GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

BKN Brooklyn Nets
S Drake Powell 40.5m
11
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.1

An icy shooting night severely dragged down his overall rating despite his stellar defensive effort. He consistently forced contested looks off the dribble, short-circuiting possessions and feeding the opponent's transition game. While his tremendous on-ball pressure mitigated some of the damage, the sheer volume of wasted offensive trips kept him in the red.

Shooting
FG 4/16 (25.0%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 32.6%
USG% 21.2%
Net Rtg -5.1
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 40.5m
Offense -3.3
Hustle +2.5
Defense +13.3
Raw total +12.5
Avg player in 40.5m -17.6
Impact -5.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
S Trevon Scott 39.7m
8
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.7

A dominant defensive presence defined his night, completely locking down his side of the floor. He sacrificed his own offensive volume to focus on weak-side rim protection and securing contested 50/50 balls. That relentless blue-collar effort stabilized the lineup even when the team struggled to score.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 10.6%
Net Rtg -1.3
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.7m
Offense +4.0
Hustle +4.6
Defense +15.5
Raw total +24.1
Avg player in 39.7m -17.4
Impact +6.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 4
BLK 1
TO 2
S Malachi Smith 37.4m
11
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
-0.9

Flawless shot selection and opportunistic scoring maximized his value without demanding high usage. He took exactly what the defense gave him, punishing late closeouts and keeping the ball moving within the flow of the offense. This hyper-efficient approach, paired with active hands in the passing lanes, drove a highly productive shift.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 93.5%
USG% 8.9%
Net Rtg +2.8
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.4m
Offense +10.8
Hustle +3.8
Defense +0.9
Raw total +15.5
Avg player in 37.4m -16.4
Impact -0.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 52.9%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Ben Saraf 35.6m
19
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.9

Aggressive downhill drives fueled a massive scoring leap, even if the finishing efficiency left something to be desired. He consistently collapsed the defense by attacking the paint, drawing contact to generate value when his jumper wasn't falling. Combined with highly disruptive perimeter defense, his relentless attacking mentality yielded a solid net positive.

Shooting
FG 5/13 (38.5%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 9/10 (90.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.6%
USG% 27.6%
Net Rtg -13.2
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.6m
Offense +8.9
Hustle +3.5
Defense +10.0
Raw total +22.4
Avg player in 35.6m -15.5
Impact +6.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 3
S E.J. Liddell 21.1m
21
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+23.1

An absolute masterclass in offensive efficiency sparked a monumental surge in his overall impact. He ruthlessly exploited mismatches in the post and knocked down trailing jumpers, completely shattering his recent slump. This sudden eruption of high-quality shot-making single-handedly tilted the game's momentum during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 7/9 (77.8%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 93.8%
USG% 26.2%
Net Rtg +8.0
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.1m
Offense +20.5
Hustle +0.8
Defense +11.0
Raw total +32.3
Avg player in 21.1m -9.2
Impact +23.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
9
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
-8.0

Poor shot selection from the perimeter heavily penalized his overall effectiveness tonight. He repeatedly settled for early-clock, contested triples instead of probing the defense, resulting in empty trips that stalled the offense. The inability to find the bottom of the net ultimately erased any minor contributions he made on the other end.

Shooting
FG 4/13 (30.8%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 34.6%
USG% 21.0%
Net Rtg +4.8
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.7m
Offense +0.8
Hustle +3.5
Defense +0.3
Raw total +4.6
Avg player in 28.7m -12.6
Impact -8.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Jalen Wilson 19.4m
7
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-1.1

Struggling to find a rhythm, his inability to convert in traffic severely limited his impact. He looked hesitant when attacking closeouts, often picking up his dribble too early and bogging down the half-court flow. This lack of offensive punch resulted in a noticeable drop from his usual standard and a negative overall rating.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +20.4
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.4m
Offense +1.3
Hustle +1.4
Defense +4.6
Raw total +7.3
Avg player in 19.4m -8.4
Impact -1.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.1

Perfect shooting execution during a short stint on the floor maximized his value tonight. Rather than chasing his usual high scoring volume, he played strictly within the flow of the offense and locked in defensively. His disciplined approach and timely rotations ensured the second unit won his minutes convincingly.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 125.0%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg +66.9
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.3m
Offense +1.3
Hustle +1.5
Defense +4.4
Raw total +7.2
Avg player in 9.3m -4.1
Impact +3.1
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
5
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.4

Making the absolute most of a brief cameo, he provided an instant spark of hyper-efficient offense. He decisively took open looks and extended his impressive streak of high-percentage shooting without forcing the issue. This quick burst of mistake-free basketball resulted in a tremendous per-minute impact.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +97.2
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.2m
Offense +5.6
Hustle +1.7
Defense +0.6
Raw total +7.9
Avg player in 8.2m -3.5
Impact +4.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
MIL Milwaukee Bucks
S AJ Green 38.6m
20
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+6.2

Elite floor spacing completely warped the opposing defense and fueled an outstanding overall rating. By hunting transition triples and capitalizing on catch-and-shoot opportunities, he shattered his recent scoring averages. His constant off-ball movement forced defenders into exhausting chase sequences, opening up driving lanes for everyone else.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 6/12 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 72.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -6.6
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.6m
Offense +15.4
Hustle +5.2
Defense +2.3
Raw total +22.9
Avg player in 38.6m -16.7
Impact +6.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Taurean Prince 36.8m
16
pts
11
reb
4
ast
Impact
-5.8

A heavy reliance on the perimeter dragged down his overall effectiveness, snapping a three-game streak of highly efficient shooting. Settling for contested looks from deep rather than attacking the paint stalled the offense during key stretches. Despite solid defensive rotations, the sheer volume of wasted possessions resulted in a net-negative impact.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 4/12 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 53.3%
USG% 22.0%
Net Rtg +2.8
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.8m
Offense +5.1
Hustle +1.4
Defense +3.7
Raw total +10.2
Avg player in 36.8m -16.0
Impact -5.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
S Jericho Sims 36.5m
12
pts
8
reb
6
ast
Impact
+4.8

Unmatched interior efficiency powered a massive spike in his offensive production compared to his recent outings. He lived in the dunker spot, converting high-percentage drop-offs and punishing late rotations at the rim. That ruthless finishing, combined with sturdy rim protection, made him a massive plus on the floor.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 14.1%
Net Rtg +11.6
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.5m
Offense +16.3
Hustle +2.7
Defense +1.8
Raw total +20.8
Avg player in 36.5m -16.0
Impact +4.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
S Ousmane Dieng 31.6m
10
pts
7
reb
3
ast
Impact
-12.4

An absolute zero from beyond the arc cratered his offensive value and dragged his overall impact deeply into the red. He repeatedly forced heavily contested jumpers early in the shot clock, bailing out the defense and killing offensive momentum. While his length provided some rotational value on the other end, the offensive stagnation he caused was too much to overcome.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 27.5%
Net Rtg -4.8
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.6m
Offense -6.8
Hustle +1.4
Defense +6.7
Raw total +1.3
Avg player in 31.6m -13.7
Impact -12.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 7
S Pete Nance 26.4m
8
pts
2
reb
6
ast
Impact
-0.6

High-level defensive execution and constant activity on the margins anchored his positive rating tonight. Even with his scoring touch dipping below his recent baseline, his willingness to do the dirty work kept the second unit afloat. He consistently blew up pick-and-roll actions to generate stops when his jumper wasn't falling.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 45.0%
USG% 16.9%
Net Rtg -26.6
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.4m
Offense +5.3
Hustle +2.9
Defense +2.7
Raw total +10.9
Avg player in 26.4m -11.5
Impact -0.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
Cormac Ryan 33.7m
14
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-12.6

Defensive lapses and an inability to stay in front of straight-line drives severely punished his overall rating. Even though he found a decent rhythm from the perimeter, he gave those points right back by getting lost on back-door cuts. Opponents actively targeted him in isolation, turning his minutes into a significant net negative.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.3%
USG% 19.0%
Net Rtg -7.5
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.7m
Offense +3.7
Hustle +1.0
Defense -2.6
Raw total +2.1
Avg player in 33.7m -14.7
Impact -12.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Gary Harris 21.1m
7
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.2

Gritty point-of-attack defense salvaged a night where his jumper completely abandoned him. He made up for clanking several wide-open corner looks by fighting through screens and blowing up dribble hand-offs. That relentless perimeter pressure ensured he remained a slight positive despite the offensive struggles.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 38.9%
USG% 17.0%
Net Rtg -26.8
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.1m
Offense +2.5
Hustle +2.3
Defense +5.6
Raw total +10.4
Avg player in 21.1m -9.2
Impact +1.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
3
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-5.3

A complete lack of offensive assertiveness rendered him nearly invisible during his stint on the floor. Defenders aggressively sagged off him on the perimeter, which clogged the paint and derailed the team's spacing. He failed to leverage his athleticism to create advantages, resulting in a stark drop-off from his usual production.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 38.7%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg -6.3
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.3m
Offense -3.8
Hustle +0.8
Defense +4.3
Raw total +1.3
Avg player in 15.3m -6.6
Impact -5.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 3