New Orleans Pelicans
2023-24What were the New Orleans Pelicans in 2023-24, and what needed front-office attention?
NOP 2023-24: the clearest roster problems were Screening. The strongest covered areas were Defensive event creation, Shooting and spacing. The main rotation-player dependency cases were CJ McCollum, Brandon Ingram, Zion Williamson, Jonas Valanciunas, Naji Marshall. Structural basketball need, injuries, replacement lineups, and financial constraints are reported separately.
What can be trusted
Supported strengths — production, who carries it, and what money is already committed.Full reading
NOP 2023-24 Defensive event creation: this was a team strength; production ranked at the 95.7 league percentile. Herbert Jones supplied 25.2% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. Availability created or worsened the issue in isolated recent games. The team already committed substantial or redundant cap resources here.
Full reading
NOP 2023-24 Shooting and spacing: this was a team strength; production ranked at the 78.3 league percentile. CJ McCollum supplied 25.4% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. Availability created or worsened the issue in isolated recent games. The team already committed substantial or redundant cap resources here.
What needs attention
The clearest roster problems the evidence supports.Full reading
NOP 2023-24 Screening: this was one of the team's clearest roster problems; production ranked at the 16.7 league percentile. Jonas Valanciunas supplied 54.4% of the team's above-replacement production in this area. Availability created or worsened the issue in isolated recent games. The team already committed substantial or redundant cap resources here.
Every covered basketball function (11)
| Function | Reading | League percentile | Largest contributor | Recent availability | Salary commitment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Creation | SupportedMiddle of the league | 70th percentile | Brandon Ingram · 28.0% | Absences repeatedly created a problem | Heavy or redundant salary already committed here |
| Defensive event creation | SupportedTeam strength | 96th percentile | Herbert Jones · 25.1% | Isolated availability problem | Heavy or redundant salary already committed here |
| Interior finishing | SupportedMiddle of the league | 26th percentile | Zion Williamson · 33.9% | Absences repeatedly worsened an existing problem | Heavy or redundant salary already committed here |
| Passing connectivity | SupportedMiddle of the league | 70th percentile | Brandon Ingram · 25.7% | Absences repeatedly created a problem | Heavy or redundant salary already committed here |
| Point-of-attack defense proxy | WithheldBasketball conclusion withheld | — | Trey Murphy III | Recent availability conclusion withheld | Balanced or context-dependent salary commitment |
| Rebounding | SupportedMiddle of the league | 39th percentile | Jonas Valanciunas · 25.0% | Absences repeatedly created a problem | Heavy or redundant salary already committed here |
| Rim pressure | SupportedMiddle-tier area with one-player risk | 39th percentile | Zion Williamson · 40.4% | Absences repeatedly created a problem | Balanced or context-dependent salary commitment |
| Rim protection | SupportedMiddle of the league | 48th percentile | Jonas Valanciunas · 21.0% | Absences repeatedly created a problem | Heavy or redundant salary already committed here |
| Screening | SupportedCritical team problem | 17th percentile | Jonas Valanciunas · 54.4% | Isolated availability problem | Heavy or redundant salary already committed here |
| Shooting and spacing | SupportedTeam strength | 78th percentile | CJ McCollum · 25.4% | Isolated availability problem | Heavy or redundant salary already committed here |
| Switch coverage proxy | WithheldBasketball conclusion withheld | — | Trey Murphy III | Recent availability conclusion withheld | Balanced or context-dependent salary commitment |
Who the team depends on
What disappears when a player is removed — and whether an observed replacement five exists.
NOP did not have strong functional backup for CJ McCollum in shooting; removing him cost about 25.4% of the team's production in that area. The next observed option was Herbert Jones.
Replacement evidence
Jonas Valanciunas · Brandon Ingram · Zion Williamson · Herbert Jones · Dyson Daniels
shrunk net 5.476 over 169 possessions — small sample
on floor 4,327 possessions · off floor 3,289 possessions
NOP did not have strong functional backup for Brandon Ingram in passing; removing him cost about 25.7% of the team's production in that area. The next observed option was Zion Williamson.
Replacement evidence
CJ McCollum · Larry Nance Jr. · Zion Williamson · Herbert Jones · Trey Murphy III
shrunk net 3.823 over 161 possessions — small sample
on floor 4,185 possessions · off floor 3,431 possessions
NOP did not have strong functional backup for Zion Williamson in interior finish; removing him cost about 33.9% of the team's production in that area. The next observed option was Jonas Valanciunas.
Replacement evidence
CJ McCollum · Larry Nance Jr. · Brandon Ingram · Herbert Jones · Trey Murphy III
shrunk net 4.204 over 199 possessions — small sample
on floor 4,147 possessions · off floor 3,469 possessions
NOP did not have strong functional backup for Jonas Valanciunas in interior finish; removing him cost about 28.9% of the team's production in that area. The next observed option was Zion Williamson.
Replacement evidence
CJ McCollum · Larry Nance Jr. · Brandon Ingram · Herbert Jones · Trey Murphy III
shrunk net 4.204 over 199 possessions — small sample
on floor 3,764 possessions · off floor 3,852 possessions
NOP lineups performed 4.4 points per 100 possessions better with Naji Marshall than without him. The best supported alternative was [Jonas Valanciunas, Brandon Ingram, Zion Williamson, Herbert Jones, Dyson Daniels] over 169 possessions.
Replacement evidence
Jonas Valanciunas · Brandon Ingram · Zion Williamson · Herbert Jones · Dyson Daniels
shrunk net 5.476 over 169 possessions — small sample
on floor 2,353 possessions · off floor 5,263 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.Absences repeatedly created a problem
created in 8 of the final 10 covered games — mainly Brandon Ingram
Absences repeatedly worsened an existing problem
worsened in 8 of the final 10 covered games — mainly Zion Williamson
Absences repeatedly created a problem
created in 8 of the final 10 covered games — mainly Brandon Ingram
Absences repeatedly created a problem
created in 8 of the final 10 covered games — mainly Zion Williamson
Absences repeatedly created a problem
created in 8 of the final 10 covered games — mainly Zion Williamson
Absences repeatedly created a problem
created in 8 of the final 10 covered games — mainly Zion Williamson
Where money is tied up
Cap position and salary allocation — shown beside the basketball picture, never blended into it.Most salary is mapped to passing connectivity; the highest-need area is interior finishing. Salary-to-function mapping covers 100% of charges.
Exact figures
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.- Point-of-attack defense proxy: 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.