The NBA’s middle-class players have to do more than ever to keep up with the Joneses — making shots isn’t even the baseline anymore.

When we think of the more successful drafting teams of the last few years, who comes to mind? Who has drafted well without being gifted surefire studs? For me, three teams that stand out are the Memphis Grizzlies, the Oklahoma City Thunder and our New York Knicks. Desmond Bane, John Konchar, Santi Aldama, Jalen Green, Quentin Grimes and Immanuel Quickley have been tremendous value picks.

When we think of teams who’ve taken dusty coals of second rounders, undrafted prospects or reclamation prospects and turned them into shiny diamonds, whom do we think of? I think of Miami’s endless mill of shooters: Tyler Herro, Duncan Robinson, Max Strus, Gabe Vincent. I think of the Lakers – yes, you heard me – turning Lonnie Walker IV, Malik Monk and Austin Reaves into impact role players, using the combination of shooting plus one other gift (athleticism for Lonnie, explosiveness and passing for Monk and defense for Reaves).

I think of the Jazz unleashing Lauri Markannen. I think of Jordan Poole as store-brand Steph. Of Tyrese Maxey’s emergence as a true third threat for Philly. 

When I think of winning teams who have surprised me this year, I think of the Pacers and guys like Buddy Hield, Ben Mathurin, Andrew Nembhard and Aaron Nesmith. I think of the Kings and Kevin Huerter, the aforementioned Monk and Keegan Murray. Versatile shooters and tough shotmakers, the lot of them.

The pedigree of these guys is pretty varied — some are former lottery picks, like Lauri, others late firsts or second-rounders and some undrafted, like most of the Heat shooters. Most entered the league with a likely projection of becoming a role player. Higher-pedigree guys like Lauri fell from grace and unwillingly became role players while masquerading as reclamation projects. Only after that did they ascend, particularly when a new team took advantage of their shotmaking development.

So what do many of these players – and their development – have in common? They all came into the league with some level of advanced shotmaking ability, paired with other talents. We often have heard about the appeal of “dribble, pass, shoot” prospects, but it is clear that “shoot” means shoot, as the superpowered offenses around the league empower role players more than ever now.*

*Except the Knicks’ superpowered offense, of course — they rely wholly on star shotmaking and FTs.

Obviously a lot of the individual and team success for the aforementioned players can be chalked up to playing off of stars, but those role players’ gifts go beyond just ‘’orbit a star, hit open shots and maybe play defense.” Many great picks are successful by doing just those things – the New Orleans kids say hello – but today, many of these successful picks or reclamations involve players who are not unfamiliar with an audacious sidestep, step-back and transition three. And even those New Orleans kids have to dial up the shotmaking when Zion and Ingram are out:

Can you drill a pull-up three over a big who’s ventured too far from the hoop? What about a sidestep three after a 6-foot-9 defender flies past you, then jumps at you from behind, out of sight but lurking? Can you take a one-dribble midrange pull-up or hit floaters? What about a three on a fast break you’re leading? This is what I mean by shotmaking: the talent and skill to make jump shots that aren’t handed to them on a silver platter, essentially. Critically, for most of them, this was not their only appeal as a prospect. Some are super athletic. Others are tall! Others still can run the point or have a great handle. Many have great feel for the game. And so on.

This all begs two questions.

Why has shotmaking become underrated when evaluating prospects or judging reclamation projects?

For the first question, I would posit that shotmaking is typically the perceived domain of two types of player prospects.

First are the high-upside potential scoring machines. These players often go in the lottery, and high in the lottery. This isn’t really a surprise – most big-time prospects in contemporary hoops can score quite well, and it’s no longer via a bunch of post-ups or solely via bully ball. These are often the Park Place and Boardwalk of prospects: Luka Dončić, Ja Morant, Jalen Green, Cade Cunningham, Paolo Banchero, etc. If a player scores a bunch but does so via post ups and just being older and stronger (Hi, Hunter Dickinson), that’s not going to cut it. 

Second: the no-defense scorers. Guys who can score like crazy versus pre-NBA competition, but who have doubts about being able to stay on the floor and do enough other things – defense, ball moving, boxing out, you name it – to provide value aside from that scoring. The new patron saint of these guys is Cam Thomas. Additionally, certain players enter the NBA with a split opinion where they may or may not end up a no-defense scorer and find themselves in it shortly after debuting. Tre Mann and Bones Hyland are two of my favorites who have struggled adapting to defense at the NBA level, possibly a bit more than some folks anticipated. If you get stuck in this group, it’s not necessarily a death knell, but the bar for your offense becomes quite high. Cam Thomas says hello. 

However, what this two-bucket categorization leaves out are guys who might not score as much from a raw volume perspective but still display shotmaking talent. Maybe they score a lot in college, but they don’t quite have the usage to topple other teams single-handedly. Maybe they can shoot off-the-dribble jumpers, but are poor inside the arc (Hi IQ!). Maybe their role is different due to being taller and therefore needing to expend energy doing big man stuff, so they don’t show off shotmaking skills as much. This two-bucket categorization may also leave out slightly older prospects with high-volume shotmaking but doubts about upside due to age, or doubts about their scoring due to level of competition in a weaker conference or professional league, e.g. a foreign league, the G-League or the Overtime Elite league. 

Now, let’s be clear: historically, this two-bucket categorization has been a pretty smart strategy for scouts and front office evaluators. In the NBA if you’re not a star, you aren’t likely to get that many chances to cross-tween-hesi in isolation, even if your team is awful. Teams want players who can capitalize off the attention their stars get and players who have the potential to become those stars. That axiom has basically been set in stone in draft and development circles for decades. If someone is going to feast off of spot-ups playing next to Zion, Ja, Giannis, or Jokić, who cares if they can do a Harden step-back? In the past, stepbacks are the domain of superheroes and 6MOY awardees. The Batmans in the league win MVPs, the Robins are pretty ridiculous players in their own right. And yet…the times, they are a-changin’! Even the Alfreds of the league need to be able to get busy now.

Why has shotmaking become so important for high-impact supporting players for team success? 

The league has changed.

Offenses now are absolutely turbo-charged. Teams are maximizing statistically efficient shot deployment and increased pace to generate more possessions per game in total and versus defenses that aren’t set. The diversity of player skillsets – positionless basketball – is at an all-time peak, with shooting a requisite and not just a luxury, regardless of player size. There is also incredible depth of talent, with many teams boasting deep benches or multiple stars or both. Young talent in particular is not only being developed across the league, but contributing meaningful minutes to winning across the league. The result is possible contributing veterans are left to wither on benches (Hi, Evan) or be exiled from the league entirely (Hi, Carmelo) – and justifiably so. To top it off, rule changes like the removal of transition take fouls have juiced offenses and refereeing habits of making calls based on reaction and reputation rather than actual confirmed violations tend to favor offensive superstars, of which there are now many in the league, as well. 

Despite that, contemporary defenses are often as complicated and varied as they have ever been, by necessity. The quality of defense has to try to rise to the challenge, for survival.  Young, versatile impactful defenders can find those dual development-plus-impact minutes: think Deuce McBride, Austin Reaves, Matisse Thybulle. Most coaches have smart and varied defensive schemes, too. This has created an arms race. The bar for role players on offense and defense has risen in a vicious cycle as offenses have improved. For those role players on offense, it is no longer adequate to just be a knockdown shooter. You need to be a versatile shooter, able to adjust to being defended in different ways by different players, and able to generate a reliable jumpshot, possibly within the first seven seconds of the shot clock. That does not make you exceptional anymore; it makes you acceptable. Which is kind of crazy to think about, at least for me.

If you look at the best teams right now, each sport “random” players who might legitimately key a scoring run by themselves based on skill-based shooting. Think of Sam Hauser or Grant Williams, Bobby Portis and Brook Lopez, Seth Curry and TJ Warren, Cedi Osman and Caris Levert, Grimes and Quickley, AJ Griffin and De’Andre Hunter, Luke Kennard and Marcus Morris. These are all players who are tasked mostly with easier shots but still have the ability, willingness, and leeway to take harder ones – because they can make them at respectable clips. Role players have to be damn near Lou Williams on offense, but with size and defense now. This bare minimum standard of impressive shotmaking is raised even higher in the cauldron of playoff basketball, where all of a sudden the off-the-dribble shooting ability of players like Cam Johnson, Grayson Allen and Spencer Dinwiddie is stress-tested to the highest degree. 

So what does this mean for scouting moving forward and for the 2023 cycle?

These role players, despite being more talented than ever, cannot reliably shotmake or isolate versus top defenders. Maybe they can pull it off once in a while, but it’s not a well you want to drink from often. Occasionally, a prospect with some solid shotmaking ascends to a higher realm where they actually can do that, like Jordan Poole or, arguably, Tyler Herro. 

But for the most part, the skillset we are discussing here – for role players – is applied versus bent defenses, or with less help defense, or in transition, or versus benches or mixed bench-starter units. 

From an amateur scouting perspective, the beautiful thing is that regardless of whether you’re searching for prospects with higher offensive shotmaker ceilings – potential 23+ point per game scorers – or role players, you can analyze shotmaking the same way. You don’t have to do anything differently! You can ask questions like:

Are all their jumpshots stationary, or varied? Can they hit under close contests? Differing footwork? Are their 3PA/100 possessions in the double digits? How is their 2-point jumper percentage? How are their mechanics? Is their handle passable enough to take a one-dribble pullup three? How about strong enough to create space and then take a 3? How is their touch? What is their unassisted 3P rate? Unassisted rim rate? 

For players whose projection might skew a little more towards higher upside possible stardom, the answers will be different and the footage will be different. 

There’s no single metric for shooting that is a good shotmaking indicator, but you know it when you see it. “Real hoopers” who can get a bucket, and efficiently. It should also be mentioned that this isn’t an end-all be-all, and the ability to read defenses and offenses, good defensive effort and technique, good physical tools, strong passing intuition, college context and role, etc., all obviously matter greatly. Failing to analyze those traits can result in over-valuing scorers who top out as G-League Scoring Machine Quadruple-A prospects or classic European-league scoring guards:

For some prospects, maybe the bet is that they have the shotmaking, not much else, and you can develop the rest of the game:

But more often, you want to find prospects who have demonstrated shotmaking but do not rely solely upon it to make an impact.

Shotmaking is really, really hard to develop if it is not there at least a little bit. There are plenty of prospects who can be extremely successful role players, and even stars, without plus shotmaking. However, those players have a ton of pressure for other skills of theirs to really shine through at an elite NBA level. Think of OG Anunoby and his defense, RJ Barrett and his heat-seeking missle ability to get to the rim at will, Scottie Barnes’ ability to do a little of everything while being 6-foot-10 – and these guys are borderline stars. On the role-player side of the ledger? You have to have mixes like McBride’s mix of insane defense and connective passing. Kleber’s amazing nexus of game-processing, high motor, size, rebounding and stationary shooting. Bruce Brown’s ability to hit standstill jumpers and somehow be a historically great cutter, dunker and passer. And so on and so on. So you shouldn’t ignore prospects who can’t shake-n-bake-n-shotmake with the best of them, but you should be that much more rigorous when analyzing the rest of their game.

For the road, here are some shotmaking names to watch in the 2023 class lurking either on the periphery of the top ten or wholly outside of it: Gradey Dick, Jett Howard, GG Jackson, Brice Sensabaugh, Terquavion Smith, Nikola Djurisic, Max Lewis, Dariq Whitehead, Jordan Hawkins, and Kyle Filipowski.