Kemba Walker
DAL · 2022-23Mixed coverageWhat does Kemba Walker actually supply on the floor?
Kemba Walker's strongest evidenced functions are creation, passing, rim pressure; the weakest available areas are interior finishing, event creation, shooting. The profile is tied to DAL for 2022-23.
Function profile
2022-23 — 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-23 | DAL | — | Mixed coverage | 51 | 49 | 46 | 51 | — | 32 | — | — | 49 | 40 | 46 |
| 2021-22 | NYK | — | Mixed coverage | 59 | 43 | 61 | 58 | — | 17 | 49 | 48 | 34 | 42 | 37 |
| 2020-21 | BOS | — | High evidence | 70 | 49 | 59 | 71 | — | 23 | 54 | 50 | 34 | 58 | 28 |
| 2020-21 | OKC | — | Insufficient evidence | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
| 2019-20 | BOS | — | High evidence | 71 | 46 | 70 | 70 | — | 14 | — | — | 50 | 48 | 30 |
| 2018-19 | CHO | — | High evidence | 63 | 49 | 62 | 63 | — | 12 | — | — | 37 | 62 | 28 |
| 2017-18 | CHO | — | High evidence | 74 | 51 | 74 | 75 | — | 18 | — | — | 35 | 53 | 16 |
| 2016-17 | CHO | — | High evidence | 59 | 51 | 82 | 57 | — | 19 | — | — | 39 | 50 | 23 |
| 2015-16 | CHO | — | Limited evidence | 81 | 74 | 69 | 73 | — | — | — | — | 35 | 72 | — |
| 2014-15 | CHO | — | Limited evidence | 80 | 62 | 44 | 74 | — | — | — | — | 48 | 73 | — |
| 2013-14 | CHO | — | Limited evidence | 82 | 62 | 52 | 78 | — | — | — | — | 44 | 59 | — |
What teams depended on him for
Seasons where a team's situation report named him a dependency case.DAL did not have enough resolved lineup possessions involving Kemba Walker for a dependable replacement conclusion.
Replacement evidence
Reggie Bullock · Spencer Dinwiddie · Dwight Powell · Dorian Finney-Smith · Luka Doncic
shrunk net 4.8860 over 286 possessions
on floor 246 possessions · off floor 6848 possessions
NYK had a supported lineup path without Kemba Walker: [Derrick Rose, Taj Gibson, Alec Burks, Obi Toppin, Immanuel Quickley] at 5.1 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 153 possessions. This is an observed option, not proof it is universally better.
Replacement evidence
Derrick Rose · Taj Gibson · Alec Burks · Obi Toppin · Immanuel Quickley
shrunk net 5.1290 over 153 possessions
on floor 1726 possessions · off floor 5190 possessions
BOS had an observed replacement lineup for Kemba Walker, but it came with a performance cost. The supported alternative was [Tristan Thompson, Marcus Smart, Jaylen Brown, Jayson Tatum, Daniel Theis] at -2.0 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 192 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Tristan Thompson · Marcus Smart · Jaylen Brown · Jayson Tatum · Daniel Theis
shrunk net -2.0230 over 192 possessions
on floor 2640 possessions · off floor 4093 possessions
BOS had an observed replacement lineup for Kemba Walker, but it came with a performance cost. The supported alternative was [Gordon Hayward, Marcus Smart, Jaylen Brown, Jayson Tatum, Daniel Theis] at -0.8 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 371 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Gordon Hayward · Marcus Smart · Jaylen Brown · Jayson Tatum · Daniel Theis
shrunk net -0.7680 over 371 possessions
on floor 4141 possessions · off floor 3453 possessions
CHO did not have a sufficiently supported observed replacement lineup for Kemba Walker. The database keeps the functional-loss evidence but does not invent a replacement plan.
Replacement evidence
No replacement lineup is supported by the available evidence.
on floor 5227 possessions · off floor 2034 possessions
CHO was highly dependent on Kemba Walker. Removing him cost about 31.9% of creation production, and lineups with him performed 9.8 points per 100 possessions better than lineups without him. The best supported replacement group was [Jeremy Lamb, Cody Zeller, Michael Carter-Williams, Frank Kaminsky, Treveon Graham] over 152 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Jeremy Lamb · Cody Zeller · Michael Carter-Williams · Frank Kaminsky · Treveon Graham
shrunk net 0.8920 over 152 possessions
on floor 5024 possessions · off floor 2202 possessions
CHO was highly dependent on Kemba Walker. Removing him cost about 58.1% of shooting production, and lineups with him performed 11.6 points per 100 possessions better than lineups without him. The best supported replacement group was [Marco Belinelli, Ramon Sessions, Roy Hibbert, Nicolas Batum, Frank Kaminsky] over 166 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Marco Belinelli · Ramon Sessions · Roy Hibbert · Nicolas Batum · Frank Kaminsky
shrunk net -1.9490 over 166 possessions
on floor 4873 possessions · off floor 2207 possessions
CHO did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Kemba Walker.
Replacement evidence
Marvin Williams · Spencer Hawes · Jeremy Lin · Jeremy Lamb · Frank Kaminsky
shrunk net 4.8940 over 162 possessions
on floor 5674 possessions · off floor 2052 possessions
CHO did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Kemba Walker.
Replacement evidence
Mo Williams · Al Jefferson · Marvin Williams · Gerald Henderson · Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
shrunk net 4.7180 over 193 possessions
on floor 3516 possessions · off floor 2894 possessions
CHO did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Kemba Walker.
Replacement evidence
Al Jefferson · Josh McRoberts · Ramon Sessions · Gerald Henderson · Michael Kidd-Gilchrist
shrunk net 0.8290 over 239 possessions
on floor 3857 possessions · off floor 2170 possessions
Known contract calendar
Governed contract events naming this player — dates carry their honest quality.Kemba Walker has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2023 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Kemba Walker has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2023 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. No extension-review trigger is applied yet.
Kemba Walker has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2019 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Kemba Walker has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2019 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
Kemba Walker has a reported contract-control horizon through the 2019 season. The June 30 date is a season-boundary planning proxy, not proof of exact free-agency status. The player is inside the two-season extension-review horizon, but exact eligibility and value are not certified.
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.