Rudy Gay
UTA · 2022-23Mixed coverageWhat does Rudy Gay actually supply on the floor?
Rudy Gay's strongest evidenced functions are rim protection, rebounding, interior finishing; the weakest available areas are shooting, event creation, rim pressure. The profile is tied to UTA 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 | UTA | — | Mixed coverage | 50 | 46 | 39 | 47 | 50 | 52 | 52 | 55 | 58 | 45 | 58 |
| 2021-22 | UTA | — | Mixed coverage | 45 | 59 | 51 | 42 | 48 | 66 | 40 | 39 | 46 | 44 | 67 |
| 2020-21 | SAS | — | Mixed coverage | 48 | 52 | 57 | 44 | 42 | 54 | 60 | 62 | 63 | 62 | 65 |
| 2019-20 | SAS | — | High evidence | 50 | 60 | 50 | 47 | — | 68 | — | — | 64 | 44 | 70 |
| 2018-19 | SAS | — | High evidence | 62 | 56 | 71 | 57 | — | 67 | — | — | 57 | 55 | 61 |
| 2017-18 | SAS | — | High evidence | 50 | 66 | 45 | 44 | — | 77 | — | — | 71 | 72 | 54 |
| 2016-17 | SAC | — | High evidence | 58 | 64 | 60 | 56 | — | 75 | — | — | 63 | 74 | 63 |
| 2015-16 | SAC | — | Limited evidence | 44 | 58 | 53 | 37 | — | — | — | — | 49 | 73 | — |
| 2014-15 | SAC | — | Limited evidence | 74 | 64 | 60 | 66 | — | — | — | — | 47 | 52 | — |
| 2013-14 | — | — | Limited evidence | 71 | 71 | 47 | 62 | — | — | — | — | 50 | 68 | — |
What teams depended on him for
Seasons where a team's situation report named him a dependency case.UTA did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Rudy Gay.
Replacement evidence
Kelly Olynyk · Lauri Markkanen · Talen Horton-Tucker · Ochai Agbaji · Walker Kessler
shrunk net 4.5500 over 287 possessions
on floor 1517 possessions · off floor 5838 possessions
UTA lineups performed 3.6 points per 100 possessions better with Rudy Gay than without him. The best supported alternative was [Mike Conley, Rudy Gobert, Jordan Clarkson, Joe Ingles, Eric Paschall] over 205 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Mike Conley · Rudy Gobert · Jordan Clarkson · Joe Ingles · Eric Paschall
shrunk net 4.1050 over 205 possessions
on floor 1807 possessions · off floor 5624 possessions
SAS lineups performed 6.8 points per 100 possessions better with Rudy Gay than without him. The best supported alternative was [DeMar DeRozan, Dejounte Murray, Jakob Poeltl, Derrick White, Keldon Johnson] over 646 possessions.
Replacement evidence
DeMar DeRozan · Dejounte Murray · Jakob Poeltl · Derrick White · Keldon Johnson
shrunk net 4.3780 over 646 possessions
on floor 2471 possessions · off floor 3938 possessions
SAS had a supported lineup path without Rudy Gay: [LaMarcus Aldridge, DeMar DeRozan, Trey Lyles, Bryn Forbes, Derrick White] at 0.0 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 189 possessions. This is an observed option, not proof it is universally better.
Replacement evidence
LaMarcus Aldridge · DeMar DeRozan · Trey Lyles · Bryn Forbes · Derrick White
shrunk net 0.0080 over 189 possessions
on floor 2700 possessions · off floor 3567 possessions
SAS had a supported lineup path without Rudy Gay: [LaMarcus Aldridge, DeMar DeRozan, Davis Bertans, Bryn Forbes, Derrick White] at 5.0 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 265 possessions. This is an observed option, not proof it is universally better.
Replacement evidence
LaMarcus Aldridge · DeMar DeRozan · Davis Bertans · Bryn Forbes · Derrick White
shrunk net 4.9670 over 265 possessions
on floor 3705 possessions · off floor 4145 possessions
SAS had a supported lineup path without Rudy Gay: [LaMarcus Aldridge, Danny Green, Patty Mills, Kyle Anderson, Dejounte Murray] at 5.2 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 358 possessions. This is an observed option, not proof it is universally better.
Replacement evidence
LaMarcus Aldridge · Danny Green · Patty Mills · Kyle Anderson · Dejounte Murray
shrunk net 5.2150 over 358 possessions
on floor 2383 possessions · off floor 4945 possessions
SAC did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Rudy Gay.
Replacement evidence
Arron Afflalo · Kosta Koufos · Darren Collison · Garrett Temple · DeMarcus Cousins
shrunk net -0.0360 over 193 possessions
on floor 1778 possessions · off floor 5220 possessions
SAC did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Rudy Gay.
Replacement evidence
Marco Belinelli · Kosta Koufos · Darren Collison · Omri Casspi · Willie Cauley-Stein
shrunk net -4.2040 over 165 possessions
on floor 4453 possessions · off floor 2939 possessions
SAC did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Rudy Gay.
Replacement evidence
No replacement lineup is supported by the available evidence.
on floor 4242 possessions · off floor 2690 possessions
SAC did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Rudy Gay.
Replacement evidence
Jason Thompson · DeMarcus Cousins · Derrick Williams · Isaiah Thomas · Ben McLemore
shrunk net -0.8380 over 151 possessions
on floor 3332 possessions · off floor 3574 possessions
TOR did not have enough reliable function-loss evidence to judge dependence on Rudy Gay.
Replacement evidence
Kyle Lowry · DeMar DeRozan · Patrick Patterson · Jonas Valanciunas · Terrence Ross
shrunk net 2.3810 over 242 possessions
on floor 1064 possessions · off floor 6203 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.