NEWCASTLE (Paul Nilsen Women's Basketball Worldwide) - The terms 'modern-day player' or 'multi-faceted' are both a blessing and a curse to women's basketball - although maybe now more of the latter.

The obsession with turning every player into a do-it-all 'multi-faceted' and 'modern-day' player has arguably gone too far.

I have spoken about it in the past, but I have to raise it again as it is serious. Although granted, I stand up to be shot at by the army of coaches, coaching consultants, specialist staff and others who now sing a relentless and irritating tune in respect of the merits of being a 'modern and rounded player' - one that rings unpleasantly in my ears.

In truth, I am sick of hearing people talk about developing players who can shoot - instead of shooters who can play.

There is a difference.

The 'mojo' of the women's game is shooting and in recent years, I fear the quality is beginning to plummet and I blame too many young shooters being told they need to do more on the court. Consequently their primary talent is being diluted as a result.

Of course they need to do more. I also accept that a lot of guards whose main skill is shooting, are told and indeed believe themselves that they must handle the ball, penetrate, have incredible defense and everything else.

I subscribe to a light version of this - honestly I do.

But there is absolutely no perspective and proportionality when it comes to shooters in the women's game.

It is an art and a priceless tradition which is being treat with contempt because we can't cope with the notion that perhaps the mantra of the 'modern day player' could be flawed - in the cases of shooters at least.

To have a young girl walk through the gym doors who has the potential to be a great shooter with hard work and practice is a wonderful thing.

But of course the phrase 'Oh she's just a shooter' is one that has become the ultimate backhanded compliment.

Yet trawl through the raft of youth tournaments I have attended in recent years and I don't have enough fingers, toes and hairs on my head and body to count how many times coaches and teams were crying out for 'just a shooter'.

Too many of their players were trying to prove they could dribble and create their own shot - the misguided tick in the box for player development for so long.

Too many national federations have and indeed continue to place an overbearing emphasis on telling that young girl in question she needs to do a multitude of other things.

Instead of honing her priority skill to a level of shooting which makes her as deadly as deadly gets and then making her a competent ball handler and not a liability on defense - she is working on all the latter things disproportionately. Instead of shooting the ball until she can’t hold her arms in the air any longer.

I have even seen clear examples of players whose shot percentages have plummeted because they have clearly been advised to 'bulk up' and get in the weights room. Guess what? They did and it affected their shooting motion, their impact and ultimately, their numbers.

At grass-roots level, the women's game is being damaged because of this and it will impact on the senior level.

In an ideal world, everyone would be a Diana Taurasi and be an incredible shooter and also do everything else brilliantly. But of course that is not realistic.

I feel passionate that women's basketball should welcome the ever expanding and maturing athleticism and physicality - the era of more exciting dunks, power drives to the hoop with spectacular 'and-1's, shot-blocking that is getting ever nearer the rim - and all that jazz.

But whether I am a coach or fan, I am continually scanning my eyes down benches at games and trying to determine who could come onto the court, catch the ball behind a screen for example and actually hit shots consistently.

Is it really such a label of shame to be considered as 'just a shooter' - whether that perception is the reality or not?

Are we happy to have a roster with no real specialists, but a vanilla collection of 'modern-day' players who are so 'samey' they cancel each other out in a sea of mediocrity?

I hope not.

Some premier nations don't have any great shooters at any level - although a couple do tend to be relatively successful, so they will probably push back on my own theory.

Then again, I would ask what the 'missing dimension' is that doesn't make them the very best?

Regretfully I am adding this issue to my list of ongoing campaigns.

I am just so saddened that 'pure shooters' in the women's game seem to be engaged in a rather unpalatable race to extinction with polar bears - and I am sure that both are due to man-made choices.

Paul Nilsen

FIBA

FIBA's columnists write on a wide range of topics relating to basketball that are of interest to them. The opinions they express are their own and in no way reflect those of FIBA.

FIBA takes no responsibility and gives no guarantees, warranties or representations, implied or otherwise, for the content or accuracy of the content and opinion expressed in the above article.