HOU

2025-26 Season

JABARI SMITH JR.

Houston Rockets | Forward | 6-11
Jabari Smith Jr.
15.8 PPG
6.9 RPG
1.8 APG
35.2 MPG
+7.6 Impact

Jr. produces at an elite rate for a 35-minute workload.

Embed this player card

Copy & paste this HTML into any page:

The widget updates automatically whenever our data does.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
+7.6
Scoring +13.7
Points 15.8 PPG = +10.2
Shot Making above expected FG% = +3.5
Creation +0.8
Creation 1.8 AST/g = +0.8
Turnovers -3.2
Turnovers 1.4/g = -3.2
Hustle & Effort +6.1
Rebounds 6.9 RPG = +6.1
Raw Impact +17.4
Baseline (game-average expected) −9.8
Net Impact
+7.6
83th pctl vs Forwards

PBP Credit: Every play is analyzed from play-by-play data. Scorers get difficulty-adjusted credit, assisters get creation value based on the shot opportunity they created, and turnovers are classified by type. Shot difficulty is derived from 1M+ shots across 4 seasons. Full methodology

SKILL DNA

Percentile rank vs 234 Forwards with 10+ games

Scoring 79th
15.8 PPG
Efficiency 57th
57.7% TS
Playmaking 57th
1.8 APG
Rebounding 89th
6.9 RPG
Defense 80th
+9.6/g
Hustle 92th
+19.4/g
Creation 66th
+2.86/g
Shot Making 86th
+8.72/g
TO Discipline 71th
0.04/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Jabari Smith Jr.’s opening stretch of the 2025-26 campaign was defined by maddening inconsistency, as poor shot selection and hidden defensive costs repeatedly sabotaged his overall effectiveness. This frustrating dynamic peaked during the 11/21 vs DEN matchup. While he stuffed the box score with 21 points and 11 rebounds, a brutal interior shooting performance and massive volume of missed shots dragged his actual impact down to an abysmal -7.4. Even when his jumper fell efficiently, defensive lapses ruined his nights. During the 11/05 vs MEM game, he scored 16 points on just eight shots but posted a horrific -10.4 impact score because he bled points on the other end of the floor. Still, Smith offered flashes of his true ceiling when he fully engaged his physical tools. On 10/27 vs BKN, he managed a meager 11 points but generated a highly valuable +4.3 impact score, utilizing smothering perimeter defense and flawless switchability to influence winning without needing to score. Until he stops settling for heavily contested jumpers and tightens his pick-and-roll coverages, these wild swings will continue to plague his season.

A brutal slump defined this twenty-game stretch for Jabari Smith Jr., as a heavy diet of clanked perimeter jumpers constantly sabotaged his on-court value. Even when the ball occasionally went through the hoop, hidden costs dragged him down. Look at the 12/06 vs DAL matchup, where he poured in 22 points but still posted a -0.4 impact score because empty possessions and poor spacing ruined the offensive flow. His shot selection hit absolute rock bottom on 12/18 vs NOP. Forced perimeter looks completely cratered his efficiency that night, resulting in a disastrous -25.6 impact rating. He occasionally found other ways to survive. During a quiet 11-point outing on 01/23 vs DET, Smith Jr. salvaged a +4.4 impact mark through relentless hustle plays that kept possessions alive. Still, this erratic stretch revealed a forward relying far too heavily on contested jumpers rather than letting the game come to him.

This stretch was a maddening pendulum swing between two-way dominance and passive, perimeter-floating irrelevance. When Smith fully engaged on both ends of the floor, he looked unstoppable, peaking on 02/23 vs UTA with 31 points and a massive +18.3 impact score. That elite rating stemmed directly from lethal shot-making paired with suffocating switch defense that completely disrupted the opposing offense. Yet, he frequently sabotaged his own value by settling for terrible looks, perfectly illustrated on 02/11 vs LAC. Despite logging a robust 16 points and 12 rebounds in that contest, his heavy reliance on perimeter isolation killed ball movement and dragged him down to a -4.1 impact score. The floor fell out entirely on 03/05 vs GSW. A catastrophic 0-for-8 shooting night tanked his impact to a brutal -20.6, exposing just how fragile his overall utility becomes when the jumper stops falling.

IMPACT TIMELINE

Game-by-game performance vs average. Green = above average, red = below.

PATTERNS

Very consistent. Jr. posts positive impact in 78% of games — you almost always get a productive night. Scoring varies by ~5 points, but the overall contribution stays positive.

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 54% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

Defensive difference-maker. Jr. consistently forces tough shots and protects the rim — opponents shoot worse when he's guarding them.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 13 games. Longest cold streak: 3 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 74 games with tracking data. Shows who guarded this player on offense and who he guarded on defense, with their shooting stats in those matchups.

ON OFFENSE: WHO GUARDED HIM

His shooting stats against each primary defender this season

C. Johnson 109.7 poss
FG% 38.9%
3P% 55.6%
PPP 0.19
PTS 21
D. DeRozan 103.2 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 14.3%
PPP 0.09
PTS 9
J. Collins 83.3 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 12
D. Vassell 78.9 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 7
A. Bailey 73.0 poss
FG% 55.6%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.23
PTS 17
C. Flagg 72.0 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 16
T. da Silva 71.6 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.13
PTS 9
J. Champagnie 67.2 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.15
PTS 10
S. Sharpe 63.0 poss
FG% 71.4%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 11
J. Randle 60.1 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 4

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

How opponents shot when he was the primary defender. Lower FG% = better defense.

C. Johnson 86.2 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.06
PTS 5
J. Randle 73.4 poss
FG% 38.5%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 14
A. Bailey 59.5 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 4
T. Murphy III 59.3 poss
FG% 55.6%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.25
PTS 15
J. Collins 58.6 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 9
D. Brooks 55.2 poss
FG% 46.2%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.25
PTS 14
K. Leonard 53.5 poss
FG% 53.8%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 16
B. Ingram 53.2 poss
FG% 42.9%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 8
M. Smart 50.7 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 4
S. Castle 50.6 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 15

SEASON STATS

78
Games
15.8
PPG
6.9
RPG
1.8
APG
0.7
SPG
0.9
BPG
44.8
FG%
36.2
3P%
77.1
FT%
35.2
MPG

GAME LOG

78 games played