DEN

2025-26 Season

JONAS VALANČIŪNAS

Denver Nuggets | Center | 6-11
Jonas Valančiūnas
8.6 PPG
5.0 RPG
1.2 APG
13.3 MPG
-3.0 Impact

Valančiūnas produces at an below average rate for a 13-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
-3.0
Scoring +8.1
Points 8.6 PPG = +6.5
Shot Making above expected FG% = +1.6
Creation +0.5
Creation 1.2 AST/g = +0.5
Turnovers -2.9
Turnovers 1.1/g = -2.9
Defense -1.0
Defense 0.2 STL, 0.6 BLK = -1.0
Hustle & Effort +4.7
Rebounds 5.0 RPG = +4.7
Raw Impact +9.4
Baseline (game-average expected) −12.4
Net Impact
-3.0
23th 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 48th
8.9 PPG
Efficiency 74th
63.8% TS
Playmaking 37th
1.2 APG
Rebounding 37th
5.2 RPG
Defense 11th
+2.9/g
Hustle 73th
+20.6/g
Creation 24th
+1.78/g
Shot Making 49th
+4.41/g
TO Discipline 15th
0.08/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Jonas Valančiūnas spent the first quarter of the 2025-26 season settling into a new reality as a highly specialized, brute-force battering ram off the bench. When his sheer mass translated to the glass, he changed the math of the game without even needing to shoot the basketball. Take his 11/28 vs SAS outing; despite managing just 4 points, he posted a +6.8 impact score because his dominant rebounding secured crucial extra possessions and stabilized the defense. However, when opposing guards dragged him into space, his heavy feet became an undeniable liability. During his 10/29 vs NOP appearance, he tallied a highly efficient 10 points through low-post bully ball, but still bled value with a -4.2 impact score due to a disastrous -8.7 defensive mark. He is still capable of completely overwhelming backup bigs when handed the right matchup. On 11/07 vs GSW, he bullied his way to deep post position to drop 16 points in just 16 minutes, racking up a massive +16.4 impact score. He is no longer an every-night anchor, but as a situational wrecking ball, his heavy screens and interior physicality remain a potent weapon.

This stretch of the season was defined by a volatile tug-of-war between Valančiūnas's bruising interior dominance and his glaring lack of defensive mobility. You can see this tension perfectly in the 01/27 vs DET matchup. He racked up 16 points and 16 rebounds but still suffered a -2.4 impact. Despite that gaudy box score, his heavy feet in space yielded an abysmal -8.8 defensive score that actively bled points on the other end of the floor. Conversely, his micro-stint on 01/25 vs MEM yielded just 4 points in 6 minutes, yet he managed a robust +6.8 impact. He simply used his massive frame to wall off the paint, generating a +4.5 defensive score without needing offensive touches to create value. When the matchup actually suited his plodding style, he could still take over. Stepping into the starting lineup on 12/31 vs TOR, he bullied his way to 17 points and 9 rebounds, anchoring a massive +20.6 impact through flawless execution around the rim.

This stretch defined Valančiūnas's volatile transition into a pure, matchup-dependent situational bruiser. His massive frame remains a potent offensive weapon, but his heavy feet create wild swings in his actual on-court value. Take his 12/15 vs HOU appearance as a prime example of his hidden costs. He scored an efficient 8 points on 4-of-5 shooting, but glaring defensive liabilities in space completely ruined the shift and dragged him down to a disastrous -7.5 impact score. Contrast that defensive bleeding with his gritty 03/05 vs LAL outing. He tallied a +0.8 impact score despite scoring just 4 points on zero field goal attempts, creating vital non-scoring value simply by drawing fouls and securing extra possessions. When deployed against the right personnel, however, his bully-ball tactics still work wonders. He brutally punished smaller defenders on 02/25 vs BOS, racking up 11 points and a stellar +6.2 impact score on 5-of-7 shooting.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Inconsistent. Valančiūnas has clear good-night/bad-night splits, with scoring swinging ~5 points between games. You're never quite sure which version shows up.

Reliable shooter — hits 45%+ from the field in 80% of games. You can count on efficient nights more often than not.

Average defender. Valančiūnas doesn't hurt you defensively, but he's not making opponents uncomfortable either.

Slight upward trend. First-half impact: -3.8, second-half: -2.2. Modest improvement — possibly settling into a rhythm.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 4 games. Longest cold streak: 7 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 63 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 53.6 poss
FG% 12.5%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 5
J. Duren 48.0 poss
FG% 71.4%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.23
PTS 11
M. Raynaud 39.8 poss
FG% 87.5%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.35
PTS 14
A. Sarr 35.7 poss
FG% 44.4%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 8
I. Stewart 31.8 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 9
S. Adams 31.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.25
PTS 8
J. Williams 31.6 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.35
PTS 11
B. Lopez 28.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.21
PTS 6
D. Eubanks 27.6 poss
FG% 37.5%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 6
K. Ware 26.8 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 8

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

R. Gobert 53.2 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 4
S. Adams 43.9 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 3
M. Raynaud 34.3 poss
FG% 55.6%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.32
PTS 11
I. Stewart 30.4 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 6
J. Duren 30.3 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 8
A. Sarr 29.1 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.21
PTS 6
D. Sabonis 25.1 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 2
D. Eubanks 24.8 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 6
B. Lopez 24.1 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
J. Nurkić 23.8 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.46
PTS 11

SEASON STATS

66
Games
8.6
PPG
5.0
RPG
1.2
APG
0.2
SPG
0.6
BPG
58.2
FG%
30.8
3P%
77.2
FT%
13.3
MPG

GAME LOG

66 games played