← Team Metrics
Latest

Memphis Grizzlies

2017-18
2016-172017-182018-192019-202020-212021-222022-232023-242024-252025-26
Latest available releaseEvidence released Aug 22, 2026, 8:30 PM UTCLive database

What were the Memphis Grizzlies in 2017-18, and what needed front-office attention?

MEM 2017-18: the clearest roster problems were Rim pressure, Interior finishing, Defensive event creation. No supported strength was identified. The main rotation-player dependency cases were JaMychal Green, Tyreke Evans, Mario Chalmers, Chandler Parsons, Dillon Brooks. Structural basketball need, injuries, replacement lineups, and financial constraints are reported separately.

CoveragePartial8 supported · 3 withheld
Cap positionOver the cap, below the tax line, on selected player charges
Next decision dateNo calendar release at this as-of time

What can be trusted

Supported strengths — production, who carries it, and what money is already committed.

No supported team strengths for this season — team picture available; recent availability layer unavailable.

What needs attention

The clearest roster problems the evidence supports.
Rim pressure
11th percentile
Dillon Brooks carries 24.0%
Availability: No governed recent availability evidence for this seasonMoney: Heavy or redundant salary already committed here
Full reading

MEM 2017-18 Rim pressure: this was one of the team's clearest roster problems; production ranked at the 11.1 league percentile. Dillon Brooks supplied 24.0% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season. The team already committed substantial or redundant cap resources here.

Interior finishing
15th percentile
Marc Gasol carries 21.4%
Availability: No governed recent availability evidence for this seasonMoney: Comparatively little salary committed to a critical need
Full reading

MEM 2017-18 Interior finishing: this was one of the team's clearest roster problems; production ranked at the 14.8 league percentile. Marc Gasol supplied 21.4% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season. The cap allocation to this critical need was comparatively low.

Defensive event creation
22nd percentile
Mario Chalmers carries 22.3%
Availability: No governed recent availability evidence for this seasonMoney: Heavy or redundant salary already committed here
Full reading

MEM 2017-18 Defensive event creation: this was one of the team's clearest roster problems; production ranked at the 22.2 league percentile. Mario Chalmers supplied 22.3% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season. The team already committed substantial or redundant cap resources here.

Every covered basketball function (11)
FunctionReadingLeague percentileLargest contributorRecent availabilitySalary commitment
CreationSupportedMiddle of the league33rd percentileMarc Gasol · 23.2%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Defensive event creationSupportedCritical team problem22nd percentileMario Chalmers · 22.3%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Interior finishingSupportedCritical team problem15th percentileMarc Gasol · 21.4%No recent availability layer for this seasonComparatively little salary committed to a critical need
Passing connectivitySupportedStructural team problem11th percentileTyreke Evans · 24.3%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Point-of-attack defense proxyWithheldBasketball conclusion withheldAndrew HarrisonNo recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment
ReboundingSupportedStructural team problem15th percentileJaMychal Green · 32.1%No recent availability layer for this seasonUnderfunded structural need
Rim pressureSupportedCritical team problem11th percentileDillon Brooks · 24.0%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Rim protectionSupportedMiddle of the league30th percentileMarc Gasol · 39.6%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
ScreeningWithheldBasketball conclusion withheldAndrew HarrisonNo recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment
Shooting and spacingSupportedStructural team problem0th percentileTyreke Evans · 32.3%No recent availability layer for this seasonHeavy or redundant salary already committed here
Switch coverage proxyWithheldBasketball conclusion withheldAndrew HarrisonNo recent availability layer for this seasonBalanced or context-dependent salary commitment

Who the team depends on

What disappears when a player is removed — and whether an observed replacement five exists.
JaMychal Green
Single-skill dependence

MEM did not have strong functional backup for JaMychal Green in rebounding; removing him cost about 32.1% of the team's production in that area. The next observed option was Marc Gasol.

rotation 39%loses 32.1% of rebounding
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without JaMychal Green

Mike Conley · Marc Gasol · James Ennis III · Andrew Harrison · Jarell Martin

shrunk net -1.29 over 150 possessions — small sample

on floor 2,662 possessions · off floor 4,163 possessions

Tyreke Evans
Lineup performance dependence

MEM lineups performed 9.9 points per 100 possessions better with Tyreke Evans than without him. The best supported alternative was [Mike Conley, Marc Gasol, James Ennis III, Andrew Harrison, Jarell Martin] over 150 possessions.

rotation 41%loses 23.0% of creation
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Tyreke Evans

Mike Conley · Marc Gasol · James Ennis III · Andrew Harrison · Jarell Martin

shrunk net -1.29 over 150 possessions — small sample

on floor 2,727 possessions · off floor 4,098 possessions

Mario Chalmers
Lineup performance dependence

MEM lineups performed 3.1 points per 100 possessions better with Mario Chalmers than without him. The best supported alternative was [Marc Gasol, Tyreke Evans, JaMychal Green, Andrew Harrison, Dillon Brooks] over 324 possessions.

rotation 36%loses 22.3% of defensive event creation
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Mario Chalmers

Marc Gasol · Tyreke Evans · JaMychal Green · Andrew Harrison · Dillon Brooks

shrunk net 4.965 over 324 possessions

on floor 2,490 possessions · off floor 4,335 possessions

Chandler Parsons
Lineup performance dependence

MEM lineups performed 4.1 points per 100 possessions better with Chandler Parsons than without him. The best supported alternative was [Marc Gasol, Tyreke Evans, JaMychal Green, Andrew Harrison, Dillon Brooks] over 324 possessions.

rotation 18%loses 12.0% of shooting and spacing
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Chandler Parsons

Marc Gasol · Tyreke Evans · JaMychal Green · Andrew Harrison · Dillon Brooks

shrunk net 4.965 over 324 possessions

on floor 1,201 possessions · off floor 5,624 possessions

Dillon Brooks
Replacement lineup exists, with a performance cost

MEM had an observed replacement lineup for Dillon Brooks, but it came with a performance cost. The supported alternative was [Mike Conley, Marc Gasol, James Ennis III, Andrew Harrison, Jarell Martin] at -1.3 adjusted net points per 100 possessions over 150 possessions.

rotation 60%loses 11.5% of interior finishing
Replacement evidence
Best observed five without Dillon Brooks

Mike Conley · Marc Gasol · James Ennis III · Andrew Harrison · Jarell Martin

shrunk net -1.29 over 150 possessions — small sample

on floor 4,079 possessions · off floor 2,746 possessions

Function loss, lineup performance, and replacement-lineup evidence remain separate; none is causal player value.

What injuries change

Recent absences and the basketball needs they created or worsened.

No governed recent game-level availability layer exists for this season.

Where money is tied up

Cap position and salary allocation — shown beside the basketball picture, never blended into it.
WithheldThe team was over the cap but below the tax on selected player charges; exception detail remains withheld.
Selected player charges
$110.7M
Share of cap
112%
Tax line
$8.57M under
First apron
$14.6M under
Second apron
No governed line that season

Most salary is mapped to creation; the highest-need area is defensive event creation. Salary-to-function mapping covers 91% of charges.

Exact figures
Salary cap: $99,093,000Luxury tax line: $119,266,000First apron: $125,266,000Second apron: Selected player charges: $110,700,149Source-reported payroll: $110,700,149 (source-named payroll total; not relabeled as cash or cap)

Exact transaction legality withheld — no exception-usage, cap-hold, and transaction ledger evidence.

What the evidence cannot answer

Deliberate abstentions — where the database refuses a conclusion rather than guessing.
PartialTeam picture available; recent availability layer unavailable8 of 11 functions supported
  • Point-of-attack defense proxy: Basketball conclusion withheld
  • Screening: Basketball conclusion withheld
  • Switch coverage proxy: Basketball conclusion withheld

Exact transaction legality: Exact transaction legality withheld — no exception-usage, cap-hold, and transaction ledger evidence

Team-season situation report. Structural basketball quality, recent availability, player dependence, replacement lineups, and financial position remain separate. No acquisition recommendation, transaction grade, coaching grade, outcome claim, or causal value is inferred.