Before the 2019-2020 NBA season tipped off, one of its star players had already sparked a contentious debate. Anybody who is extremely online noticed Kevin Durant's back-and-forth with Hardwood Paroxysm about the virtue of shooting in the midrange. HP was making the analytical argument that anybody who is good at shooting in the midrange should try to optimize that skill and get an extra point out of the shot. KD's argument was based more on a player's feel for the game and the fact that math is probably the last thing a player is thinking about when trying to get off a shot in an NBA game against some of the world's best defenders.
I love the analytic side of basketball and think it has done a lot to make the game more enjoyable. Teams trying to get the best shots available has led to some really beautiful basketball over the years (the recent Warriors dynasty coming to mind). Of course, you can also make the case that it has spawned Houston's less-than-enjoyable, dribble-heavy offense and that relying too much on numbers can suck the soul out of the game.
As indicated, I don't buy into that last part too much. However, I also don't believe every analytic choice is always 100 percent correct. An example from the first game of this year's season demonstrates how there are contexts when what seems like the most analytic-friendly choice falls short.
Early in the second quarter of the Pelicans/Raptors game, New Orleans had wrong-footed Toronto's defense after a Kenrich Williams offensive rebound off a Nickeil Alexander-Walker 3-point attempt. The Raptors D basically became three guys in the paint protecting the basket and two guys on the perimeter flying around to close out potential 3-point attempts.
By not recovering fully, Toronto had stationed itself to take away a shot at the rim and a 3-pointer, but allow for everything else. New Orleans would respond with a Josh Hart drive-and-kick, an E'Twaun Moore drive-and-kick, and then an Alexander-Walker drive that ended in a heavily contested and unsuccessful layup attempt over Serge Ibaka.
This is a case where I think a midrange shot would have been entirely appropriate. Any one of Hart, Moore, or Alexander-Walker could have pump-faked a 3-pointer, gotten to their dominant hand and had time and space to pull up from a comfortable range. Yet, each one chose to go directly at the paint where Ibaka and Marc Gasol were ready--two of them deciding to kick out because their prospects were bleak. Not until the rookie got the ball did he get to find out about Serge Ibaka's defesnvie credentials up close. By hunting the analytically superior shot, the Pelicans actually ended up getting a less desirable look.
Again, tooling your offense to find looks at the basket, open 3s, and free throw attempts is a great idea. Those should always be your top priorities. But context is always going to dictate which choices are the most beneficial. With smart defenses working to limit an opposing offense's efficiency, sometimes you have to rethink just exactly what constitutes your optimal decision.
