ATL

2025-26 Season

JOCK LANDALE

Atlanta Hawks | Center | 6-11
Jock Landale
10.6 PPG
5.7 RPG
1.7 APG
22.1 MPG
+2.5 Impact

Landale produces at an above average rate for a 22-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
+2.5
Scoring +9.3
Points 10.6 PPG = +7.1
Shot Making above expected FG% = +2.2
Creation +0.5
Creation 1.7 AST/g = +0.5
Turnovers -2.3
Turnovers 0.9/g = -2.3
Defense -0.8
Defense 0.5 STL, 0.5 BLK = -0.8
Hustle & Effort +6.3
Rebounds 5.7 RPG = +6.3
Raw Impact +13.0
Baseline (game-average expected) −10.5
Net Impact
+2.5
54th pctl vs Centers

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 93 Centers with 10+ games

Scoring 59th
10.6 PPG
Efficiency 49th
59.1% TS
Playmaking 61th
1.7 APG
Rebounding 46th
5.8 RPG
Defense 84th
+8.9/g
Hustle 45th
+16.5/g
Creation 24th
+1.78/g
Shot Making 70th
+6.19/g
TO Discipline 84th
0.04/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Jock Landale’s first 20 games were defined by a stark transition from a struggling starter to a devastating bench weapon. Early on, his starting minutes actively hurt the team, as seen on 10/22 vs NOP. Despite scoring a respectable 10 points, he bled points in the paint while trapped in drop coverage, dragging him down to a disastrous -9.0 impact score. A mid-November demotion to the second unit completely flipped the script. Unleashed against backup bigs on 11/20 vs SAC, Landale erupted for 21 points in just 15 minutes. He posted an astronomical +20.1 impact score in that contest by ruthlessly finishing pick-and-roll rim runs. He followed up that dominance on 11/24 vs DEN with 26 points and 10 rebounds, generating a +9.5 impact by bullying the interior with physical drop-step moves.

Jock Landale’s mid-season stretch was defined by a wild, unpredictable metamorphosis from a gritty bench enforcer into an occasional offensive focal point. On 12/07 vs POR, he generated a massive +13.0 impact not just by scoring 15 points, but by setting bone-crushing screens that consistently freed his guards for downhill attacks. His absolute peak arrived weeks later on 01/18 vs ORL. Operating with ruthless efficiency, Landale shot 9-of-11 from the floor to tally 21 points and a staggering +21.3 impact score. Yet, this newfound offensive ambition sometimes blew up in his face. During his start on 01/07 vs PHX, a brutal 0-for-5 shooting night and an inability to finish through contact dragged him down to a miserable -5.8 impact. When he stuck to punishing smaller defenders and executing simple pick-and-pops, he thrived as a tactical weapon. However, whenever he forced brick-heavy sequences or lagged in defensive coverage, his on-court value evaporated.

A turbulent demotion from the starting lineup to the bench defined this chaotic stretch for Jock Landale. When his jumper was falling, he looked like a dangerous floor-stretching weapon. During 02/05 vs UTA, he caught absolute fire, draining five threes for 26 points and 11 rebounds to generate a massive +19.9 impact score by pulling opposing bigs out of the paint. He replicated that magic off the bench during 02/22 vs BKN, where a perfect 3-for-3 mark from deep fueled a +15.4 impact that completely broke Brooklyn's coverage principles. But when his touch vanished, his minutes became actively harmful. A total inability to convert easy looks during 03/10 vs DAL resulted in a brutal -9.2 impact score, turning his scoreless shift into an offensive black hole. Still, Landale occasionally salvaged quiet nights through sheer effort, like his +3.0 impact on just six points during 02/24 vs WAS, driven entirely by gritty trench work and an elite +5.2 hustle score.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. Landale's impact swings wildly relative to his average — some nights dominant, others invisible. Scoring varies by ~6 points per game.

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 59% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

Good defender on his best nights, but it comes and goes. Some games Landale locks in defensively, others he gets picked apart.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 6 games. Longest cold streak: 6 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 66 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

R. Gobert 80.0 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 16
M. Raynaud 66.3 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.24
PTS 16
D. Queen 57.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.36
PTS 21
B. Carlson 53.6 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 60.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 15
J. Duren 52.5 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.06
PTS 3
J. Randle 50.1 poss
FG% 42.9%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 9
D. Ayton 45.8 poss
FG% 87.5%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.41
PTS 19
I. Zubac 43.0 poss
FG% 83.3%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 13
A. Gill 40.1 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 5
S. Bey 39.3 poss
FG% 55.6%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 11

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

R. Gobert 97.7 poss
FG% 71.4%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 20
D. Queen 95.6 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 19
M. Raynaud 67.6 poss
FG% 62.5%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 15
J. Duren 55.3 poss
FG% 62.5%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 10
D. Ayton 54.0 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 4
J. Randle 52.7 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.32
PTS 17
A. Gill 49.7 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 5
B. Carlson 49.1 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 10
I. Zubac 47.4 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 6
D. Gafford 46.4 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 11

SEASON STATS

68
Games
10.6
PPG
5.7
RPG
1.7
APG
0.5
SPG
0.5
BPG
51.5
FG%
38.3
3P%
63.5
FT%
22.1
MPG

GAME LOG

68 games played