Okay so here are my responses to the above explanation:
In the case of more than one defender marking the same player, it is the defender causing the pick.
This statement is not always true, it should be obvious that even while double / triple teaming a player it is possible for a pick to occur mainly as a result of the offence player’s movement. This would be particularly relevant in a zone defense. Or to put it another way, just because you were double teaming does not make it your fault that you were picked.
The defense should not be given a reprieve for a violation they have themselves intentionally caused.
Even if a defender deliberately takes a position where a pick is more likely to occur, this does not mean that they caused the pick, nor does it mean that they were malicious in the choice of position. Forget double teaming for a minute, imagine marking an offence player in the middle of a a stack, your team is forcing towards a chosen sideline, you choose to stand 1 or 2 meters away from your mark, on the open side. Because the stack is closely spaced if the person you are marking cuts to the break side it is more likely that you will be picked because you choose not to stand right beside them, should we say that this is not a pick?
Finally in short, I’m unconvinced that there is a situation beyond the extreme examples provided, where this amendment would be appropriate, but it certainty would have the added effect of disadvantaging players in a legitimate defensive structure.