In invasion team sports, scoring efficiency depends on the ability to create scoring opportunities and to convert them into goals or points. Scoring performance varies across sports and comparisons among them are little. In this paper we compare creation and conversion of scoring opportunities in different team sports and genders. Box-score data from six sports [basketball, handball, water polo, field hockey, football, ice hockey] (328 teams, 5723 games, both genders) were standardized by “per ball possession”. We applied Bayesian methods to compute the posterior distributions of shots per possession (SHTpPOS), points per shot (PTSpSHT) and points per possession (PTSpPOS). We evaluated differences for these three variables among sports, between genders and the correlation between every pair of them. Inter-sports evaluation evidenced basketball, handball, ice hockey and water polo are sports with a high probability of creating shots (SHTpPOS—p(robability) > 0.65). Complementary, ice hockey, field hockey and football are sports with a low probability of converting shots (PTSpSHT—0.05 < p < 0.26). Despite the distinct results among sports for creating and converting opportunities, all sports in both genders, converged to a scoring efficiency (PTSpPOS) below 0.5. In the genders’ comparison, men are more efficient in creating opportunities than women, except in water polo. For scoring efficiency, differences between men and women are fewer. Results prevent generalization about differences in scoring efficiency between genders. Finally, creation and conversion have low correlation in sports with high shot creation probabilities (basketball and ice hockey). In these sports, scoring is not limited by the number of shots taken but rather by their accuracy. For sports with low shot creation probabilities (soccer and men field hockey), creation and conversion presented higher correlation. Evidences contribute to increase coaches’ understanding about scoring tactics’ challenges in team sports and design practices accordingly.

Basketball players' performances have been traditionally summarized in indices that rely on the game-related statistics (e.g. rebounds, field goals, etc). Indices are defined according to different methods (e.g. Efficiency Index -Ei, Plus-Minus, Wins Produced), seeking distinct analytic objectives. Ei is frequently used given its simplicity. However, it has questionable validity since it measures productivity instead of efficiency and uses biased calculations for scoring. This study aimed to define indices of efficiency (Basketball Efficiency Index (BEi)) and productivity (Basketball Productivity Index (BPi)) of a player's contribution to the team performance with greater validity than Ei. Methods: We gathered public NBA game-related statistics (2014/2015 À 2018/2019). We analyzed: Ei's and BEi's winning prediction accuracy; Ei's and BEi's point spread prediction accuracy; the correlation between GRS and Ei, BEi, BPi, and PER; players' rank correlation between indices. Results: In comparison to Ei, both BEi and BPi reduced the weight of points scored on the final value. Less reliance on points scored results in a more accurate comparison of the contribution of players independent of their tactical roles. Conclusion: These indices may improve coaches' understanding of the real contribution of each player to team performance.