"The code is more what you call a guideline..."
We should know where OUR and OPPONENT points arise. "Do more of what works and less of what doesn't." For example, UCONN's Geno Auriemma expects a third of points in transition, a third from set plays, and a third on threes. There'll be overlap, getting threes in transition or from sets. How he separates that, I don't know.
With young (middle school) players, we get few threes, seldom more than 1 or 2 per game, so I'm discounting them.
First, where do points NOT arise? We never score from bad shots, forced shots, shot turnovers, or as my coach called them "$H#T shots." We don't score on our turnovers, offensive rebounds we don't get, or missed free throws.
Consider separating scoring into categories like:
Transition
Set offense (man and zone)
Put backs
Specials (BOBs and SLOBs)
Free throws
That informs our strengths and weaknesses. Despite lacking size, we rebounded well (eyeball test), but finished poorly on put backs. "Don't break the glass."
We can also inform scoring by using shot charts. We saw how flawed three-point shooting became the undoing of both the Celtics and the Rockets in conference finals this season.
The NBA uses advanced metrics by player...(2016-2017, LeBron in orange). As previously discussed, we know that 2018 NBA high points per possession come off cutting and low from post ups.
They examine points from isolation, spot ups, off screens, off handoffs, transition, pick and roll handler and roller, as cutter, put backs, and post ups. We lack the time and manpower to categorize to this degree.
The top team in the NBA in percentage points scored on free throws was Charlotte and the lowest was Sacramento (12.4%).
Golden State scored the most points per game in transition and Portland the least (8.4). The Celtics scored only 9.6 ppg in transition. Each team decides the relevance of those statistics. Coach Brad Stevens remarked, "99.9% of the time, the numbers don't drive decisions, they validate them."
Last season the Eastern Conference had several teams among the leaders in defensive transition points allowed and Chicago had the worst stats at 1.15 points/possession but they allowed few transition opportunities. Phoenix allowed over 20 points per game in transition.
We want to score "easy" baskets, meaning transition, layups, put backs, and open midrange shots. For now, free throws aren't easy for us. My sense is that our highest points per type of play also flow from cutting (give-and-go, back door plays) although that's strictly eyeball test. It's no coincidence that occurs by generating assists. During the Olympics, the USAWNT had a game where they assisted on 40 of 48 baskets, reflecting Coach Auriemma's philosophy.
Ideally, we'd have data on scoring by both play type and types of shots taken.
All that said, the best laid plans often won't play. My primary goal is developing youth players for high school not maximizing wins. In a 'win-driven' league, teams are going to apply zone pressure and fall back into zone defense (usually 2-3). I can't change that, so we need to spend time defeating pressure (advantage-disadvantage drills) and paint touches/ball reversal against zones. For now (summer), that means working on quicker decision-making, better passing, finishing, and shooting fundamentals.