MIN

2025-26 Season

JULIAN PHILLIPS

Minnesota Timberwolves | Forward | 6-6
Julian Phillips
2.9 PPG
1.0 RPG
0.2 APG
8.9 MPG
-6.8 Impact

Phillips produces at an poor rate for a 9-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
-6.8
Scoring +2.4
Points 2.9 PPG = +1.8
Shot Making above expected FG% = +0.6
Creation +0.2
Creation 0.2 AST/g = +0.2
Turnovers -0.5
Turnovers 0.2/g = -0.5
Defense +0.2
Defense 0.5 STL, 0.1 BLK = +0.2
Hustle & Effort +1.0
Rebounds 1.0 RPG = +1.0
Raw Impact +3.3
Baseline (game-average expected) −10.1
Net Impact
-6.8
5th 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 10th
4.3 PPG
Efficiency 10th
48.3% TS
Playmaking 0th
0.3 APG
Rebounding 2th
1.5 RPG
Defense 35th
+6.4/g
Hustle 2th
+3.8/g
Creation 12th
+1.38/g
Shot Making 12th
+2.74/g
TO Discipline 95th
0.02/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Julian Phillips spent the first twenty games of the 2025-26 season oscillating wildly between defensive sparkplug and offensive black hole. His on-court value rarely tied to his scoring column. On 11/17 vs DEN, he tallied just 2 points but posted a massive +4.6 impact score because his smothering point-of-attack defense completely salvaged a rough shooting night. Yet, whenever he was asked to shoulder any real offensive burden, the results were disastrous. Look no further than 11/21 vs MIA, where a dreadful 1-for-5 shooting performance squandered all his energetic hustle, resulting in a brutal -5.4 impact score. Even when he managed a modest 5 points in a starting role on 12/03 vs BKN, inefficient finishing around the basket stalled out possessions and dragged him down to a -4.3 impact. Phillips clearly possesses the raw defensive chops to survive in this league. However, his aimless offensive wandering remains a glaring liability that keeps him on the fringes of the rotation.

Julian Phillips spent this mid-season stretch clinging to the fringes of the rotation, surviving purely as a chaotic, high-energy defensive specialist. His value rarely appeared in the scoring column, but his smothering perimeter defense on 01/03 vs CHA generated an impressive +3.1 impact score despite logging just three points. Extended minutes, however, exposed his offensive limitations. When given a 23-minute leash on 02/01 vs MIA, Phillips scored a stretch-high 10 points but managed a meager +0.2 impact. A brutal 3-for-11 shooting night severely dragged down his overall effectiveness, though he salvaged a neutral rating by relentlessly crashing the offensive glass for second-chance opportunities. The margin for error at the end of the bench is razor-thin. A disastrous three-minute appearance on 01/18 vs BKN perfectly illustrated this volatility, resulting in a -2.0 impact driven entirely by immediate defensive breakdowns and poorly timed fouls.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Struggling. Phillips has posted negative impact in 94% of games this season. The production rarely outweighs the cost.

Streaky shooter — only cracks 45% from the field in 33% of games. Efficiency is all over the place night-to-night.

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

Slight upward trend. First-half impact: -7.6, second-half: -6.0. Modest improvement — possibly settling into a rhythm.

In a rough stretch — 13 straight games with negative impact. Longest cold streak this season: 24 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 71 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

K. Johnson 24.7 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
S. Fontecchio 22.2 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 2
D. Bane 19.8 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 4
T. da Silva 19.8 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 3
G. Mathews 19.7 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
M. Porter Jr. 18.7 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
M. Gardner 16.0 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 2
T. Martin 13.0 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.38
PTS 5
J. Jaquez Jr. 10.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 3
D. Smith 10.7 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 3

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

K. Johnson 26.2 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 4
T. da Silva 26.0 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
T. Martin 21.3 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
B. Mathurin 15.6 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
M. Gardner 13.8 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
J. Green 13.6 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.37
PTS 5
J. Jaquez Jr. 12.4 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.32
PTS 4
K. Jakučionis 12.3 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 3
P. Larsson 11.4 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.35
PTS 4
B. Adebayo 10.4 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.58
PTS 6

SEASON STATS

48
Games
2.9
PPG
1.0
RPG
0.2
APG
0.5
SPG
0.1
BPG
42.1
FG%
30.8
3P%
78.3
FT%
8.9
MPG

GAME LOG

48 games played