Demystifying the destructive myth of the “Shot Creator”

While recently reading an ESPN piece by Kirk Goldsberry, the brilliant and thought-provoking spatial analytical guru, I came across a seemingly innocuous sentence that was so galling, I was impelled to stop reading, turn down my Puddle of Mudd compilation and tweet my disgust:

“I always say that the hardest part about shooting in the NBA is actually getting a shot off, something normal people and many NBA players have trouble doing.” – Kirk Goldsberry

Given Mr. Goldsberry’s impressive CV, I’m confident in declaring that this is likely the dumbest thing he has ever written. You see, smart, attractive, analytically-minded reader - next to committing a turnover, taking a field goal attempt is literally the easiest action any player can make on offense that’s tracked in the boxscore. Moreover, there has literally never been a player in history who was talented enough to play in the NBA, yet unable to “get a shot off.” For Christsakes, Tyrone Muggsy Fucking Bogues averaged 7 field goal attempts per game for his career, and he’s no bigger than your standard squirtle (1)!

When a Squirtle gains enough EXP points it evolves into a Muggsy Bogues!

Unfortunately, Goldsberry is hardly unique in exaggerating the skill needed to take a shot. In fact, this facacta belief is so widespread among pundits, the media and therefore fans that it has culminated in the “Shot Creator” myth, in which high volume shooters are credited with “creating” the shots they take. While this myth and its accompanying narrative may sound like a harmless misunderstanding, it has actually damaged the game by cultivating generations of misinformed fans, journalists and coaches and encouraging the widespread practice of an isolation-heavy NBA offensive “system” that is inefficient at best and downright repelling at worst. But before we can dig into the impact of this myth, let’s briefly dive into its flawed logical roots.

The crux of the “Shot Creator” myth can be traced two basic issues:

1.     The media’s fetish for raw point totals
2.     Credit (rather than a penalty) being given to a player for taking a shot

The first issue is fairly simple. The mainstream media tends to emphasize the number of points a player scores far more than the efficiency with which the player scored said points. This leads to inefficient high-volume scorers getting far more credit than they deserve.

The roots of the second issue, however, are far more complex in nature. Essentially, players are given credit for choosing to take a shot, when in actuality players should be docked credit for spending a precious team resource (a possession). This is because, unless a player generates a shot attempt off a defensive steal or an offensive rebound, he really hasn’t “created” a shot; rather he has chosen to employ his team’s possession. And yet, pundits, the mainstream media and consequently fans, consistently overvalue high-volume low efficiency scorers by crediting them for the points they score, without docking credit for the resource (a possession) that they’ve expended!

So now that we’ve seen that the roots of the “Shot Creator” myth can be traced to an obsession with point totals and misunderstanding of how field goal attempts should be (dis)credited, let’s see how the myth has hurt NBA basketball.

Well, first off, it’s led to the aforesaid “dumbing down” of NBA fans, coaches and media. Want proof? Check out this list of players who were selected for an NBA All-Star game and try not to laugh:

Player	All-Star Year	Pts/Game	FGA/Game	WS/48	WS/48 below average (.100)
Antoine Walker	2002-03	20.1	19.9	0.039	-0.061
Allen Iverson	2003-04	26.4	23.4	0.066	-0.034
Kevin Duckworth	1990-91	15.8	13.4	0.082	-0.018
Juwan Howard	1995-96	22.1	18.5	0.082	-0.018
Latrell Sprewell	1994-95	20.6	17	0.034	-0.066
Chris Kaman	2009-10	18.5	15.8	0.044	-0.056
Jrue Holiday	2012-13	17.7	16.5	0.055	-0.045
Joe Johnson	2010-11	18.2	16.1	0.080	-0.02
Glenn Robinson	1994-95	20.9	18	0.080	-0.02
Vin Baker	1994-95	17.7	15	0.083	-0.017
Mitch Richmond	1992-93	21.9	17.4	0.087	-0.013

Notice a trend? Each of these players took a ton of shots and scored a lot of points, but produced a Win Shares per 48 minutes (WS/48) below the NBA average of .100. And yet, these high-scoring players were rewarded for their subpar play by being honored as one of the world’s best players!  

   

But glorifying players who don’t deserve it is not the only problem the “Shot Creator” myth has perpetuated. Additionally, the “Shot Creator” myth has led far too many teams to overvalue their high volume “Shot Creators” and subsequently encouraged these naive teams to run inefficient, ugly, isolation-heavy offenses that emphasize low-percentage shots from “Shot Creators” in lieu of higher percentage shots produced by dynamic, team basketball. For instance, is anyone really that surprised that the Raptors offense has exploded since it traded Rudy Gay and redistributed his low-efficiency isolation shot attempts to more efficient team-oriented sets? In fact, forget efficiency – do you think any Atlanta fans miss watching Iso-Joe pound the ball into the ground for 15 seconds before taking a contested mid-range jumper? Didn’t think so.

So the next time you hear someone reference a “Shot Creator” or extol the value of a low-efficiency, high-volume scorer, tell them to quiet down and listen. Then calmly explain to that person that he or she is the reason NBA basketball is imperfect. 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Now, I will acknowledge that there are some players who are so inefficient at scoring that they choose to refrain from shooting, but this is very different from being unable to shoot. Moreover, this choice is likely influenced by their coach who would stop playing them if they shot frequently. To wit, what player in their right mind doesn’t want to shoot and accrue all the money and glory that follows? Have you ever heard of a player demanding a smaller role on offense?