GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

MIL Milwaukee Bucks
S Ryan Rollins 32.4m
24
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+7.9

Slicing through the defense with exceptional shot selection, he consistently found high-quality looks to maintain his hot scoring streak. Active hands in the passing lanes (+4.2 defense) supplemented his offensive clinic, making him a steady two-way contributor.

Shooting
FG 10/16 (62.5%)
3PT 4/7 (57.1%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 24.3%
Net Rtg +5.1
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.4m
Offense +17.9
Hustle +3.8
Defense +4.2
Raw total +25.9
Avg player in 32.4m -18.0
Impact +7.9
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Ousmane Dieng 31.3m
17
pts
9
reb
6
ast
Impact
-5.3

Counting stats masked a highly inefficient outing where forced drives into traffic resulted in empty possessions. While he rebounded well for his position, his inability to finish through contact at the rim dragged down his overall effectiveness.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 4/7 (57.1%)
Advanced
TS% 47.0%
USG% 25.3%
Net Rtg +14.8
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.3m
Offense +8.3
Hustle +1.2
Defense +2.5
Raw total +12.0
Avg player in 31.3m -17.3
Impact -5.3
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S AJ Green 26.5m
6
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-18.5

A disastrous shooting night from beyond the arc punished the offense, as opponents aggressively stunted off him to crowd the paint. Failing to provide his usual floor-spacing gravity rendered his minutes highly detrimental to the unit's flow.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 42.9%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.5m
Offense -5.7
Hustle +1.4
Defense +0.4
Raw total -3.9
Avg player in 26.5m -14.6
Impact -18.5
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 4
S Kyle Kuzma 22.4m
4
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
-7.6

Uncharacteristic passivity defined this outing, as he completely vanished as a scoring threat and allowed the defense to sag off him. He provided solid weak-side help defense, but his refusal to look at the basket crippled the team's half-court spacing.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 12.3%
Net Rtg -3.8
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.4m
Offense -0.3
Hustle +1.2
Defense +3.9
Raw total +4.8
Avg player in 22.4m -12.4
Impact -7.6
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 4
S Myles Turner 21.9m
19
pts
11
reb
0
ast
Impact
+16.9

Completely controlled the paint with menacing drop coverage that deterred drives and spiked his defensive rating (+7.0). Breaking out of a recent slump, his relentless rim-running and offensive rebounding exhausted the opposing frontcourt.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 6/7 (85.7%)
Advanced
TS% 59.1%
USG% 28.1%
Net Rtg -6.0
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.9m
Offense +17.3
Hustle +4.7
Defense +7.0
Raw total +29.0
Avg player in 21.9m -12.1
Impact +16.9
How is this calculated?
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 0
Cormac Ryan 29.4m
21
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+21.4

An absolute terror on the perimeter, his point-of-attack defense (+13.1) completely short-circuited the opponent's primary actions. He paired this suffocating pressure with lethal offensive efficiency, capitalizing on transition leak-outs to post a dominant overall score.

Shooting
FG 7/8 (87.5%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 107.6%
USG% 17.4%
Net Rtg +29.3
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.4m
Offense +19.0
Hustle +5.7
Defense +13.1
Raw total +37.8
Avg player in 29.4m -16.4
Impact +21.4
How is this calculated?
STL 5
BLK 0
TO 2
Jericho Sims 26.1m
12
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
-6.0

Flawless finishing around the basket was completely undone by poor rim protection and slow pick-and-roll coverages. Opposing guards relentlessly targeted his drop coverage, turning his highly efficient offensive night into a net negative.

Shooting
FG 6/7 (85.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 76.1%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg +41.8
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.1m
Offense +9.3
Hustle +1.2
Defense -2.1
Raw total +8.4
Avg player in 26.1m -14.4
Impact -6.0
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
19
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+3.7

Delivered an absolute masterclass in spot-up shooting, punishing every late rotation by going perfect from beyond the arc. Despite the scoring clinic, his overall impact was muted by occasional blown assignments in transition defense.

Shooting
FG 7/8 (87.5%)
3PT 5/5 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 118.8%
USG% 20.8%
Net Rtg +40.0
+/- +20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.8m
Offense +13.9
Hustle +1.3
Defense +1.7
Raw total +16.9
Avg player in 23.8m -13.2
Impact +3.7
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
Pete Nance 23.3m
5
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
-9.3

Struggled to leave a footprint on the game, passing up open looks and stalling the offensive machinery. His inability to anchor the paint defensively allowed opponents to score easily inside, severely dragging down his net rating.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.2%
USG% 11.3%
Net Rtg +48.9
+/- +23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.3m
Offense +2.7
Hustle +1.6
Defense -0.7
Raw total +3.6
Avg player in 23.3m -12.9
Impact -9.3
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
+2.1

Maximized a garbage-time cameo by immediately injecting chaotic energy into the defensive front. A quick bucket and hyper-aggressive ball denial in just under two minutes yielded a surprisingly positive net score.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.2%
USG% 50.0%
Net Rtg +30.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.9m
Offense 0.0
Hustle +0.8
Defense +2.3
Raw total +3.1
Avg player in 1.9m -1.0
Impact +2.1
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
+2.0

Made the most of a fleeting final-minute appearance by executing perfectly on his only offensive touch. Setting up a teammate and finishing a quick play ensured his brief stint ended in the green.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg -66.7
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 0.9m
Offense +2.5
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total +2.5
Avg player in 0.9m -0.5
Impact +2.0
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
MEM Memphis Grizzlies
S Toby Okani 41.2m
9
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-18.0

Heavy minutes amplified the damage of poor shot selection and a complete lack of playmaking creation. While he provided marginal hustle value, clanking momentum-killing jumpers early in the shot clock tanked his overall impact rating.

Shooting
FG 4/12 (33.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 34.9%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg -13.8
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 41.2m
Offense +1.0
Hustle +2.7
Defense +1.0
Raw total +4.7
Avg player in 41.2m -22.7
Impact -18.0
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Rayan Rupert 39.0m
33
pts
10
reb
10
ast
Impact
+25.2

An absolute two-way masterclass defined this breakout performance, with elite hustle and defensive metrics (+10.8 each) anchoring his massive impact score. He broke out of a severe scoring slump by aggressively attacking the rim, but it was his relentless ball pressure that truly dismantled the opponent.

Shooting
FG 9/19 (47.4%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 13/16 (81.2%)
Advanced
TS% 63.4%
USG% 29.9%
Net Rtg -11.0
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.0m
Offense +25.3
Hustle +10.8
Defense +10.8
Raw total +46.9
Avg player in 39.0m -21.7
Impact +25.2
How is this calculated?
STL 4
BLK 1
TO 4
20
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
+3.5

Blistering perimeter efficiency fueled a strong offensive rating, breaking him out of a recent scoring slump. However, his modest overall impact suggests he gave much of that value back by getting caught on screens during defensive rotations.

Shooting
FG 6/11 (54.5%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.4%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -30.4
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.4m
Offense +14.6
Hustle +1.6
Defense +1.4
Raw total +17.6
Avg player in 25.4m -14.1
Impact +3.5
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
13
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.7

Continued his streak of efficient interior finishing, but a negative defensive rating (-0.9) neutralized his offensive contributions. Poor closeouts on the perimeter allowed easy looks, keeping his overall impact barely above water despite the steady scoring.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 57.4%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg -22.6
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.3m
Offense +8.0
Hustle +1.4
Defense -0.9
Raw total +8.5
Avg player in 14.3m -7.8
Impact +0.7
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
11
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
+16.0

Maximized a brief rotation stint by pairing flawless perimeter shot selection with suffocating weak-side rim protection (+8.6 defensive impact). His ability to instantly disrupt passing lanes upon checking in sparked a massive swing in just 12 minutes of action.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 112.7%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg -19.5
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.5m
Offense +11.7
Hustle +2.6
Defense +8.6
Raw total +22.9
Avg player in 12.5m -6.9
Impact +16.0
How is this calculated?
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 0
16
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-10.1

A brutal diet of contested perimeter jumpers completely derailed his offensive value, as 13 empty trips down the floor fueled opponent transition opportunities. Even with respectable hustle numbers, forcing the issue as a primary creator proved highly detrimental to the team's rhythm.

Shooting
FG 6/19 (31.6%)
3PT 3/10 (30.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.2%
USG% 20.4%
Net Rtg -13.7
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.6m
Offense +4.8
Hustle +3.0
Defense +3.5
Raw total +11.3
Avg player in 38.6m -21.4
Impact -10.1
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
-17.9

Offensive invisibility and bricked spot-up looks severely handicapped the floor spacing during his heavy minutes. He chased loose balls admirably to generate some hustle value, but failing to punish defensive closeouts made him a massive liability overall.

Shooting
FG 2/9 (22.2%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 27.8%
USG% 13.2%
Net Rtg -17.3
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.4m
Offense -2.3
Hustle +3.9
Defense +0.7
Raw total +2.3
Avg player in 36.4m -20.2
Impact -17.9
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
Adama Bal 25.2m
8
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.5

Despite decent shooting splits and positive individual hustle metrics, his presence on the floor coincided with disastrous team runs. Getting repeatedly targeted in pick-and-roll switches compromised the defensive shell, dragging his net score firmly into the red.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 13.1%
Net Rtg -26.9
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.2m
Offense +3.7
Hustle +1.7
Defense +1.1
Raw total +6.5
Avg player in 25.2m -14.0
Impact -7.5
How is this calculated?
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
Taj Gibson 7.3m
0
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.8

Made his brief rotation cameo entirely about doing the dirty work, completely eschewing scoring to focus on glass-cleaning. Securing critical defensive rebounds in traffic stabilized the second unit and kept his net impact in the green.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 4.5%
Net Rtg +23.5
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.3m
Offense +2.1
Hustle +1.2
Defense +1.6
Raw total +4.9
Avg player in 7.3m -4.1
Impact +0.8
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0