POR

2025-26 Season

SIDY CISSOKO

Portland Trail Blazers | Guard | 6-6
Sidy Cissoko
5.1 PPG
2.2 RPG
1.5 APG
19.1 MPG
-8.2 Impact

Cissoko produces at an poor rate for a 19-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
-8.2
Scoring +3.9
Points 5.1 PPG = +2.8
Shot Making above expected FG% = +1.1
Creation +0.5
Creation 1.5 AST/g = +0.5
Turnovers -2.2
Turnovers 0.9/g = -2.2
Defense -0.3
Defense 0.7 STL, 0.3 BLK = -0.3
Hustle & Effort +2.1
Rebounds 2.2 RPG = +2.1
Raw Impact +4.0
Baseline (game-average expected) −12.2
Net Impact
-8.2
2th 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 13th
5.4 PPG
Efficiency 9th
45.4% TS
Playmaking 24th
1.5 APG
Rebounding 31th
2.4 RPG
Defense 24th
+5.2/g
Hustle 72th
+10.8/g
Creation 42th
+2.52/g
Shot Making 37th
+5.68/g
TO Discipline 62th
0.05/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Sidy Cissoko’s early campaign was defined by a disastrous promotion to the starting lineup that ruthlessly exposed his lack of offensive gravity. He occasionally salvaged his value through sheer grit, like on 11/18 vs PHX. Despite shooting a dismal 2-for-7 from the floor for just 8 points in that contest, elite rotational awareness and constant physical engagement earned him a +2.9 impact score. However, increased minutes quickly magnified his fatal flaws. Even when he managed a massive scoring spike with 11 points on 12/03 vs CLE, he still posted a -0.6 impact score because underlying mistakes completely negated his buckets. Opposing defenses simply stopped guarding him, bogging down the entire half-court system.

Sidy Cissoko's midseason run was defined by maddening inconsistency, oscillating violently between flawless execution and being an outright offensive liability. When his jumper actually fell, the results were spectacular. He erupted for a +12.4 impact score on 01/05 vs UTA, fueled entirely by scorching perimeter shooting and staggering hustle metrics. He followed that with a pristine 4/4 shooting night on 01/09 vs HOU, yielding a massive +13.4 impact because his perfect shot selection kept the offense humming. Yet, those rare peaks were quickly buried beneath a mountain of clunky performances. Look no further than his start on 01/13 vs GSW, where a miserable 1/4 shooting effort completely tanked his overall impact to a brutal -14.9. Ultimately, a mid-stretch promotion to the starting unit only magnified his flaws, revealing a player whose defensive flashes simply cannot hide a deeply broken offensive game.

Extreme volatility defined Sidy Cissoko’s midseason stretch, as the wing oscillated violently between flawless efficiency and complete offensive invisibility. On 01/30 vs NYK, he was spectacular. He paired a perfect 5-for-5 shooting night with suffocating defense to generate a stellar +7.8 impact score off the bench. Yet when handed a starting gig on 02/07 vs MEM, a sudden spike in usage exposed his limitations. Despite grabbing 10 rebounds, his inefficient perimeter chucking completely derailed the offensive flow and dragged his impact down to a -2.8. The bottom completely fell out shortly after on 02/09 vs PHI, where he posted a disastrous -10.1 impact score. He went scoreless on 0-for-4 shooting in that contest, actively hurting the team with poor defensive awareness and creating brutal 4-on-5 spacing issues that doomed his minutes.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Struggling. Cissoko has posted negative impact in 85% of games this season. The production rarely outweighs the cost.

Streaky shooter — only cracks 45% from the field in 37% of games. Efficiency is all over the place night-to-night.

In a rough stretch — 15 straight games with negative impact. Longest cold streak this season: 16 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

I. Collier 44.1 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 7
D. DeRozan 43.8 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
C. Holmgren 32.4 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 6
T. Murphy III 32.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 3
G. Jackson 31.2 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
I. Quickley 30.2 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.17
PTS 5
J. Butler III 28.7 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
D. Green 28.2 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 60.0%
PPP 0.39
PTS 11
C. Flagg 27.8 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
R. Westbrook 27.5 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

C. Wallace 37.6 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.08
PTS 3
A. Thompson 36.9 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.43
PTS 16
J. Butler III 32.8 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.34
PTS 11
R. Westbrook 32.2 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 9
K. Filipowski 32.0 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 5
S. Barnes 31.2 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 3
G. Jackson 31.2 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.29
PTS 9
K. Towns 30.7 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.39
PTS 12
T. Watford 30.4 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2
D. White 29.9 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 5

SEASON STATS

75
Games
5.1
PPG
2.2
RPG
1.5
APG
0.7
SPG
0.3
BPG
39.8
FG%
29.8
3P%
65.9
FT%
19.1
MPG

GAME LOG

75 games played