O.J. Mayo resurrection in Phoenix?

Dudley produces more than just shots. Mayo doesn’t. So if Dudley isn’t hitting shots, he still has value.

Most nights he (Mayo) also was the focal point of the other team’s defense.

Mayo is, at best, third option on the team, behind Randolf and Gay, and first option with a second unit, like Shannon Brown is sometimes for us.

I’ll come back to this page, but here is OJ Mayo’s 2010-11 82 games page and it shows the top 20 units Mayo was on. In how many of those is Mayo option number 1? Lets say Mayo is behind Randolf and Gay as option 1, but be generous and say he is ahead of Gasol and Conley. Of the 20 lineups, Mayo is the 1st option in 6, for 151 minutes, and not first in 14, for 1022 minutes. Mayo played 1869 last year, so for at least 60% of the time, he wasn’t the primary option on the court.

If we look at FGA per game, which is a good indicator of where on a team a player ranks as an option, Mayo was 4th last year behind Randolf, Conley, and Gay, and is 5th this year behind Gasol as well, although Gasol is probably gettin shots that normally go to the injured Randolf, so 4th is probably still fair.

So Mayo was 4th in FGA per game, and wasn’t primary option for over 60% of the time on court. I don’t think the argument he is the focal point of the other team’s defence holds water. I’m willing to listen to disagreement, but I think that argument is just plain wrong (BTW: http://basketballvalue.com/teamunits.php?year=2010-2011&team=LAL should show ALL lineups but isn’t working ATM – I’m not sure that would significantly change the argument though, but feel free to check it later).

Next up, I understand that people don’t like statistics, but there exists two possibilities:

1) Mayo is not playing as well as he could because of factors beyond his control – like being keyed on by the opponent, poor teammates etc – and his stats will rebound when these issues are solved. But the stats have to rebound, because they aren’t good.

2) Mayo has a high ceiling, but an inconsistency that, game in and game out, play to play, manifests itself in the stats grading as below what you would expect. In other words, yes, Mayo can do great things, but for what ever reason, poor shot selection, less than ideal handle whatever, he produces at a level less than his best.

Which is it? IMHO, you can’t deny statistics, you have to explain them away. Statistics tell a story, the context of which is unknown, and finding a context is the key. you can;t ignore numbers, but nor can you claim they tell the dreaded “whole story”.

So, to explain these numbers, you’ve chosen the rather common “Mayo’s role was to be the go-to guy deep in the shot clock when play has already broken down” argument, so lets explore that.

82 games has a handy per player run down of when in the shot clock each player takes his shots. Here is (for 2010-11) OJ Mayo vs Jared Dudley

There no significant difference between Dudley and Mayo. In the last 8 seconds of the clock it is 30% vs 33%, so Dudley gets 3% more early. Now, maybe you can explain that away as well, but it doesn’t LOOK like the “late in shot clock” explanation holds much water.

Now lets turn to Synergy – http://www.mysynergysports.com/ – a site that breaks down how a player plays, e.g. by shot type. http://imgur.com/a/Uw58x shows both player’s stats, and OJ plays a lot more in isolation and as the PnR ballhandler than Dudley, but he isn’t very effective at either, ranking 43rd and 81st at each. Apart from that, both players score effectively in similar areas, such as transition and as a shooter (off screens and spotting up). As a comparison, Goran Dragic ranks 64th as a PnR ball handler, and you need enough reps to qualify (Dudley doesn’t qualify for either iso or PnR).

If the argument is that Mayo is significantly different to Dudley, I can agree completely. But if the argument is that he is significantly better than Dudley, I just don’t see it. He isolates more, and is the PnR ball handler more often, but he’s not terribly efficient at either, and certainly not a difference maker.

When Mayo played a lot and looked good, as a rookie and as a sophomore, the Grizzlies were BAD. As they got better, Mayo’s playing time decreased, and along with it his production. If the argument is that Mayo is the sort of player that can make a difference, the fact they Grizzlies have gotten better as Mayo’s time, prominence on the team and role has reduced dramatically is indication of the complete opposite.

I’m all for wanting to get a player that creates shots, but if Mayo, the third option (at best) on the Grizzlies, a player who isn’t a great iso player, is the best we can do, why not hold out for a better player? Why would we want to be hamstrung by a guy who isn’t good enough to make a real difference, and who will command significantly more than Dudley’s salary in the coming years?

The choice is ultimately between Dudley, a great roleplayer who can be efficient and effective without the ball, who gives a solid effort game in and game out, and Mayo, who needs the ball to be of any value, does little else to help a team, and who isn’t capable of lifting a team with his primary skills, but will inevitably be paid significantly more.

YMMV, and I guess the argument comes down to whether you believe that Mayo, at 24 or 25, can turn it around and become a star. Personally, I think Dudley is simply the better bet, and Mayo’s “potential”, whatever it is, is unlikely to ever be realised enough for Mayo to be even a “third best player on a contender”, let alone a star.