that are rebounded by the offence do not end the possession either.
The 0.44 coefficient is an empirical average across all those cases, fitted to league-wide play-by-play data. It is a good average and a poor individual estimate. For a player whose free throws come disproportionately from and-ones, or from a stretch of intentional fouling at the end of games, the true figure differs. That is why the coefficient is an input here rather than a hard-coded constant, and why any TS% quoted to three decimal places is claiming more precision than the underlying method supports.
What TS% Deliberately Ignores
TS% is a scoring-efficiency number and nothing else. It says nothing about volume: a player taking four shots a game at 70 per cent TS% and a player taking twenty-two at 60 per cent are not comparable on this axis alone, and the second is almost always the more valuable offensive player. It says nothing about shot difficulty, whether the shots were created or assisted, or how much defensive attention the player drew. It says nothing about turnovers, which end possessions with zero points and never appear in TSA.
It also flatters certain roles structurally. A centre finishing lobs and putbacks will post a high TS% on a shot diet that a guard cannot replicate, because the shots themselves are close and uncontested. Comparing TS% across positions without acknowledging that is a standard misreading. Within a role, or within a single player across seasons, the comparison is far more informative.
Reading the Points-Added Column
Efficiency percentages are hard to feel. A gap of four percentage points in TS% sounds small until you convert it into points, which is what the last grid item does. Over a single game the difference is usually a couple of points. Over a full season's worth of attempts it becomes a large number, and that translation is the honest way to argue about whether an efficiency gap actually matters.
The figure is only as meaningful as the baseline you enter. Comparing a player to a league-wide average answers a different question from comparing them to their own previous season, or to the team's other options at the position. This page deliberately publishes no baseline of its own, because league efficiency drifts over time and any figure hard-coded here would be stale within a season. Bring your own from a source you can cite.
Small Samples Break This Statistic
A single game with eight true shooting attempts can produce a TS% anywhere from zero to well over a hundred per cent, and none of those numbers mean anything about the player. Efficiency statistics need volume before they stabilise, and the smaller the sample the more the result is describing variance rather than skill. If you are computing TS% for a single game, treat it as a description of that game and nothing more.
The same caution applies to comparing a small-sample hot stretch against a full-season baseline. The arithmetic will happily tell you a player added twelve points over nine games; the honest reading is that nine games is not enough to distinguish that from noise. Every rate statistic on this site carries the same warning, from the batting average calculator to the fielding percentage calculator.
Arb Digital builds fast, dependency-free calculators and the content strategy around them, so a single page earns links instead of sitting unread. Browse the free library, or tell us what your readers keep computing by hand.
Browse All Free Tools Talk To Arb DigitalCommon Mistakes to Avoid
- Using free throws made instead of attempted — the denominator wants attempts, because a missed free throw still consumed part of a possession.
- Confusing TS% with eFG% — eFG% ignores free throws entirely, so the two diverge most for exactly the players who get to the line most.
- Reading TS% as a made-shot percentage — it is points per attempt scaled by two, and it can exceed 100 per cent.
- Comparing across positions without adjustment — a rim-finishing role produces a structurally higher TS% than a heavy pull-up shooting role.
- Quoting a small-sample TS% as a player trait — efficiency rates need volume before they describe anything stable.
Related Free Tools From Arb Digital
For the field-goal-only version of scoring efficiency, use the effective field goal percentage calculator, and for a single-game box-score summary that folds shooting into rebounds, assists, steals and turnovers, use the basketball game score calculator. Elsewhere in sport, the slugging percentage calculator handles the baseball equivalent of weighting outcomes by value, the on-base percentage calculator covers the denominator question in that sport, and the Elo rating calculator handles head-to-head strength rather than individual efficiency. General arithmetic lives in the percentage calculator, and everything else is in the free online tools hub.
Frequently Asked Questions
True shooting percentage is a scoring-efficiency figure equal to points divided by twice the true shooting attempts, where true shooting attempts are field goal attempts plus 0.44 times free throw attempts. It measures points produced per scoring attempt, counting threes and free throws at their actual value.
Effective field goal percentage adjusts only for the extra value of made three-pointers and ignores free throws completely. True shooting percentage includes free throw points in the numerator and a fraction of free throw attempts in the denominator, so it captures scoring from the line as well.
It is an empirical estimate of the average fraction of a possession that a single free throw attempt consumes, fitted to league-wide play-by-play data. Two-shot fouls, three-shot fouls, and-ones and technical free throws all consume different amounts, and 0.44 is the average across them.
Yes, in principle. A player who scores more than two points per true shooting attempt, for example through made three-pointers combined with and-one free throws, will compute above 100 per cent. It is unusual over any meaningful sample but perfectly possible in a single game.
No. Turnovers end possessions with no points and never appear in the formula, and nothing in TS% distinguishes a contested pull-up from an uncontested layup. It measures efficiency on shots actually attempted and nothing beyond that.
It is the efficiency gap between the computed TS% and the baseline you entered, multiplied by twice the true shooting attempts. That converts a percentage difference into the number of extra points produced over the same number of attempts.
There is no fixed threshold, but single-game figures are dominated by variance and should be read as a description of that game only. Efficiency rates stabilise as attempt volume grows, which is why full-season figures are far more informative than short stretches.
This tool reproduces published basketball statistics definitions for reference and analysis only. Statistic definitions and the free throw coefficient vary between sources and eras, so state which definition and which baseline produced any figure you quote.
