Coaches watch eFG% closely during games too, not just after the fact in postgame box scores, since a team or player trending sharply below their season eFG% average mid-game is often a signal that shot selection has drifted toward tougher, lower-value looks and needs correcting on the fly.
Effective field goal percentage (eFG%) adjusts regular shooting percentage to account for the fact that a made 3-pointer is worth 50% more than a made 2-pointer. A player who shoots a lower raw field goal percentage but takes and makes more threes can still be a more efficient scorer than a player who shoots a higher percentage from 2-point range only — eFG% is built specifically to capture that. It’s become a staple stat across the NBA, WNBA, NCAA, and international basketball coverage precisely because it lines up much more closely with actual points produced per shot than the older, simpler field goal percentage ever did.
Below the calculator you’ll find a manual step-by-step walkthrough, common calculation mistakes, a full benchmark table, why eFG% beats raw shooting percentage, what actually drives a strong eFG%, and an expanded FAQ.
eFG% Calculator (Effective Field Goal %)
🏀 Blogyz CalcEstimates only — formulas follow the official standard for this stat, but always confirm against your league’s exact scoring rules.
Step-by-Step: How to Calculate eFG% by Hand
Step 1: Take total field goals made and add half of your 3-pointers made — this gives extra credit for the bonus value of made threes. Step 2: Divide that weighted total by total field goal attempts. For example, a player who makes 9 field goals (3 of them 3-pointers) on 18 attempts: weighted makes = 9 + (0.5 × 3) = 10.5. eFG% = 10.5 ÷ 18 = .583, or 58.3%.
Notice that free throws are excluded entirely from eFG% — it’s a pure measure of shot-taking efficiency from the field, separate from a player’s ability to get to the line and convert free throws.
Common Mistakes When Calculating eFG%
The most common mistake is forgetting the 0.5 weighting on 3-pointers entirely and just calculating plain field goal percentage instead, which understates the true efficiency of a high-volume 3-point shooter. A second mistake is including free throws made or attempted in the calculation — eFG% only ever considers field goal attempts, never free throws. A third mistake is confusing eFG% with true shooting percentage (TS%), a related but distinct stat that also factors in free throws — the two numbers will differ for any player who shoots free throws at all. A fourth mistake is applying the 0.5 bonus to all made shots instead of only 3-pointers — the weighting only ever applies to the 3-point makes subset, never to the full field goals made total.
eFG% Benchmarks at a Glance
These are the exact thresholds this calculator uses:
| eFG% | Tier | What It Typically Means |
|---|---|---|
| 55.0% and above | Elite | Among the most efficient scorers in the league |
| 50.0% – 54.9% | Excellent | Well above league-average shooting efficiency |
| 45.0% – 49.9% | League Average | Roughly matches typical pro shooting efficiency |
| Below 45.0% | Below Average | Inefficient shot selection or shot-making |
Why eFG% Beats Raw Field Goal Percentage
Plain field goal percentage treats a made 3-pointer and a made 2-pointer identically, which creates a misleading picture in the modern, three-point-heavy game. A player who shoots 40% from three (well above league average) will show a lower raw field goal percentage than a player who shoots 55% but only from 2-point range close to the basket — yet the 3-point shooter is often generating more actual point production per shot attempt. eFG% corrects this by properly crediting the extra value of made threes, which is why analysts and coaches treat it as a far more accurate read on true shooting efficiency than plain field goal percentage, especially for perimeter-oriented players.
The stat became especially important as the NBA and other leagues shifted toward heavier 3-point volume over the past two decades — evaluating players purely on raw shooting percentage in an era where teams deliberately hunt 3-point shots would systematically undervalue exactly the players driving that strategic shift.
What Actually Drives a Strong eFG%
Shot selection is the single biggest lever — players and teams that prioritize high-value shots (3-pointers and shots near the rim) over inefficient long 2-point jumpers post noticeably higher eFG% numbers even without any actual improvement in shooting mechanics. Volume matters too: a player who takes mostly contested, difficult shots late in the shot clock will post a lower eFG% than one who consistently gets open, high-percentage looks generated by good ball movement and screening. The most efficient scorers in any league typically combine a smart shot diet with genuine shot-making skill, rather than relying on one or the other alone.
Role also shapes typical eFG% expectations — centers and other players who take most of their shots near the basket generally post higher eFG% than perimeter-heavy players, simply because shots at the rim have a much higher inherent make rate than jump shots, three-pointers included. This is why eFG% comparisons are usually most meaningful between players of a similar role or shot profile rather than across every position on the floor.
eFG% and the Rise of “Moneyball Basketball”
The explosion of 3-point shooting across professional and college basketball over the last fifteen years is, in large part, a direct response to eFG%-style efficiency math. Once coaching staffs and front offices fully internalized that a made 3-pointer is worth 50% more than a made 2-pointer while typically being only marginally harder to make than a long midrange jumper, the strategic conclusion was straightforward: hunt more threes and layups, and stop settling for long 2-point jump shots that offer worse value for similar difficulty. Teams now track eFG% by shot zone — restricted area, midrange, above-the-break three, corner three — and build offensive systems specifically designed to generate the highest-value looks in that breakdown, a shift that simply wasn’t possible to justify with raw shooting percentage as the primary evaluation tool.
This same logic has trickled down from the professional ranks into college and even high school coaching philosophy, where “no long twos” has become something of a rallying cry among analytically-minded staffs. Critics argue the shift has made the game more homogeneous, with fewer players developing a traditional midrange game, but from a pure eFG%-efficiency standpoint the strategic logic is hard to dispute.
FAQ
What’s considered an elite eFG% in professional basketball?
An eFG% above 55% is considered elite for a high-volume scorer, typically achieved by top shooters and efficient interior scorers.
How is eFG% different from true shooting percentage (TS%)?
TS% also factors in free throw attempts and makes, giving an even more complete picture of scoring efficiency, while eFG% looks only at field goal attempts. A player who draws a lot of fouls and shoots free throws well will usually have a noticeably higher TS% than eFG% — see our dedicated TS% calculator for the full breakdown.
Why is a made 3-pointer weighted at 0.5 extra instead of counted as 1.5 shots?
The formula’s structure reflects that a 3-pointer is worth 50% more points than a 2-pointer (3 versus 2), so crediting it with an extra half-make in the numerator produces the exact same points-per-shot-attempt ratio as directly comparing point totals to attempts.
Does eFG% include and-one free throws after a made shot?
No — eFG% is calculated purely from field goal makes and attempts. Any free throws earned on the play, including and-one opportunities, are excluded from this specific formula.
Can eFG% be used for team-level shooting efficiency, not just individual players?
Yes — the same formula works identically at the team level using total team field goals made, 3-pointers made, and field goal attempts, and it’s a common way analysts compare overall offensive shooting efficiency between teams.
Does a high eFG% always mean a player should shoot more?
Not automatically — eFG% measures efficiency on the shots a player actually took, not whether those shots were smart decisions within the flow of the offense. A player can have a great eFG% on a small number of open, high-quality looks without necessarily being someone who should be given a much higher shot volume, since efficiency often declines as shot difficulty increases with more defensive attention.
