ORL

2025-26 Season

NOAH PENDA

Orlando Magic | Guard-Forward | 6-7
Noah Penda
3.9 PPG
3.1 RPG
1.2 APG
12.7 MPG
-6.1 Impact

Penda produces at an poor 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
-6.1
Scoring +3.2
Points 3.9 PPG = +2.3
Shot Making above expected FG% = +0.9
Creation +0.3
Creation 1.2 AST/g = +0.3
Turnovers -1.6
Turnovers 0.7/g = -1.6
Hustle & Effort +3.2
Rebounds 3.1 RPG = +3.2
Raw Impact +5.1
Baseline (game-average expected) −11.2
Net Impact
-6.1
13th pctl vs Guards

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 245 Guards with 10+ games

Scoring 9th
4.5 PPG
Efficiency 17th
48.0% TS
Playmaking 17th
1.3 APG
Rebounding 66th
3.6 RPG
Defense 77th
+9.7/g
Hustle 89th
+14.3/g
Creation 27th
+1.94/g
Shot Making 10th
+3.78/g
TO Discipline 55th
0.05/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Noah Penda's opening twenty games were defined by wild swings between game-wrecking defensive energy and crippling offensive ineptitude. On 11/01 vs WAS, he logged just 3 points in seven minutes but generated a massive +7.5 impact score by operating as a highly disruptive defensive presence. When given extended run, his relentless motor occasionally overwhelmed opponents, peaking on 12/20 vs UTA where he ripped down 12 rebounds and posted a staggering +21.0 impact mark. That massive rating stemmed directly from his elite help-side coverage and glass-cleaning, creating immense value without demanding a heavy offensive diet. However, his limitations became glaringly obvious whenever he tried to force the issue offensively. During the 12/23 vs POR matchup, he tallied 8 points and 6 rebounds but suffered a brutal -12.7 impact score. Poor shot selection and a barrage of bricked attempts—going 3-for-10 from the floor—severely punished his overall rating and actively stalled the offense. Until he learns to simply execute his role and stop forcing bad looks, his rotation minutes will remain a chaotic roll of the dice.

Noah Penda’s midseason stretch was defined by maddening inconsistency, oscillating wildly between brilliant bursts of energy and completely unplayable stints. Against CHA on 01/22, he looked like a legitimate rotation weapon. He posted a staggering +9.1 impact score on the back of flawless offensive execution and a highly efficient 13 points. Yet, when given a starting nod and 38 minutes against NOP on 01/11, his overall value plummeted to a brutal -9.1 impact rating. Even though he scored nine points in that contest, poor shot quality and careless offensive fouls actively dragged down his team. Conversely, Penda found ways to salvage his minutes even when his jumper completely abandoned him. During a scoreless six-minute run against PHX on 02/21, he still scratched out a +1.7 impact by relying entirely on high-energy hustle plays to keep possessions alive. To survive in this league, he must realize his worth lies in relentless grit rather than forced half-court creation.

Noah Penda’s late-season stretch was defined by a rapid descent to the end of the bench, driven by an offensive invisibility that made him a severe liability. He occasionally salvaged his minutes through sheer grit. On Mar 07 vs MIN, he scored zero points but still posted a +2.5 impact score because his excellent defensive positioning and solid rebounding kept the second unit afloat. Yet, even when he actually found the bottom of the net, hidden costs often dragged down his overall value. A prime example came on Mar 19 vs CHA, where erratic shot selection yielded a -3.4 impact despite a relative scoring surge of eight points. More often than not, his absolute refusal to threaten the rim allowed opponents to relentlessly pack the paint. During a brutal outing on Mar 12 vs WAS, this complete lack of spacing resulted in a dismal -6.6 impact score. He simply cannot survive in a modern NBA rotation as a pure zero on offense.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Struggling. Penda has posted negative impact in 83% of games this season. The production rarely outweighs the cost.

Streaky shooter — only cracks 45% from the field in 38% of games. Efficiency is all over the place night-to-night.

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

Performance has dropped off. First-half impact: -4.4, second-half: -7.9. Worth watching whether it's fatigue, injury, or opponents adjusting.

In a rough stretch — 16 straight games with negative impact. Longest cold streak this season: 16 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 73 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

T. Murphy III 30.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 3
T. Maxey 29.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2
M. Porter Jr. 26.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 2
D. Mitchell 24.2 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
C. Thomas 23.2 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 5
L. Ball 22.4 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 2
T. Salaün 20.8 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.38
PTS 8
K. Knueppel 19.7 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
B. Portis 18.9 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.11
PTS 2
J. Jackson Jr. 18.6 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 4

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

T. Murphy III 42.2 poss
FG% 83.3%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 12
M. Porter Jr. 31.9 poss
FG% 22.2%
3P% 28.6%
PPP 0.19
PTS 6
C. Thomas 28.2 poss
FG% 37.5%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.32
PTS 9
P. George 24.6 poss
FG% 20.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 2
D. Avdija 24.2 poss
FG% 55.6%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.45
PTS 11
C. McCollum 22.9 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 3
J. Champagnie 22.1 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.27
PTS 6
E. Mobley 21.9 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.41
PTS 9
L. Ball 21.2 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 5
D. Barlow 19.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.36
PTS 7

SEASON STATS

60
Games
3.9
PPG
3.1
RPG
1.2
APG
0.5
SPG
0.3
BPG
41.0
FG%
32.3
3P%
68.8
FT%
12.7
MPG

GAME LOG

60 games played