DET

2025-26 Season

TOBIAS HARRIS

Detroit Pistons | Forward | 6-8
Tobias Harris
13.3 PPG
5.1 RPG
2.5 APG
27.7 MPG
+5.4 Impact

Harris produces at an elite rate for a 28-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
+5.4
Scoring +11.9
Points 13.3 PPG = +9.0
Shot Making above expected FG% = +2.9
Creation +0.9
Creation 2.5 AST/g = +0.9
Turnovers -2.4
Turnovers 1.0/g = -2.4
Defense +0.4
Defense 0.9 STL, 0.4 BLK = +0.4
Hustle & Effort +3.7
Rebounds 5.1 RPG = +3.7
Raw Impact +14.5
Baseline (game-average expected) −9.1
Net Impact
+5.4
76th 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 70th
13.3 PPG
Efficiency 59th
57.9% TS
Playmaking 73th
2.5 APG
Rebounding 66th
5.1 RPG
Defense 98th
+13.9/g
Hustle 48th
+11.7/g
Creation 57th
+2.55/g
Shot Making 68th
+7.06/g
TO Discipline 77th
0.04/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Tobias Harris spent the first twenty games of the season riding a maddening seesaw of offensive execution, alternating between surgical mismatch hunting and disastrous shot selection. His worst habits surfaced on 11/01 vs DAL. During that brutal outing, a steady diet of contested jumpers resulted in an abysmal -16.2 impact score. Yet, when he actively eliminated those forced looks, his value skyrocketed. Look no further than the 11/22 vs MIL contest, where Harris posted a massive +7.3 impact score by leaning into hyper-efficient shot selection to score 18 points on just nine field goal attempts. Scoring totals rarely dictated his actual worth. He even managed to stay in the green on 10/22 vs CHI with a +1.4 impact despite scoring only 10 points on clunky 4-of-12 shooting. His relentless defensive effort (+24.6 def) salvaged that performance, anchoring the lineup when his jumper completely abandoned him.

A maddening pendulum swing of offensive engagement and shot selection defined this mid-season stretch for Tobias Harris. When he actively hunted mismatches, the veteran forward was highly effective, as seen on 01/27 vs DEN when he attacked the interior for 22 points and a stellar +14.1 impact score. Yet, just a week later on 02/03 vs DEN, he completely abandoned that aggressive blueprint. Despite reaching double figures with 11 points in that rematch, a brutal combination of bricked mid-range jumpers and staggering defensive apathy tanked his value to a horrific -16.4 impact. He frequently settled for heavily contested perimeter looks during this span, neutralizing his own offensive rhythm. Fortunately, Harris eventually found ways to contribute when his jumper failed him late in the stretch. During a clunky 11-point shooting night on 02/27 vs CLE, he still posted a +8.0 impact score by transforming into a defensive menace and piling up hustle plays to salvage his on-court value.

This twenty-game stretch was defined by maddening inconsistency, with Tobias Harris oscillating wildly between a highly engaged two-way anchor and a passive offensive bystander. He perfectly illustrated his hidden value during the Feb 27 vs CLE matchup. Despite a clunky 11-point performance on 5-of-13 shooting, he generated a robust +8.4 impact by transforming into an absolute menace on the defensive end. His massive +17.6 defensive impact score that night salvaged his overall rating, revealing how much he influences winning when fully committed to getting stops. Conversely, empty calories plagued him during the Mar 25 vs ATL contest. He poured in 22 points, but his overall impact was dragged down to a meager +1.8 because slow perimeter closeouts constantly bled value. When his jumper completely abandoned him and he refused to adapt, the results were brutal. During the Mar 10 vs BKN game, he forced terrible isolation attempts against set defenses, resulting in just 2 points and a catastrophic -10.7 impact score.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Volatile for his role. Harris has noticeable ups and downs, with scoring moving ~6 points between games.

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 52% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

Defensive difference-maker. Harris consistently forces tough shots and protects the rim — opponents shoot worse when he's guarding them.

Hot right now — 4 straight games with positive impact. Longest positive run this season: 6 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 59 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

J. Johnson 113.1 poss
FG% 40.7%
3P% 42.9%
PPP 0.24
PTS 27
B. Ingram 80.5 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 7
J. Brown 76.9 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 28.6%
PPP 0.16
PTS 12
D. White 62.6 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.27
PTS 17
K. Durant 49.5 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 5
D. DeRozan 48.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.29
PTS 14
P. Banchero 41.9 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 4
J. Champagnie 41.3 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
D. Avdija 40.3 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 7
J. Hart 39.6 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.25
PTS 10

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

J. Brown 132.8 poss
FG% 29.7%
3P% 12.5%
PPP 0.23
PTS 31
B. Ingram 73.0 poss
FG% 53.3%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 19
E. Mobley 70.2 poss
FG% 64.3%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.34
PTS 24
J. Johnson 60.9 poss
FG% 41.2%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.33
PTS 20
P. Banchero 60.7 poss
FG% 22.2%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 6
M. Bridges 55.3 poss
FG% 22.2%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 5
N. Clowney 46.2 poss
FG% 20.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 7
S. Bey 45.3 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 12
D. Brooks 42.5 poss
FG% 41.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 12
M. Turner 42.4 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 7

SEASON STATS

63
Games
13.3
PPG
5.1
RPG
2.5
APG
0.9
SPG
0.4
BPG
46.9
FG%
36.8
3P%
86.6
FT%
27.7
MPG

GAME LOG

63 games played