The NBA three point line is about 23 feet away on average. The worst shot in the sport is a 22 1/2 foot jumper.
NBA defenses invite opponents to take midrange jumpers. Obviously they want to defend the rim and keep opponents from very high percentage shots from close in. And teams are getting so good at shooting the three that they want to defend there as well (with the extra point and all). So the longer midrange shots are shot at a much lower percentage than shots in the paint, but they're not worth as many points as a 23 footer.
So that's the dead zone in the NBA.
And yet, I believe, therein lies a market inefficiency waiting to be exploited.
Some players are just really, really good at the midrange shots - 16-21 feet. And if defenses are geared around stopping the paint and the three, and they give you the midrange shots - really, NBA defenses often just give you that shot - and you can master that shot to the tune of 50% shooting, then you'll be in pretty good shape.
Here are some interesting numbers from hoop data (
http://hoopdata.com/teamshotlocs.aspx):
2012-13, NBA team shooting percentage by distance:
At Rim: 16.4-25.5 (64.6%)
3-9 feet: 3.6-9.0 (39.8%)
10-15 feet: 2.6-6.3 (41.7%)
16-23 feet: 7.1-18.5 (38.3%)
Threes: 7.2-20.0 (36.0%; effective FG% of 53.8%)
At the rim, you're talking about layups, dunks, tip-ins. Naturally the percentage will be high. 3-9 feet you're talking about the close-in paint. That's the area that defenses really challenge. Very low shooting percentages not because the percentages would be low unguarded, but because those shots are always challenged, usually by seven-foot guys. And often, the players shooting those shots are big men with very little touch.
10-15 is the spot where teams shoot the least. Well-defended, a pretty low shooting percentage. Teams just don't run much stuff designed to get that shot.
16-23 is the dead zone. As you can see, teams shoot a lot from that area. But not so much by design; rather, because that's what NBA defenses want you to take. And for good reason - 38.3%. Often these are big men who have just set screens. Not the shooting guards who will drift a little further back and take threes.
Of course, the three point field goal percentage is lower, but the *effective* field goal percentage (taking the extra point into consideration) is 53.8%. Huge. Why shoot from 20 feet at 38.3% when you can shoot three feet back at an effective rate of 53.8%?
I think it's this midrange stuff that can be exploited. Somehow. Teams will figure out how.