I calculated the on/off difference for offensive and defensive ratings for some of the top prospects. I ended up using positive differences as good for both offense and defense, so it's a little confusing.
Following Potential 2025 Draftees
- Thread starter Elizah Huge
- Start date
This ends up being a bigger indictment of the teams that these guys played on. They also have an adjusted +/- that adjusts for strength of schedule, but I stuck with just the raw numbers.
Here are the adjusted for SOS numbers. This makes a huge difference for a few of the prospects, specifically Tre Johnson. I don't remember Tre missing any games, so it is confusing to me why his strength of schedule was so different on/off the court?
HadAnEffectHere
Well-Known Member
From Tony Jones
www.nytimes.com
1. Jazz have mostly only worked out second round prospects so far, planning to work out guys around 21 next, and then finally guys in contention for 5.
2. Jazz are going to try to win games but they don't know which direction to take. Whether to add veterans to the roster to try to compete for the play-in or trade away all their veterans and be organically bad. Won't rest guys as much this year regardless.
3. Jazz have talked to at least one fellow lottery team about trading the #5 pick, but this section is very vague. Unclear if it means trading up, trading down, or trading out or how serious these talks are.
What’s next for Jazz after hiring Austin Ainge as president of basketball operations?
After being asked about tanking and saying, "you won't see that this year," Ainge must pick a path for the Jazz: youth or veteran core.
www.nytimes.com
1. Jazz have mostly only worked out second round prospects so far, planning to work out guys around 21 next, and then finally guys in contention for 5.
2. Jazz are going to try to win games but they don't know which direction to take. Whether to add veterans to the roster to try to compete for the play-in or trade away all their veterans and be organically bad. Won't rest guys as much this year regardless.
3. Jazz have talked to at least one fellow lottery team about trading the #5 pick, but this section is very vague. Unclear if it means trading up, trading down, or trading out or how serious these talks are.
seattlejazzfan
Well-Known Member
the difference between Harper and Bailey, having played on the same team is interesting.
Traore 6’3 barefoot with 6’8 wingspan
Yes, that was interesting. Ace had the kind of impact you would hope for when playing on a trash team, Harper didn't have the same impact
The craziest one for me was Sorber. Georgetown was an awful defensive team without him and an amazing defensive team with him.
I noticed this when I was comparing their play styles with and w/o each other. Harper is kind of an anti +\- god. But in sample sizes this small it probably has a lot to do with shooting variance.
So the offense was better or worse with Flagg on the court? I am a little confused.
seattlejazzfan
Well-Known Member
pretty sure that means it was worse.
bottom line, duke was an incredible offensive team with or without flagg.
just a little better without him.
Yeah, sorry, it is confusing. Positive numbers equal good, negative numbers equal bad. According to the adjusted numbers Duke was very slightly better offensively without Flagg on the court.
I mean, the board is staying pretty consistent, Im just moving individuals up/down as I look at certain players that I overlooked due to preconceived bias.
For Riley, like I said earlier with Illinois, I watched them a lot early and barely at all in the last few months. I just think he has more upside than most non-lottery guys due to his size/handle/shot creation upside.
Essnegue is probably the next guy I will give a somewhat significant bump to.
Beringer had a nice 10-5-2 game in whatever playoff thing he is playing in currently. 2nd most minutes on the team in a close win
How does adjusting for SOS work?
seattlejazzfan
Well-Known Member
his legs are tree trunks.
Very solid board. Only thing I can’t really see is Fleming over Ace tbh.
I'm not 100% sure which is why I posted the raw numbers first.
I believe they are calculating the offensive and defensive efficiency of the lineups you play against and averaging them out. It makes sense for a guy like Boogie Fland who played mostly against non conference teams, and then his team played the majority of their SEC schedule without him. His On/Off looks amazing, but the adjusted On/Off looks closer to what you would expect. For a guy like Tre Johnson, who was healthy the whole year, I don't understand how the level of competition he faces was so much more difficult with him on the court than with him off the court.