Cade Cunningham
DET · 2025-26Franchise engineHigh evidenceWhat does Cade Cunningham actually supply on the floor?
Cade Cunningham's strongest evidenced functions are creation, passing, event creation; the weakest available areas are shooting, rebounding, rim pressure. The profile is tied to DET for 2025-26.
Function profile
2025-26 — eleven separate readings on a league scale. They are not additive.* limited evidence for that function. A dash means the evidence was insufficient — not a zero. Use the separate function strengths to evaluate role and roster fit; do not treat them as one player-value score. POA or switch conclusions require lineup, matchup, and assignment evidence beyond this profile.
Season by season
Every governed season profile on record.| Season | Team | Role | Evidence | Creation | Rim pressure | Shooting | Passing | Screening | Interior finish | Point of attack | Switch coverage | Rim protection | Event creation | Rebounding |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 | DET | Franchise engine | High evidence | 86 | 60 | 51 | 86 | — | 61 | — | — | 65 | 71 | 57 |
| 2024-25 | DET | — | High evidence | 87 | 55 | 61 | 85 | — | 49 | 50 | 51 | 66 | 49 | 50 |
| 2023-24 | DET | — | High evidence | 78 | 49 | 54 | 77 | — | 43 | 43 | 40 | 46 | 39 | 36 |
| 2022-23 | DET | — | Mixed coverage | 68 | 54 | 41 | 67 | — | 54 | 44 | 44 | 50 | 45 | 53 |
| 2021-22 | DET | — | High evidence | 77 | 52 | 45 | 76 | 51 | 45 | 37 | 44 | 53 | 68 | 52 |
What teams depended on him for
Seasons where a team's situation report named him a dependency case.DET lineups performed 3.2 points per 100 possessions better with Cade Cunningham than without him. The best supported alternative was [Tobias Harris, Duncan Robinson, Jalen Duren, Ausar Thompson, Daniss Jenkins] over 381 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Tobias Harris · Duncan Robinson · Jalen Duren · Ausar Thompson · Daniss Jenkins
shrunk net 11.3510 over 381 possessions
on floor 4859 possessions · off floor 3348 possessions
DET did not have strong functional backup for Cade Cunningham in creation; removing him cost about 48.2% of the team's production in that area. The next observed option was Ausar Thompson.
Replacement evidence
Dennis Schroder · Malik Beasley · Isaiah Stewart · Simone Fontecchio · Ronald Holland II
shrunk net 0.0660 over 160 possessions
on floor 4906 possessions · off floor 2755 possessions
DET did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Cade Cunningham.
Replacement evidence
No replacement lineup is supported by the available evidence.
on floor 3808 possessions · off floor 3387 possessions
DET lineups performed 3.3 points per 100 possessions better with Cade Cunningham than without him. The best supported alternative was [Alec Burks, Bojan Bogdanovic, Saddiq Bey, Jaden Ivey, Jalen Duren] over 157 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Alec Burks · Bojan Bogdanovic · Saddiq Bey · Jaden Ivey · Jalen Duren
shrunk net 1.3400 over 157 possessions
on floor 759 possessions · off floor 6562 possessions
DET lineups performed 3.2 points per 100 possessions better with Cade Cunningham than without him. The best supported alternative was [Cory Joseph, Jerami Grant, Hamidou Diallo, Saddiq Bey, Isaiah Stewart] over 154 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Cory Joseph · Jerami Grant · Hamidou Diallo · Saddiq Bey · Isaiah Stewart
shrunk net -0.8920 over 154 possessions
on floor 3739 possessions · off floor 3377 possessions
Known contract calendar
Governed contract events naming this player — dates carry their honest quality.No governed contract-calendar events name this player.
Function scores, roles, dependence records and contract events are separate evidence. No combined player value, trade value or ranking is computed from them, and none of them is a causal impact claim.