pj said:
It's going to be anti-correlated in the NBA. You have to be great at something to make the NBA. If you can't shoot free throws, you can't shoot at all, so you'd better have an off-the-charts bball IQ like Rondo. But if you can shoot well, you can survive without a great bball IQ. At the high school level low FT% and low BBIQ are correlated, because both are indicators that you don't care about the game much and don't eat, drink, and sleep it. Or at least don't practice enough. But in the NBA, they are inversely correlated.
BBIQ to me refers to a players ability to understand game situations - time and score, reading defenses, knowing when to attack and went to pull back, not helping off your man when your man is Ray Allen, etc. There is no IQ element to a foul shot. It's take the ball and shoot it. It'd be like saying "that kicker has poor football IQ" because he missed a couple chippies, or "he's a soccer moron" because he missed a PK.
You won't find a smarter basketball player - on or off the court - than Okafor, and foul shots were his Achilles heel. For years the guy synonymous with bad FT shooting was a Yale grad (Dudley). Rodman was a real life moron, but had high BBIQ.
To the degree that there's a correlation at higher levels, it's that the guys who are surviving with a "low BB IQ" are doing so due to the fact that they are either big or freakishly athletic - and those guys aren't typically good shooters on top of that or they'd be on their way to the Hall of Fame. Ultimately, a free throw is a shooting skill (and a confidence one). The other side to that is there are countless thousands of people who kick butt at pop-a-shot, but would be utterly clueless on what to do if there were suddenly people in the way. We just never hear of them since ESPN doesn't cover carnival games (well, I can't vouch for that - they do poker, spelling and hot dog eating).