GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

PHX Phoenix Suns
S Devin Booker 37.0m
37
pts
5
reb
9
ast
Impact
+7.8

Serving as the primary engine, his ability to generate points both for himself and his teammates overwhelmed the defense. Elite shot creation and high-level playmaking fueled a massive offensive rating, continuing his trend of elite production. The sheer volume of his offensive output easily outweighed any minor inefficiencies in his shooting splits.

Shooting
FG 13/27 (48.1%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 9/9 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.8%
USG% 37.9%
Net Rtg +16.5
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.0m
Offense +23.9
Hustle +2.0
Defense +0.1
Raw total +26.0
Avg player in 37.0m -18.2
Impact +7.8
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
S Dillon Brooks 33.4m
28
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+7.7

Breaking out of a recent slump, his ability to create and convert looks carried the offensive load. Aggressive, high-volume scoring paired with lethal three-point shooting drove a stellar impact rating. A strong defensive showing (+3.1) complemented his scoring outburst, making this a complete two-way performance.

Shooting
FG 11/22 (50.0%)
3PT 4/5 (80.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.9%
USG% 30.8%
Net Rtg +9.3
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.4m
Offense +17.9
Hustle +1.7
Defense +3.1
Raw total +22.7
Avg player in 33.4m -15.0
Impact +7.7
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Khaman Maluach 30.2m
4
pts
14
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.0

Despite minimal offensive involvement, his ability to clean the glass and anchor the defense (+5.8) heavily influenced the game's flow. Dominant rebounding and rim deterrence were the sole drivers of his positive value. His hustle plays (+3.8) generated crucial extra possessions that offset his lack of scoring.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 6.8%
Net Rtg +21.1
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.2m
Offense +8.4
Hustle +3.8
Defense +5.8
Raw total +18.0
Avg player in 30.2m -19.0
Impact -1.0
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 0
S Jordan Goodwin 13.1m
9
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+6.1

Hitting multiple triples maximized his value during a short stint, punishing defensive closeouts. Deep-range accuracy in limited minutes provided a sharp boost to his team's offensive efficiency, extending his streak of highly efficient shooting games. Solid defensive metrics (+2.6) ensured he was a two-way contributor while on the floor.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 21.2%
Net Rtg +3.7
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.1m
Offense +9.1
Hustle +0.7
Defense +2.6
Raw total +12.4
Avg player in 13.1m -6.3
Impact +6.1
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Jalen Green 3.8m
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.6

Missing his only attempts in less than four minutes of action provided no offensive value, a stark contrast to his recent scoring punch. A brief, scoreless stint resulted in a quick negative impact before he exited the game. The lack of court time prevented him from establishing any rhythm or contributing meaningfully.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg -12.5
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.8m
Offense -2.0
Hustle 0.0
Defense +0.3
Raw total -1.7
Avg player in 3.8m -1.9
Impact -3.6
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
13
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.4

Bricking a high volume of attempts from beyond the arc stalled out multiple offensive sets, severely hurting his net rating. Poor perimeter execution dragged down an otherwise active performance. The negative impact of his missed threes overshadowed his solid rebounding and hustle contributions.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.5%
USG% 19.5%
Net Rtg +4.2
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.8m
Offense +8.0
Hustle +3.5
Defense +1.6
Raw total +13.1
Avg player in 33.8m -17.5
Impact -4.4
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
Ryan Dunn 24.4m
0
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.8

Failing to score a single point created a severe spacing issue that bogged down the team's half-court execution. A completely barren offensive performance tanked his rating despite elite defensive metrics (+6.4). His excellent hustle and rebounding simply couldn't compensate for being an absolute zero on the scoring end.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 7.1%
Net Rtg +23.3
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.4m
Offense -3.7
Hustle +2.5
Defense +6.4
Raw total +5.2
Avg player in 24.4m -13.0
Impact -7.8
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
14
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.6

Capitalizing on spot-up opportunities, his highly efficient shooting stretched the floor and punished defensive rotations. Pinpoint accuracy from beyond the arc was the catalyst for his strong positive rating, doubling his recent scoring average. This low-maintenance scoring punch provided a massive boost without requiring heavy usage.

Shooting
FG 5/7 (71.4%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg -10.9
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.2m
Offense +14.5
Hustle +1.0
Defense +1.4
Raw total +16.9
Avg player in 23.2m -12.3
Impact +4.6
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Oso Ighodaro 17.6m
4
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.5

Failing to make an impact on the glass or as a facilitator made his minutes highly unproductive. A lack of defensive resistance and low overall involvement resulted in a deeply negative score, snapping his streak of highly efficient shooting nights. The defensive lapses (-1.6) compounded his quiet offensive output, making him a clear liability.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 10.8%
Net Rtg -9.6
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.6m
Offense +1.7
Hustle +1.2
Defense -1.6
Raw total +1.3
Avg player in 17.6m -11.8
Impact -10.5
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.3

While he offered some defensive value (+2.8), his inability to secure a single rebound or generate offense limited his utility. Complete invisibility on the glass and as a playmaker kept his net impact in the negative. The lack of tangible production across most categories made his stint largely ineffective.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.1%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.5m
Offense -0.2
Hustle +1.7
Defense +2.8
Raw total +4.3
Avg player in 13.5m -8.6
Impact -4.3
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.4

His complete lack of involvement in the offense meant his team was essentially playing four-on-five during his minutes. Registering zero counting stats across the board led to a negative impact rating. The empty stint provided no value to offset the natural bleed of a neutral defensive presence.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg -43.9
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.9m
Offense -2.0
Hustle +1.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total -1.0
Avg player in 5.9m -3.4
Impact -4.4
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.9

He managed a couple of quick passes, but missing his only shot attempt kept his offensive value muted. A very brief appearance yielded a slightly negative score due to a lack of scoring output. The short stint didn't allow enough time to make a significant positive or negative mark.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -37.5
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.1m
Offense +0.1
Hustle +1.1
Defense -0.4
Raw total +0.8
Avg player in 4.1m -1.7
Impact -0.9
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
DAL Dallas Mavericks
S Max Christie 32.8m
18
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.3

Busting out of a recent shooting slump, his high-volume success from deep provided a crucial offensive spark. Perimeter marksmanship was the primary engine behind his strong positive rating. Solid defensive metrics (+3.8) ensured that his scoring surge wasn't undermined by lapses on the other end.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 4/9 (44.4%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 70.5%
USG% 17.6%
Net Rtg +2.8
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.8m
Offense +14.3
Hustle +2.7
Defense +3.8
Raw total +20.8
Avg player in 32.8m -16.5
Impact +4.3
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
S Cooper Flagg 31.9m
11
pts
11
reb
6
ast
Impact
-7.7

Offensive inefficiency tanked his overall impact despite a massive defensive contribution (+7.5). A barrage of 14 missed shots dragged down his value, neutralizing the positive effects of his playmaking and rebounding. The stark drop-off from his recent scoring tear highlighted how much his empty possessions hurt the team's momentum.

Shooting
FG 4/18 (22.2%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 28.5%
USG% 29.2%
Net Rtg +12.6
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.9m
Offense -1.2
Hustle +3.3
Defense +7.5
Raw total +9.6
Avg player in 31.9m -17.3
Impact -7.7
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
S Ryan Nembhard 31.8m
9
pts
5
reb
7
ast
Impact
-8.6

The playmaking was steady, but his overall offensive footprint wasn't dominant enough to overcome the hidden costs of empty possessions. Despite solid facilitation, an inability to generate high-value scoring opportunities kept his net impact in the red. A slight negative defensive rating further dragged down his overall effectiveness during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.7%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg +3.1
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.8m
Offense +8.0
Hustle +2.0
Defense -0.1
Raw total +9.9
Avg player in 31.8m -18.5
Impact -8.6
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
20
pts
8
reb
2
ast
Impact
+9.2

Capitalizing on high-percentage looks allowed him to continue his hot streak of efficient scoring, punishing the defense inside and out. Exceptional shot selection and finishing drove a massive positive impact. His ability to stretch the floor with a trio of triples added a valuable dimension that amplified his overall offensive footprint.

Shooting
FG 8/11 (72.7%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 84.2%
USG% 20.3%
Net Rtg -10.9
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.3m
Offense +19.7
Hustle +2.2
Defense +1.9
Raw total +23.8
Avg player in 26.3m -14.6
Impact +9.2
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S Khris Middleton 17.6m
4
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-14.2

Failing to convert a single field goal attempt cratered his offensive value, making him a liability on that end of the floor. This complete inability to find the bottom of the net resulted in a severely negative impact score. His minor hustle contributions were nowhere near enough to offset the empty possessions he generated.

Shooting
FG 0/5 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 29.6%
USG% 21.4%
Net Rtg -28.3
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.6m
Offense -4.9
Hustle +1.6
Defense +0.1
Raw total -3.2
Avg player in 17.6m -11.0
Impact -14.2
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
23
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.2

Exploding for a massive scoring increase compared to his recent average, his perimeter marksmanship punished defensive rotations. A blistering shooting display single-handedly drove his positive impact. The sheer volume of efficient scoring easily masked a slight negative rating on the defensive end.

Shooting
FG 8/12 (66.7%)
3PT 5/8 (62.5%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 89.3%
USG% 19.1%
Net Rtg +13.6
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.3m
Offense +19.6
Hustle +1.9
Defense -1.1
Raw total +20.4
Avg player in 29.3m -15.2
Impact +5.2
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Moussa Cisse 21.7m
11
pts
9
reb
0
ast
Impact
+7.2

Converting almost all of his looks around the basket maximized his offensive value without needing high volume. Elite interior efficiency and rim protection fueled a highly productive stint. His defensive presence (+3.8) and rebounding anchored the paint, making him a major net positive.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.4%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +5.2
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.7m
Offense +13.2
Hustle +2.5
Defense +3.8
Raw total +19.5
Avg player in 21.7m -12.3
Impact +7.2
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
AJ Johnson 17.1m
4
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
-6.0

Clanking the vast majority of his attempts created a slew of empty possessions that stalled the offense. Disastrous shot selection and execution completely derailed his overall rating. While he offered some resistance defensively (+2.3), the sheer volume of wasted offensive trips made him a significant net negative.

Shooting
FG 1/11 (9.1%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 16.8%
USG% 27.3%
Net Rtg -31.4
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.1m
Offense -2.1
Hustle +1.9
Defense +2.3
Raw total +2.1
Avg player in 17.1m -8.1
Impact -6.0
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+0.1

He provided decent hustle and connective passing, but lacked the offensive aggression to move the needle significantly. A low-usage profile resulted in a relatively neutral impact score, continuing a trend of quiet offensive nights. The lack of scoring punch kept his overall value hovering just below the break-even point.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 12.2%
Net Rtg -40.8
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.1m
Offense +3.9
Hustle +2.1
Defense +1.0
Raw total +7.0
Avg player in 16.1m -6.9
Impact +0.1
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Tyler Smith 15.3m
3
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.0

Failing to secure a single rebound severely limited his utility on the floor. Invisibility on the glass and low offensive involvement led to a negative net rating. Without enough volume or defensive disruption to compensate, his minutes were largely empty.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 5.0%
Net Rtg -27.7
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.3m
Offense +2.6
Hustle +0.4
Defense +0.3
Raw total +3.3
Avg player in 15.3m -6.3
Impact -3.0
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0