GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

SAS San Antonio Spurs
S De'Aaron Fox 34.5m
25
pts
5
reb
7
ast
Impact
+6.7

Slicing through the primary line of defense at will, he consistently collapsed the opposing shell to create high-value looks. His aggressive point-of-attack pressure (+6.9 defense) perfectly complemented an offensive masterclass that broke a recent scoring slump.

Shooting
FG 10/20 (50.0%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 58.6%
USG% 30.9%
Net Rtg -5.8
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.5m
Offense +13.9
Hustle +2.7
Defense +6.9
Raw total +23.5
Avg player in 34.5m -16.8
Impact +6.7
How is this calculated?
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 4
S Dylan Harper 32.6m
13
pts
6
reb
4
ast
Impact
-3.9

Forcing tough, contested looks in the paint broke his recent streak of hyper-efficient finishing. Despite bringing exceptional energy and lateral quickness on defense (+6.8), those empty offensive possessions ultimately tipped his net score into the negative.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 46.4%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg +7.0
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.6m
Offense +1.8
Hustle +4.2
Defense +6.8
Raw total +12.8
Avg player in 32.6m -16.7
Impact -3.9
How is this calculated?
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 4
S Devin Vassell 31.0m
14
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.1

Clanking five attempts from deep stunted the offensive rhythm and offset his otherwise stellar defensive rotations. While his active hands generated solid hustle metrics (+3.5), the inefficient shot profile kept him just below the break-even line.

Shooting
FG 5/13 (38.5%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 48.9%
USG% 21.1%
Net Rtg +1.6
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.0m
Offense +4.0
Hustle +3.5
Defense +6.5
Raw total +14.0
Avg player in 31.0m -15.1
Impact -1.1
How is this calculated?
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
-11.0

Total offensive paralysis defined this outing, as he bricked open looks and stalled half-court sets. The massive gap between his box score and total impact (-10.4) points to back-breaking live-ball mistakes that fed directly into opponent scoring runs.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 16.7%
USG% 8.8%
Net Rtg +8.3
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.8m
Offense +0.3
Hustle +1.0
Defense +3.0
Raw total +4.3
Avg player in 26.8m -15.3
Impact -11.0
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
S Luke Kornet 26.0m
10
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
+12.6

Flawless execution in the pick-and-roll allowed him to feast on easy interior looks. He compounded this offensive efficiency with superb drop-coverage positioning (+7.0 defense), forcing guards into contested mid-range floaters all night.

Shooting
FG 5/6 (83.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 10.3%
Net Rtg +7.5
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.0m
Offense +16.1
Hustle +3.1
Defense +7.0
Raw total +26.2
Avg player in 26.0m -13.6
Impact +12.6
How is this calculated?
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
20
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+9.1

Abandoning the three-point line to bully his way to the rim yielded fantastic results. Relentless downhill drives punished smaller defenders, while his physical presence on the glass anchored a robust +9.9 overall impact.

Shooting
FG 8/15 (53.3%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.1%
USG% 25.3%
Net Rtg +19.2
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.9m
Offense +15.2
Hustle +2.5
Defense +6.2
Raw total +23.9
Avg player in 28.9m -14.8
Impact +9.1
How is this calculated?
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 2
9
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-9.0

Passive positioning and an unwillingness to let it fly from deep allowed his defender to freely roam and double-team others. This lack of offensive gravity, combined with sluggish transition recoveries, resulted in a punishing -7.3 net rating.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 67.8%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg +20.6
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.8m
Offense +2.1
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.8
Raw total +5.8
Avg player in 26.8m -14.8
Impact -9.0
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
17
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
+11.6

Catching absolute fire from beyond the arc completely shattered his recent shooting slump and stretched the defense to its breaking point. This elite floor-spacing gravity opened up driving lanes for everyone else, driving a massive +12.9 impact score.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 5/6 (83.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 94.4%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg +7.1
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.7m
Offense +19.1
Hustle +2.9
Defense +3.4
Raw total +25.4
Avg player in 24.7m -13.8
Impact +11.6
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.4

Operating strictly as a connective passer, he kept the ball moving but offered zero scoring threat to keep the defense honest. A few mistimed defensive rotations slightly outweighed his hustle, leaving him just below neutral.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.2%
USG% 10.5%
Net Rtg +52.9
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.6m
Offense +1.8
Hustle +1.3
Defense +0.9
Raw total +4.0
Avg player in 8.6m -4.4
Impact -0.4
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
POR Portland Trail Blazers
S Toumani Camara 40.0m
18
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
+7.8

Elite perimeter defense and a constant motor (+3.8 hustle) anchored a highly productive two-way performance. He consistently disrupted passing lanes to generate stops, while cashing in on spot-up opportunities from deep to stretch the floor efficiently.

Shooting
FG 7/12 (58.3%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg +9.9
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 40.0m
Offense +15.2
Hustle +3.8
Defense +8.9
Raw total +27.9
Avg player in 40.0m -20.1
Impact +7.8
How is this calculated?
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 2
S Scoot Henderson 38.0m
20
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.5

Errant shot selection at the rim and a heavy volume of missed jumpers nearly derailed his night. However, relentless ball pressure and excellent screen navigation on the other end (+9.1 defensive impact) managed to keep his head just above water.

Shooting
FG 7/20 (35.0%)
3PT 3/9 (33.3%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.0%
USG% 24.5%
Net Rtg -10.1
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.0m
Offense +9.4
Hustle +2.4
Defense +9.1
Raw total +20.9
Avg player in 38.0m -20.4
Impact +0.5
How is this calculated?
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 1
S Deni Avdija 37.5m
29
pts
6
reb
6
ast
Impact
-4.8

Despite a high-volume scoring night fueled by aggressive drives, his overall impact sank into the red (-2.4) due to hidden defensive costs. Poor rotational awareness allowed opponents to capitalize on the weak side, completely erasing the value of his offensive output.

Shooting
FG 13/21 (61.9%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.7%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg +9.0
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.5m
Offense +15.8
Hustle +1.9
Defense -0.3
Raw total +17.4
Avg player in 37.5m -22.2
Impact -4.8
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 6
S Jrue Holiday 31.5m
13
pts
10
reb
6
ast
Impact
-14.4

Forced perimeter shots and a brutal 1-for-7 night from beyond the arc cratered his offensive efficiency. The resulting long rebounds fueled opponent transition pushes, dragging his overall impact down to a dismal -9.4 despite standard point-of-attack defensive effort.

Shooting
FG 6/17 (35.3%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 38.2%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -13.2
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.5m
Offense +2.0
Hustle +1.6
Defense +1.6
Raw total +5.2
Avg player in 31.5m -19.6
Impact -14.4
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Donovan Clingan 28.3m
11
pts
11
reb
5
ast
Impact
+7.9

Stepping out to knock down three triples completely warped the opposing frontcourt's defensive shell. His massive +10.4 impact was further cemented by dominant rim protection and active rebounding that choked off second-chance opportunities.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 78.6%
USG% 10.8%
Net Rtg -5.1
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.3m
Offense +15.7
Hustle +3.5
Defense +6.2
Raw total +25.4
Avg player in 28.3m -17.5
Impact +7.9
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 3
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.4

Offensive zeroing out completely sabotaged his elite defensive disruption. Opponents simply ignored him on the perimeter, packing the paint and turning his empty possessions into a crippling -9.5 overall deficit.

Shooting
FG 0/5 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg -33.5
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.1m
Offense -3.1
Hustle +2.1
Defense +4.2
Raw total +3.2
Avg player in 24.1m -11.6
Impact -8.4
How is this calculated?
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.0

Operating strictly as a vertical spacer and drop-coverage anchor, he provided exactly what was required in his limited stint. Solid rim deterrence (+2.2 defense) and mistake-free finishing kept his impact marginally positive.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.5%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -37.9
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.8m
Offense +4.2
Hustle +1.9
Defense +2.2
Raw total +8.3
Avg player in 12.8m -7.3
Impact +1.0
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Kris Murray 12.4m
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.6

Failing to establish any physical presence during his rotation, he was frequently targeted on switches. This defensive bleeding (-1.5) combined with complete offensive passivity resulted in a steep negative impact during his brief time on the floor.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 6.1%
Net Rtg -34.9
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.4m
Offense +0.8
Hustle +0.8
Defense -1.5
Raw total +0.1
Avg player in 12.4m -7.7
Impact -7.6
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.2

Blown coverages on the perimeter quickly eroded any value from his short stint. Getting caught out of position defensively (-1.5) allowed easy penetration, dragging his net score into the red.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg -34.5
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.9m
Offense +1.7
Hustle +1.2
Defense -1.5
Raw total +1.4
Avg player in 8.9m -3.6
Impact -2.2
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.5

Rushing his offensive reads led to three quick misses that killed momentum. The resulting empty trips and poor transition balance turned a brief cameo into a notable negative.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 50.0%
Net Rtg +22.2
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.3m
Offense -2.7
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.6
Raw total -1.9
Avg player in 4.3m -2.6
Impact -4.5
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Caleb Love 2.2m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.8

A purely cardio stint where he failed to register a single meaningful offensive action. His inability to impact the flow of the game during garbage time resulted in a sluggish -2.4 rating.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -66.7
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.2m
Offense -1.9
Hustle +0.7
Defense 0.0
Raw total -1.2
Avg player in 2.2m -1.6
Impact -2.8
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1