Shooting for the Top: Does Shooting Matter for #1 Picks?
Stephen combs through draft history to see how important shooting has been for the top picks in the NBA Draft.
Does Shooting Matter?
The other day, I was walking my dog while listening to a basketball podcast. I found myself wondering: “How well did the number one picks of years past shoot from three before getting drafted?” As one often does.
That innocent thought led me down a rabbit hole full of surprising discoveries. The reason I even found myself curious enough to look into this is due to the discourse that surrounds the top players in this draft class. Players like Alex Sarr, Nikola Topic, and Stephon Castle have tons of fans in the scouting community, but one of the main concerns with them is the shooting.
But do NBA Front Offices truly care about how top prospects shoot? I believe that most of us—if we’re honest—would assume so. After all, the league has the most skilled players it has ever had, with spacing to be valued at a premium; shooting equals spacing. This perception of the league at large would naturally impact how teams would value prospects in each draft class, but I think people would be shocked that shooting does not appear to be that significant of a consideration for teams selecting at the top of any particular draft in recent history.
Setting the Stage
To keep league trends in mind, I didn’t want to dive too far down a rabbit hole of previous draft classes. Considering that the incoming draft class has been viewed as one of the most dismal in quite some time, I elected to look back to 2013—a class that is viewed as one of the worst the NBA has seen in the past 20 drafts.
We’ll look at draft history through two lenses: dating back to 2013, and also dating back to the 2019 draft class as well. This is to help account for recent trends and positional valuations.
There will be breakdowns of how these players shot from the three-point line and free-throw line (to serve as a touch indicator) in each player’s draft year. Additionally, we’ll look to see how these top picks progressed as shooters once they hit the league.
Again, the primary objective of this is to help determine how we should analyze prospects that will be in the 2024 NBA Draft.
The 2024 Draft Prospects
The 2024 Draft class isn’t made up of players that many believe are going to produce a lot of star power. As you will see below, the projected lottery players for this class are all over the place in shooting efficiency. Of the current projected Top 3 players (Sarr, Zaccharie Risacher, and Topic), Risacher is the only one that is considered to be an above-average three-point shooter. However, he is also the worst free-throw shooter within that group.
Stephon Castle may be the “dark horse” to be taken with the first pick in the coming draft, but his three-point shooting has been a glaring deficiency. He has been credited with hitting 20 of 75 three-pointers, per Synergy Sports, with his attempts falling behind only Risacher—who attempted 182. With free-throw shooting serving as a long-time indication of touch, Castle is second in the group of four.
Matas Buzelis and Ron Holland have sort of “mushroomed” compared to the rest of this class—hiding in a dark corner and developing under a veil of mystery. There is a likelihood that they could get in front of NBA front offices and scrimmage against other players of this ilk, and outshine some of them. They also are considered below average in shooting, but they did play on an NBA-sized floor. The only issue with that reasoning is that their free throw percentage also doesn’t meet the average of previous number one players. While there were former number one picks that have shot worse, they are also All-Stars.
Outside of the prospects that are being considered for the top spots in the coming draft, there are a few players who have been phenomenal from beyond the arc. Dalton Knecht has made the greatest number of three-pointers while also attempting the most. What propels Risacher to the top of this class is his efficiency on volume. While his efficiency and volume are less than, say, Jared McCain, Zaccharie possesses a star-level size and length. However, the free-throw percentage is concerning.
Reed Sheppard hovered around 50% from deep throughout the season on respectable volume—fifth in total attempts among this group. He was also among the top players in free throw percentage. The only “knock” against him would be that he is in that sub-6’4” stature. You’ll notice that NBA front offices don’t draft players of his height that high anymore. The last player of that size that was taken #1 was Kyrie Irving.
Rob Dillingham fits into similar boxes in comparison to his Kentucky teammate. Rob didn’t make as many, but was still very efficient from distance. What many believe Dillingham has over Sheppard is being an offense unto himself. Rob posted shooting efficiency numbers that are above average, which does help his draft stock even if he isn’t considered to be in contention for a top pick currently.
Not very many prospects within this year’s class are considered to be poor free-throw shooters in their draft year. As mentioned earlier, Risacher’s low free-throw percentage could be indicative to his long-term projection as a pro. His sample size relative to his draft contemporaries is within the top five, which may solidify that there is some substance to the lack of efficiency.
Dalton Knecht led in three-point attempts and makes and tops the free throw metrics as well. His free throw rate during the season was respectable, at 35.4, and he was able to finish through contact (credited with 15 And-1s on 148 fouls drawn, per Synergy).
Ja’Kobe Walter attempted the second-most free throw attempts, at 219, and finished just a hair under 80%. While Walter’s three-point percentage is considered middle-of-the-pack, his efficiency from range was still above average compared to top picks of draft classes past. The ability to make teams pay from the charity stripe appears to bode well for his future success as a floor spacer.
Rumblings of Donovan Clingan being able to convert on jumpers have begun to surface as workout season is in effect. His three-point percentage of 25% actually mirrors the collegiate output of one of the best shooting big men in the NBA today—both in efficiency and actual attempts, that player being Karl-Anthony Towns. What does raise concern for his shooting projections is the low free throw percentage. Those numbers are below average compared to past number one picks. What Clingan has working to his advantage is that the three isn’t a necessity for him, positionally, to be an outside threat.
Isaiah Collier was once thought to be a real contender for being taken with the top pick in this class. Setting aside the high turnover rate, his shooting numbers are also concerning. Isaiah’s athleticism has allowed him to get to the line the third-most out of this group, but he shot under 68%—putting him in the same neighborhood as past number one selections, Ben Simmons and Zion Williams.
Alex Sarr’s shooting numbers are interesting when looking at past number one picks. His three-point efficiency is actually in step with how Victor Wembanyama shot in his draft year, but Sarr’s free throw numbers are more in line like Deandre Ayton and Anthony Bennett in comparison to big men of drafts past.
With Nikola Topic returning to game action, it seems as if his stock is on the rise. While there are doubts about his shooting projections, fans should take heart in knowing that his three-point and free-throw conversion numbers are in line with what number one picks put up in their draft years. Coupling that with his natural feel for the game, and Topic’s chances of being the first name on draft night may continue to rise.
A Lesson in Draft History
I wanted to begin analyzing the shooting numbers of players in the coming draft class first to establish a baseline but also to set the table for looking at past draft picks. Oftentimes, nostalgia and anchoring biases can set in when remembering and defending players who have paved a path in the league. Remember, data isn’t everything—and I, too, and well aware of that. However data is meant to help, and it is intended to help make decisions easier.
One of the first things that stood out to me upon gathering this information is how…pedestrian the average three-point and free-throw percentages turned out. For these players that have made the league, the teams that drafted them did not always go with a “sure thing” from distance.
The 2021 draft wasn’t too long ago, but some folks may not remember that Cade Cunningham was assumed to be the top pick throughout the entire draft cycle. His positional size was in step with the league’s infatuation with jumbo creators, and his playmaking was a sight to behold. What sealed his fate may have been his performance behind the arc. Cade shot just under 40% from deep on over 150 attempts. He also attempted over 150 free throws and shot almost 85%. We’ll look at his pro numbers later, but the three-point shot has not been as stellar as some may have hoped it might be.
Behind Cunningham, we have one of the most mysterious college-to-NBA careers in league history. Markelle Fultz was the top pick in the 2017 draft class, ahead of players like Jayson Tatum and Donovan Mitchell. His shooting metrics were on another level at Washington, as we shot over 40% from deep and over 90% from the stripe. His production in the pros has been hampered by injuries and expectations, and his efficiency hasn’t reflected the promise he showed during his time in college.
Diametrically opposed to Cade and Fultz, there are a pair of Timberwolves who put up two of the three worst three-point percentages in their draft seasons. Karl-Anthony Towns only shot 25% from deep, but there wasn’t much volume to really chew on. He finished his year at Kentucky going two-of-eight on threes. What did give evaluators belief in his shooting were his mechanics, and the fact that he shot over 80% from the free-throw line.
Anthony Edwards is working his way into superstardom in the playoffs right now, but he was questioned about his love of the game a few seasons ago. His time at Georgia had highs and lows, and it led to a lot of questions during the NBA Draft of 2020. He was not a lock to be taken number one, largely due to his inefficiencies from all over the court. His athleticism was second-to-none, but he did also display a respectable level of touch from the charity stripe.
Now, I wanted to do some research to answer my own questions that cropped up as I started finding more answers. I found myself wondering what would happen if I applied hindsight to the three-point and free-throw percentages. Surely that would boast those averages?
I was shocked to see that those numbers actually dropped. For the substitutions, I subbed in Luka Doncic into the 2018 draft class representative. Jayson Tatum replaced Markelle Fultz for the 2017 class, and his Boston teammate, Jaylen Brown goes for 2016. International MVPs Nikola Jokic and Giannis Antetokounmpo were plugged in for 2014 and 2013, respectively
While the free-throw percentage dipped, it was only marginally. The three-point percentage, however, went down by almost two percent. As stunned as I was at this finding, it did also provide some clarity. Even for the players who rise above where they were drafted, they weren’t super stellar from beyond the arc either. That should give evaluators even more comfort if they are in on prospects in the 2024 class that haven’t been flamethrowers.
Perhaps the player scouts point to as the “See! This player did it!” would be Jaylen Brown. When Boston selected him #3 overall in the 2016 draft, it was not considered a slam dunk. Jaylen had supreme athleticism—similar to Anthony Edwards—but his three-ball was not pretty. Unlike Ant, Brown didn’t even have a good free-throw percentage to bolster his shooting projection. The athleticism and outer-worldly development gave him the runway to grow as a pro.
I was not surprised to see Giannis would negatively impact the averages for this group—as he is your favorite outlier’s favorite outlier. Nikola Jokic’s numbers, though, were more interesting—particularly the free throw numbers. In his two seasons prior to making the NBA, Nikola shot over 125 three-pointers—averaging over 32 percent. That would typically be enough to have the imaginations of scouts run wild, but he also shot under 66% on free throws during those seasons. Perhaps those shooting numbers contributed to him falling to the second round of the 2014 draft.
The next question I had in my research led me down a path to see if going too far down draft history might skew what the league is doing more recently. Maybe the draft philosophies have changed somewhere between 2013 and 2023. In order to whittle the data down a bit, I looked for the same information but dating only back to 2019. Surely, the percentages would increase if I eliminated the Ben Simmons, Karl-Anthony Towns, and Deandre Ayton drafts.
I was surprised for a second time. The volume of three pointers that Paolo Banchero, Cade Cunningham, and Zion Williamson took were not enough to overcome the effect of Ant Edwards and Victor Wembanyama. The percentages from the number one picks of the five most recent drafts still fall short comparatively to number one picks dating back to 2013. The free throw percentages are slightly higher, though.
Housekeeping note: there are no changes for best player in each class.
The Next Level
The final question I had in this experiment was figuring out how each number one pick shot at the next level, year-by-year. Once I discovered that the top picks in the draft were “fine” on average, my expectations for their progression were tepid. But, yet again, I was surprised at what I found.
Top rookies shooting under 32 percent from distance didn’t shock me. Considering those same players shot around 33 percent before the NBA—most of them from the college line—31 percent (and some change) made sense. Considering, too, that most of the top picks had staggering genetic features, NBA teams almost seem to believe that the shot can easily be taught to players who have the tools to succeed in every other aspect of the game.
That’s exactly what has happened. Year two shows a leap of about two percent. That leap typically comes on about 300 more threes taken. Years three, four, and five have a respectable number of applicable players figuring into the calculations; it also shows more of who a player is going to be as a shooter. Number one picks within those years hover around 35 to 36 percent from distance.
You can imagine that once you look at years six and onward, the player pool of number one picks dwindle down rapidly—especially taking injury history into account, along with Anthony Bennett no longer being in the league.
While the three-point shooting was encouraging, the free-throw percentage did not knock me out of my chair. With number one picks coming into the NBA averaging around 75% from the stripe, the numbers that they put up within their first few seasons didn’t overwhelm me. If you look through that year three-to-year five range, these players don’t really diverge too much from that 75%.
Year six is an interesting year, considering the players that made up the pool. Andrew Wiggins was traded in the midst of his sixth season in the league, and that season was the first time he had finished over 70% from the free throw line in two years. The next season (year seven), he shot over 71%, and then he followed it up with another sub-70% year from the line again. By year eight, he was shooting under 64% from the stripe, which contributes to the year eight average plummeting to just over 72%. Ben Simmons going 6-of-15 didn’t help either.
In an effort to maintain consistency, I wanted to zoom in to just the past five draft classes to see how the more recent number one picks performed from deep and on their free throws. Remembering that the average shooting numbers for these players were actually worse compared to the average overall top picks dating back to 2013, I would assume that their pro numbers would be worse, too.
Surprisingly enough, the abbreviated timeline players actually have done better than the larger pool. Victor Wembanyama's rookie season has been one for the record books, but what has been impressive is that he has shot about five percent better on threes in the NBA. Wemby has attempted more than 150 more threes with San Antonio than he did with Metropolitans 92 and was more efficient. That’s incredible considering the spacing issues that existed with the Spurs.
Anthony Edwards went from shooting about 28% from deep on high volume in college to shooting just under 33% as a rookie in the NBA. Ant shot 253 in his draft season, and followed that up with 520 attempts with Minnesota. The extended floor didn’t impact the shooting efficiency with Edwards, and he shot a nearly-identical percentage from the free-throw line.
Zion Williamson’s first season with the Pels may have given evaluators some false hope in his shooting consistency due to the smaller sample size. At Duke, Zion shot about 33% from deep, and followed that up by going 6-of-14 from downtown in his rookie season. Digging a little deeper into his percentage, Williamson went 4-of-4 in his season debut against San Antonio, then went 1-for-1 two times later in the season. He also went 0-of-3 against the Bucks and then went 0-of-1 on five separate occasions during that season. His career average from deep has maintained at about 33%, which mimics his college numbers.
The top picks from 2019 on did well to exceed the three point averages compared to the larger timeline. For the most part, these players have also exceeded the free throw numbers.
It may seem like a slight disappointment that Paolo Banchero hasn’t really progressed as a shooter, but I did find it impressive that Banchero has maintained being a 33% shooter from deep on higher volume. His free throw numbers have also stayed about the same in the NBA compared to his draft year at Duke.
Cade has maintained his free throw percentage around that near-85% that he shot in college. In his most recent year (year three), Cunningham shot just a hair under 87% from the line on 274 attempts—a career-best. While it has taken him a while to get there, Cade has also worked his way into being a 35% shooter from deep for the first time in his young career. Along with Zion improving to being a plus-70% shooter from the line, Cade’s shooting growth played a large part in the improvement in the year two-to-year three increase of over 4%.
Curtains
So, what do you do with this information? The possibilities are endless. You could say that this data may not be a complete enough representation of how teams look at shooting in relation to number one picks. You are probably right. I could (and still might down the line) look at specific shooting metrics, play types, range, halfcourt finishing, etc. to be more refined in the progression of prospects as shooters. This isn’t meant to be an all-encompassing think-piece. This is simply a layer of the onion.
I dove into this experiment to bring it back to the prospects of the 2024 draft class. How does this experiment change how I feel about the top prospects in this class? Honestly, I feel better about some of the top names now. Information is supposed to help shape opinions. Opinions shape philosophy. Philosophy shapes behavior.
Not all of the teams that have drafted number one overall have a track record—or are given any credit—of player development. Yet, NBA teams have done a great job of taking players with outlier physical traits and are facilitating a path for them to improve as shooters. Shooting hasn’t played a monumental part in the selection of top players, which should give encouragement to those who are high on Nikola Topic, Stephon Castle, and Alex Sarr. Even those players who proved to be the best player in a draft class despite not being the first pick generally have those same physical traits, and aren’t necessarily exceptional from beyond the three-point line. So, if a team is high on Ron Holland or Matas Buzelis, they are likely to buy the traits. And they are likely to help them improve as shooters.
Now, there are obviously exceptions to every rule. Most players that have outperformed their draft stock have done so because of their shooting. That, however, may be an article for another day.
Be sure to follow me on Twitter: StephenGHoops
Catch the Draft Sickos show LIVE on the No Ceilings NBA channel:
REMEMBER, you can always find me and the rest of the No Ceilings crew on the No Ceilings NBA Draft Podcast feed: