The Pelicans finished preseason 3–1, giving New Orleans something it needed: evidence that a new coaching message can produce a response.

Jamahl Mosley’s first four exhibitions also left a more complicated picture than the record suggests. Defensive activity was encouraging. Offensive rebounding showed purpose. Jeremiah Fears strengthened his case for responsibility. Rebounding featured strong stretches and productive centers, with results varying by game and lineup. Shooting consistency and the fit of the primary rotation remain open questions.

The verdict: the Pelicans have shown enough to take Mosley’s direction seriously. They still have to turn those habits into dependable regular-season basketball.

What the 3–1 Record Actually Tells Us

Date	Opponent	Result	Margin
October 6	Oklahoma City, in Tulsa	W, 116–110	+6
October 8	At Miami	L, 118–128	−10
October 14	At Dallas	W, 101–97	+4
October 16	Washington	W, 107–106	+1

Across four games, New Orleans scored 442 points and allowed 441. Three wins came with a combined scoring margin of just one point. That is a useful reminder of how closely exhibition outcomes can depend on a handful of possessions.

The wins still matter as competitive responses. But Oklahoma City’s exhibition lineup was well removed from its full-strength rotation, Dallas used a developmental-heavy group, and both coaches’ substitutions shaped the finale.

Against Washington, New Orleans led 92–78 when Mosley changed all five players with 8:44 remaining. The closing reserves absorbed the late rally. That context limits how much the final margin tells us about the main rotation’s readiness or late-game execution.

Is a Defensive Identity Taking Shape?

There are credible early signs. The Pelicans collected 53 steals and 22 blocks. Their final two opponents shot a combined 37.7 percent, compared with 49.4 percent by the first two.

Dallas was the clearest positive: New Orleans held the Mavericks to 97 points and 35.7 percent shooting while producing 14 steals and seven blocks. Washington subsequently shot 39.6 percent as the Pelicans registered 15 steals.

The encouraging possibility is a defense that creates discomfort through multiple contributors. That reduces the burden on Herb Jones to solve every breakdown.

Miami supplied a useful counterexample: the Heat recorded 36 assists while New Orleans committed 22 player turnovers. Activity still has to become connected containment, with the offense protecting the defense from avoidable transition chances.

The limits deserve equal attention. Opponent shooting includes missed open shots, and steals can come from gambling as well as sound positioning. Different opponents and changing lineups prevent these four games from establishing a stable defensive level. Rim protection, transition organization and sustained containment still require a much longer test.

New Orleans allowed 119 points per game across the first two exhibitions and 101.5 across the last two. That is an encouraging scoring trend, with the same lineup and pace qualifications. It supports further optimism about the teaching process.

Rebounding: Encouraging Production, With Important Lineup Context

The Pelicans’ work on the glass deserves credit. New Orleans finished with a 193–191 edge in player rebounds, averaging 48.3 per game against its opponents’ 47.8. Mosley’s rebounding emphasis also produced 57 offensive boards, including 35 in the first two games.

ClutchPoints described the staff’s aggressive “All Crash” approach to pursuing extra possessions. Recovering approximately 29.7 percent of available offensive rebounds supplied statistical evidence of that emphasis.

Missi and Queen were central positives. Missi averaged eight rebounds in 18.5 minutes, while Queen averaged 8.8 in 17.1 minutes. Those are productive returns in limited playing time.

Defensive rebounding was uneven across the four games, and the full-game totals need context:

Opponent	Pelicans defensive rebounds	Opponent offensive rebounds	Defensive rebound share
Oklahoma City	33	6	84.6%
Miami	37	15	71.2%
Dallas	32	19	62.7%
Washington	34	16	68.0%

Across the schedule, the Pelicans secured 70.8 percent of available defensive rebounds. That percentage measures the share recovered after opponent misses, using player rebounds. A large defensive-rebound count alone does not establish how consistently a team finished its opportunities.

Washington Shows Why the Rotation Context Matters

Through three quarters against Washington, New Orleans collected 32 defensive rebounds and allowed eight offensive boards—an 80 percent share.

That was a strong stretch of possession-finishing. Washington collected another eight offensive rebounds in the fourth quarter, including five after Mosley changed all five players with 8:44 remaining.

The first three quarters included several lineups; the 80 percent figure is a period split rather than a starting-five statistic. Even so, it shows how a full-game number can obscure productive work earlier in the rotation.

Dallas provides the counterweight. The Mavericks collected 19 offensive rebounds, including 14 before the fourth quarter. That game gave Mosley legitimate issues to address beyond the closing minutes.

The fair assessment: the Pelicans showed encouraging rebounding effort, productive centers and strong defensive stretches. Consistency across games and units still needs testing. Four exhibitions do not establish a persistent rebounding weakness in the regular rotation.

Ball Movement Improved in Spots; Offensive Reliability Is Still Developing

The Pelicans recorded 93 assists against 68 player turnovers, an assist-to-turnover ratio of 1.37. Their final game produced 28 assists; the Dallas win produced only 19.

There were reasons to like the distribution of playmaking. Fears supplied 13 assists, Mathurin 11 and Murphy 10. Queen’s five assists against Washington offered another possible connection point for the offense.

Still, assist totals do not measure every useful pass, and they cannot prove that the ball consistently reached the best option. New Orleans needs the first advantage to lead to the next: penetration, a timely release, a willing extra pass and a shot before the defense resets.

Shooting made that process uneven. The Pelicans finished at 43.2 percent from the field, 33.1 percent from three and 73.0 percent at the foul line. Their three-point results ranged from 19-of-43 in Miami to 7-of-36 against Washington.

Winning the finale through other contributions was encouraging. A reliable offense will still need spacing around Zion, cleaner possessions and more consistent conversion of the chances it creates.

Four-Game Team Stat Box

Metric	Pelicans	Opponents
Points per game	110.5	110.3
Field-goal percentage	43.2%	43.6%
Three-point percentage	33.1%	32.9%
Free-throw percentage	73.0%	72.3%
Total player rebounds per game	48.3	47.8
Offensive rebounds per game	14.3	14.0
Defensive rebounds per game	34.0	33.8
Assists per game	23.3	26.8
Player turnovers per game	17.0	20.3
Steals per game	13.3	9.0
Blocks per game	5.5	9.0

What We Learned About the Players

Zion Williamson: Scoring Ability Is There; the Broader Standard Remains

Zion averaged 10.0 points in 18.3 minutes and shot 50 percent. His 5-for-5 night in Dallas demonstrated how efficiently he can finish. The finale also showed the variation: 5-for-14 from the field and 0-for-4 from three.

He finished with 10 rebounds, six of them defensive, across four games. That was modest production, though limited minutes and lineup responsibilities matter. His rebounding deserves continued evaluation as his workload grows. His 5-for-11 foul shooting also leaves a clear area to improve.

Those numbers do not settle his defensive performance. His regular-season value to this system will also depend on positioning, recovery effort and how effectively the group protects the paint together.

Trey Murphy III: Useful Contributions During a Cold Shooting Stretch

Murphy averaged 9.5 points and made 5 of 21 threes. Twenty-one attempts are too few to redefine his shooting ability, but the offense will need better conversion from a player whose spacing is central to its fit.

His 10 assists against two turnovers and six steals offered other positives. The requirement is to keep contributing when shots miss while continuing to seek quality attempts. His three rebounds per game came in 18.1 minutes; wing rebounding should be evaluated alongside playing time and defensive responsibilities.

Dejounte Murray: Too Little Court Time to Close the Biggest Questions

Murray’s lone appearance produced six points, six assists and four rebounds in 18:42. A toe contusion interrupted his preseason, leaving very little evidence about the continuity of a Murray-led rotation.

He can help organize possessions, but the partnership with Fears, the division of ballhandling and the combinations around Zion still require meaningful repetitions. Opening-night availability should be checked separately from this preseason assessment.

Saddiq Bey: A Strong Finish and a Useful Complement

Bey finished with 19 points and six rebounds against Washington, lifting his preseason averages to 10.0 points and 3.5 rebounds. He made 5 of 13 threes.

That final performance strengthened the case for his role as a complementary scorer who can supply spacing without dominating possession. His value rises when that offense comes with dependable defensive assignments and physical rebounding. One strong night establishes a useful example to repeat.

Herb Jones: The System Must Spread the Work Around Him

Jones averaged 4.8 points, 2.3 rebounds and one steal in 17.0 minutes. Low scoring volume does little to explain his main assignment, and steals alone cannot capture containment or communication.

The larger question is whether teammates consistently complete the help-and-recovery sequence around him. His 12 fouls are also a reminder that physicality needs control. A sustainable identity allows Jones to set a standard that the entire lineup can maintain.

Jeremiah Fears: The Clearest Case for a Bigger Assignment

Fears led the team at 13.3 points per game, adding 3.3 assists and 1.5 steals while shooting 50 percent from the field and 7-for-14 from three. He delivered five assists and three steals in each of the final two games.

His production strengthened the argument for meaningful responsibility, regardless of the opening lineup. The next challenge is managing pressure: he had 13 assists and nine turnovers. Fourteen three-point attempts also leave the durability of that shooting improvement unresolved.

His second season deserves real opportunity, paired with continued demands for sound decisions and disciplined defense.

Missi and Queen: Strong Rebounding Returns, Different Tools

Missi averaged 8.0 rebounds and 1.3 blocks in 18.5 minutes. Queen averaged 8.8 rebounds and 2.3 assists in 17.1 minutes. Their contrasting strengths give Mosley options: Missi as a rim-running, shot-contesting presence and Queen as a potential passing hub.

Their rebounding was one of the preseason’s genuine positives. Queen’s 7-for-21 shooting and nine turnovers underline the developmental work still ahead, while Missi’s four-block Dallas performance showed his defensive potential. Continued support from the wings and guards will help the centers turn contests into completed stops.

Poole, Mathurin and the Supporting Group

Poole averaged 8.8 points and recorded nine assists against three turnovers. That is an encouraging decision-making balance, although 4-for-14 three-point shooting left his perimeter impact uneven.

Mathurin averaged 9.3 points and 2.8 assists, providing another possible creator. Matković’s 4-for-11 three-point shooting offered a floor-spacing option, while Pierre made 6 of 13 from deep in limited minutes.

These are options for the rotation. Turning depth into a dependable unit requires clear assignments, combinations that fit and enough defensive reliability to survive when shots stop falling.

Attitude and Chemistry: Clearer Expectations, Unsettled Fit

The reserves supplied 60 points against Washington. That contribution shows why a functional second unit can ease the burden on the primary scorers. It also gives Mosley choices when a particular combination is struggling.

The fit still needs work. Zion, Murray, Fears, Poole and Mathurin each need opportunities to create. Some combinations will need extra shooting; others will need more size or stronger perimeter containment. The coach must communicate who initiates, who finishes and who closes, with players willing to keep moving when the possession runs through someone else.

Public comments support an improving attitude toward the work. Chemistry will become more convincing when those assignments remain clear through missed shots, a difficult road trip and changes in playing time.

Selected Player Averages

Player	GP	MIN	PTS	REB	AST	FG%	3PM–A
Zion Williamson	4	18.3	10.0	2.5	1.0	50.0%	1–7
Trey Murphy III	4	18.1	9.5	3.0	2.5	37.8%	5–21
Dejounte Murray	1	18.7	6.0	4.0	6.0	25.0%	1–3
Saddiq Bey	4	17.8	10.0	3.5	0.5	41.9%	5–13
Herb Jones	4	17.0	4.8	2.3	1.0	50.0%	3–8
Jeremiah Fears	4	19.7	13.3	2.5	3.3	50.0%	7–14
Yves Missi	4	18.5	7.3	8.0	0.5	45.8%	0–0
Derik Queen	4	17.1	5.8	8.8	2.3	33.3%	1–4
Jordan Poole	4	16.2	8.8	1.5	2.3	47.4%	4–14
Bennedict Mathurin	4	16.9	9.3	2.5	2.8	42.9%	4–13
Karlo Matković	4	14.7	7.3	3.3	0.5	52.4%	4–11

Per-game averages use appearances. Three-point makes and attempts are preseason totals. Limited minutes and changing roles make these descriptive statistics, not regular-season projections.

Has Mosley Earned Buy-In?

The available evidence supports early buy-in. A lasting culture change will require those responses to survive fatigue, losses and reduced playing time.

There is reported substance behind the message. Murphy told ClutchPoints that Mosley was “really, really into the details,” describing drills being repeated until properly executed. The same reporting detailed shared rebounding responsibilities and specific defensive positioning. Those are concrete teaching expectations.

Missi subsequently said, “Everyone is buying into that.” The defensive activity gives that statement some support.

Mosley also tested different starting groups, including bringing Zion and Murphy off the bench in Dallas. That demonstrates evaluation and experimentation; the box score cannot establish that those decisions were disciplinary measures.

His next leadership test is to make the standards consistent. If stars and reserves receive clear instructions, accept correction and retain their defensive effort through offensive struggles, the message has a chance to become routine.

Preseason offers evidence of organized teaching. The regular season will show the quality of adjustments, role communication and enforcement when the results carry greater consequences.

Are the Pelicans Ready for the Regular Season?

They are ready to begin testing a more coherent approach. The evidence is still incomplete on whether they can sustain winning basketball.

Defensive disruption, productive rebounding from the centers and strong stretches of possession-finishing provide reasons for optimism. The rebounding results need to become consistent across units, while offensive efficiency, ball security and Murray’s limited participation leave important work ahead. Fears supplied the strongest individual push for an expanded role.

The first stretch of games should be judged through five practical questions:

1. Can the Pelicans make their stronger rebounding stretches the standard across games and units?
2. Can they protect the ball as the primary players take on heavier minutes?
3. Will the wings and guards maintain their box-outs and support the centers when help rotations pull them away from the rim?
4. Can Fears and Murray operate within clear, complementary roles?
5. Will the defensive communication hold when opponents repeatedly attack a weakness?

New Orleans opens against Indiana on Wednesday, October 21. The 3–1 preseason gives Mosley a constructive starting point. The opportunity now is to make the best habits recognizable every night.

Pels Nation: What impressed you most—and what must improve first?

Pels Nation: What impressed you most—and what must improve first?

---

🏀 KEEP THE CONVERSATION GOING WITH PPR

Join Big Q, DC and Lexxah on Pelican Post Game Report for Pelicans discussion, game coverage and postgame reaction across TSC Media.

SUBSCRIBE TO PELICAN POST GAME REPORT

Sources and Statistical Notes

Analysis uses four full-game NBA.com box scores, NBA.com play-by-play for the period rebounding splits and Wizards substitution sequence, and attributed reporting. Percentages pool makes and attempts; averages use games played. Rebounds exclude separately recorded team/dead-ball rebounds. Turnovers follow NBA.com’s displayed box-score totals; providers that add unassigned team turnovers may show higher counts. The rebounding rates here are calculated from player-rebound counts and are not league tracking metrics. No possession-by-possession film grade, lineup defensive rating or numerical chemistry score is claimed.

• NBA.com box scores: October 6 at Oklahoma City; October 8 at Miami; October 14 at Dallas; October 16 vs. Washington.
• Washington play-by-play and Dallas play-by-play: period rebounding splits calculated from player rebound events.
• RealGM cross-checks: Oklahoma City, Miami, Dallas, Washington.
• Chris Dodson, ClutchPoints: Mosley’s teaching and defensive approach.
• Jim Eichenhofer, Pelicans.com: defensive progress and Missi’s comments.
• Reuters: Murray’s toe contusion.