Who are the Best "Clutch" Players in the NBA?

I'm expecting that we will be flooded over the next few days with stories of Jeremy Lin's "nerves of steel" and "iron will.". However, while metaphors involving metallic products are fun, such stories are almost always predictably silly. Players do not become good shooters over the last few minutes of a close game when they are usually bad shooters. And good shooters do not become bad shooters in the clutch. Nerves are steel are, by and large, a myth.

So what actually does make someone a good clutch player? In my mind, it boils down to two things. First, shot selection. And second, the ability to manufacture points out of slow developing half court sets. I will touch on each of these in turn.

Too many players stop running real plays at the end of the game, and instead dribble for 15 seconds around the top of the key and then hoist up long jumpers when they don't see a clear opening into the paint. Contested long jumpers are bad shots at any point of the game, including over the last few minutes. For example, consider LeBron James. LeBron shouldn't be shooting even semi-contested three pointers in the first quarter, and he shouldn't be shooting them in the clutch. But he (and others, he is not alone) have a very bad tendency of shooting more long jumpers in these situations than they would otherwise. LeBron got lucky with these shots last year in the playoffs against Boston and Chicago, hitting them at better than his usual rate. But he, predictably, regressed to the mean in the Finals. Another, far more flagrant, example of this phenomena is Kobe Bryant. Kobe forces up bad shot after bad shot at the end of close games, believing that he simply must will his team to victory. And because they are bad shots (and again, not because of nerves), he usually misses them. Don't believe me? Take a look at this chart, courtesy of Zach Lowe. The lesson is clear: teams need to work for high quality looks in the waning seconds in the same way that they would at any other time during the game.

Of course, this is easier said than done. Many teams thrive on quick shots and on player and ball that are difficult to replicate when you are trying to nurse the clock. So, who does have a game that is best suited for these situations? Numero uno: Chris Paul. Despite popular perception, Paul's teams have always gone at a plodding pace. He usually calls for the ball immediately and then walks up the floor. A play is then set up around the top of the key, and the team goes from there. This model translates perfectly to the end of the game because nothing needs to change. The same plays can be executed as the clock winds down. Making matters even better is the fact that Paul is "allowed" to pass without worrying about being criticized by the media. Whereas other top dogs like LeBron are described as "unwilling to step up" when they pass to open shooters for a last shot, Chris Paul and other point guards are considered exceptions to this rule because their position dictates that they are supposed to pass.

Shockingly, a contrasting example of the kind of player that thrives in the closing minutes is the most overrated player in basketball: Carmelo Anthony. Like Paul, Anthony does not need to change his game in the clutch. Carmelo can continue to be very good at shooting highly inefficient shots. These shots still are far from optimal at any point in the game--while Carmelo hits them far more often than most, he still does not make them at a high enough rate to make them "good shots." But if your team refuses to run a real play, and instead is going to rely on isolation and a star jacking up a shot no matter what, you may as well rely on a guy who plays that way no matter the situation and is better than pretty much anyone else at the strategy.