Dallas Mavericks

Western Conference

Dallas
Mavericks

26-56
W1

ROSTER — IMPACT RANKINGS

Anthony Davis
Forward-Center Yr 13 20G (20S)
+16.1
20.4 pts
11.1 reb
2.8 ast
31.3 min

Extreme volatility defined Anthony Davis during this six-game stretch, as he swung wildly from unstoppable offensive force to sudden spectator. He opened the run on 12/24 vs DEN by pouring in 31 points on highly efficient 12-of-19 shooting. That masterful shot selection yielded a massive +31.3 Impact score. Just a day later on 12/25 vs GSW, he vanished. Logging a mere 11 minutes and three points, he posted a -6.6 Impact score because he failed to establish any rhythm during his brief stint. The veteran big man eventually found ways to influence winning even when his touch completely abandoned him. On 01/07 vs SAC, Davis suffered a brutal 7-of-23 shooting night but still salvaged a +10.2 Impact score. He earned that positive mark by hoarding 16 rebounds, generating immense value through sheer hustle and extra possessions.

Cooper Flagg
Forward Yr 0 70G (70S)
+12.7
21.0 pts
6.7 reb
4.5 ast
33.5 min

This stretch of the season was defined by a spectacular offensive evolution, as Cooper Flagg transformed from an erratic volume shooter into a genuine superstar scorer. During the 03/06 vs BOS matchup, a brutal 7-for-23 shooting night yielded a dismal -7.7 Impact score, as forced jumpers and poor shot selection completely negated his eight rebounds. He adapted quickly, though. On 03/21 vs LAC, Flagg scored a modest 18 points on 16 shots but still posted a +12.1 Impact by grinding out 10 rebounds, dishing eight assists, and anchoring the floor with relentless defensive hustle. When his efficiency finally caught up to his ambition in April, the results were terrifying. He completely dismantled the defense on 04/03 vs ORL, dropping 51 points on a blistering 19-of-30 from the field. That masterpiece earned a staggering +57.5 Impact score because he paired pristine shot selection—including hitting 6-of-9 from deep—with constant off-ball hustle to break the game wide open.

Naji Marshall
Forward Yr 5 74G (47S)
+5.7
15.2 pts
4.7 reb
3.3 ast
29.5 min

Naji Marshall’s late-season stretch was defined by extreme, almost chaotic volatility as a scorer. When his jumper was falling, he looked like a legitimate offensive engine. He erupted for 36 points, 10 rebounds, and 6 assists on 02/26 vs SAC, using elite shot-making to generate a massive +25.4 Impact score. Yet, his aggressive mentality sometimes backfired even when the box score looked decent. Take the 03/23 vs GSW matchup, where he put up 16 points, 6 rebounds, and 7 assists but posted a -3.7 Impact because costly turnovers and hidden defensive breakdowns outweighed his raw production. Conversely, Marshall found ways to salvage his value when the offense completely dried up. During the 04/03 vs ORL game, he shot a miserable 3/12 from the floor for just 9 points, but he still managed a +0.8 Impact by relentlessly fighting for loose balls and generating crucial extra possessions with his hustle. You never quite knew which version of Marshall was going to show up, but his chaotic energy made him a fascinating rotation piece.

P.J. Washington
Forward Yr 6 57G (54S)
+4.6
14.0 pts
7.0 reb
1.8 ast
31.1 min

P.J. Washington spent the late winter transforming from a mere floor-spacer into a chaotic, bruising force on the glass. During the 02/20 vs MIN matchup, he clanked his way to a brutal 5-for-17 shooting night for just 12 points. Despite those offensive struggles, he still managed a massive +11.1 impact score because he relentlessly crashed the boards for 12 rebounds and generated vital extra possessions through pure hustle. When his jumper actually fell, he was downright devastating. He completely dismantled the opposition on 03/15 vs CLE, racking up 20 points and 11 rebounds while hitting 3-of-4 from deep to post a staggering +31.0 impact. Conversely, his overall value plummeted whenever he abandoned his playmaking duties to hunt his own shot. Look at the 04/05 vs LAL game, where he scored an efficient 15 points on 6-of-10 shooting but still registered a -1.0 impact because he recorded zero assists and dragged down the offense with empty-calorie tunnel vision.

Marvin Bagley III
Forward Yr 7 22G (4S)
+3.0
11.0 pts
6.8 reb
1.3 ast
21.4 min

Marvin Bagley III's late-season stretch was defined by maddening volatility, oscillating wildly between hyper-efficient bench scoring binges and completely invisible spot starts. When engaged as a reserve, he was a wrecking ball. During the 03/28 vs POR matchup, he erupted for 26 points and 9 rebounds on blistering 11-for-14 shooting, generating a massive +26.2 Impact score through flawless shot selection and sheer offensive force. He flashed similar value on 02/20 vs MIN, logging a +17.0 Impact score by bullying his way to 13 boards and generating crucial second-chance opportunities in the paint. Yet, thrust into the starting lineup on 02/26 vs SAC, Bagley managed a respectable 10 points and 9 rebounds but still posted a -4.3 Impact score. That negative mark stemmed from the hidden costs of his floor time, as defensive lapses and poor rotational awareness dragged down his overall effectiveness despite the decent counting stats. As an energetic backup, he remains a potent weapon, but heavier starting responsibilities quickly expose his glaring fundamental limitations.

Daniel Gafford
Forward-Center Yr 6 56G (45S)
+2.1
9.5 pts
6.8 reb
1.0 ast
21.5 min

Daniel Gafford's mid-season stretch was defined by a dramatic awakening from a sluggish passenger into a hyper-efficient interior monster. He began February looking completely lost, stumbling to an abysmal -11.5 Impact during the 02/10 vs PHX matchup while managing just four points. Something finally clicked a few weeks later. He went on an absolute tear of flawless finishing, highlighted by the 03/08 vs TOR demolition. Gafford posted a staggering +28.1 Impact in that game by converting a perfect 10-of-10 from the floor for 21 points and grabbing 11 boards, punishing Toronto with elite shot selection and overwhelming physical force. Even when his touch abandoned him, he learned how to tilt the game in his team's favor. During the 03/21 vs LAC contest, he scored a meager seven points on poor 3-of-8 shooting but still managed a +1.7 Impact because he relentlessly attacked the glass for 13 rebounds to keep offensive possessions alive.

Max Christie
Guard Yr 3 77G (68S)
+0.1
12.3 pts
3.2 reb
2.0 ast
29.1 min

This 25-game starting stint was defined by maddening inconsistency, oscillating between gritty two-way flashes and crippling offensive black holes. Christie occasionally salvaged his awful shooting nights through sheer effort. Look at 03/03 vs CHA, where he bricked his way to a 4-for-15 shooting line but still managed a +1.4 Impact score by grinding out five rebounds and playing suffocating perimeter defense. That high-motor grace period completely vanished during an abysmal 03/08 vs TOR matchup, however. He forced terrible looks all night, finishing with just two points on a disastrous 1-of-11 shooting performance to suffer a brutal -16.9 Impact score. Even when his jumper caught fire, hidden costs often ruined his overall value on the floor. During his 03/18 vs ATL appearance, an efficient 13 points on 4-of-6 shooting was entirely undone by defensive lapses and a total lack of playmaking, dragging him down to a -13.6 Impact score.

Brandon Williams
Guard Yr 3 66G (15S)
0.0
13.0 pts
2.9 reb
3.9 ast
22.2 min

Brandon Williams spent this stretch oscillating wildly between electric sparkplug and frustrating liability, struggling to find a consistent rhythm as he bounced between the starting lineup and the bench. His performance on 02/24 vs BKN perfectly captured this maddening duality. Despite pouring in 19 points and dishing 10 assists on a blistering 9-of-11 from the floor, he somehow finished with a -0.8 Impact score, a glaring indicator that his offensive creation was entirely negated by defensive lapses and hidden costs on the other end. Conversely, he found ways to tilt the floor without dominating the scoring column on 03/12 vs MEM. He managed only 12 points, but his +5.1 Impact score was earned in the trenches through aggressive rebounding—grabbing eight boards—and steadying the second unit with five assists. When he fully locked in, as he did on 04/03 vs ORL, his aggressive downhill attacking yielded 23 points and a massive +11.9 Impact score. He clearly has the raw offensive talent to swing games, but surviving in this league requires eliminating the empty-calorie outings.

Klay Thompson
Guard Yr 14 69G (8S)
-2.0
11.7 pts
2.1 reb
1.4 ast
21.7 min

This late-season stretch defined Klay Thompson's new reality as a wildly volatile bench gunner who lives and dies strictly by the three-point line. When his jumper was dialed in, he could still swing a game entirely. He erupted for 24 points on seven made triples during the 03/05 vs ORL matchup, posting a massive +13.7 Impact because his elite floor spacing broke the defense open. Yet, relying solely on his jumper meant his overall value completely vanished when he stopped doing the dirty work. Take the 03/21 vs LAC contest, where he hit all four of his three-point attempts for 12 points but still dragged the team down with a -4.5 Impact because he grabbed zero rebounds and offered absolutely nothing outside of spot-up shooting. The lows were even more punishing when his shot selection went completely sour. During the 04/07 vs LAC game, he stubbornly hoisted 17 shots to score just 11 points, bricking nine of his ten three-point attempts to finish with a dismal -6.2 Impact as his forced looks killed offensive momentum. He is no longer a two-way anchor, making his minutes a nightly gamble on his historically great wrist.

John Poulakidas
Guard Yr 0 13G
-2.3
8.8 pts
2.3 reb
0.8 ast
19.5 min
Moussa Cisse
Center Yr 0 38G (1S)
-2.4
4.5 pts
5.7 reb
0.2 ast
13.9 min

Moussa Cisse’s mid-season stretch was defined by extreme volatility, oscillating between an offensive black hole and a dominant rebounding specialist. During a brutal mid-winter slump, his lack of scoring gravity severely hurt his team. This bottomed out on 02/05 vs SAS, where he grabbed 5 rebounds in 12 minutes but generated zero points, resulting in a disastrous -15.0 impact score as his offensive limitations completely stalled the second unit. He eventually figured out how to tilt the floor without shooting the basketball. On 03/06 vs BOS, Cisse managed just 6 points but posted a +7.2 impact score by anchoring the interior defense and securing crucial extra possessions. That gritty utility work culminated in an absolute monster performance off the bench on 04/12 vs CHI. Logging an exhausting 41 minutes, Cisse destroyed the interior with 17 points and 20 rebounds, earning a massive +18.6 impact score through sheer physical dominance on the glass.

D'Angelo Russell
Guard Yr 10 26G (3S)
-4.1
10.2 pts
2.3 reb
4.0 ast
19.0 min

This eight-game stretch marked D'Angelo Russell's rapid marginalization into a low-impact reserve. During the 12/07 vs HOU matchup, his offensive passivity resulted in a brutal -13.5 Impact score as he managed just four points and two assists. He was somehow even less engaged weeks later on 12/21 vs PHI. By failing to score a single point and attempting just one shot in 11 minutes, his lack of offensive aggression dragged the second unit down to a dismal -9.6 Impact score. His lone positive contribution arrived early on 12/04 vs MIA, where crisp shot selection earned him a +2.4 Impact score. However, scoring alone could not save him. Even when his shot was falling on 12/06 vs OKC with 12 points, his Impact dipped to -0.4 because his scoring was entirely offset by hidden costs like a lack of defensive effort and zero hustle plays. When a guard is reduced to floating around the perimeter without creating for others, his on-court value simply vanishes.

Khris Middleton
Forward Yr 13 29G (16S)
-4.5
10.0 pts
3.3 reb
2.2 ast
21.1 min

This brutal late-season stretch was defined by a jarring demotion to the bench as Khris Middleton's offensive consistency completely evaporated. He opened March looking entirely lost in the starting lineup, posting a miserable -11.4 Impact score on 03/01 vs OKC due to poor shot selection that yielded just four points on an abysmal 2-of-10 from the floor. The coaching staff mercifully pulled him from the first unit shortly after, which briefly unlocked a bizarre, fleeting anomaly. Catching absolute fire on 03/12 vs MEM, Middleton poured in 35 points on 8-of-10 shooting from beyond the arc, generating a massive +34.8 Impact score purely through sheer, unadulterated shot-making efficiency. That explosive outburst was a complete mirage. He quickly reverted to being a heavy negative on the floor, bottoming out on 04/03 vs ORL with a staggering -21.3 Impact score. During that scoreless 12-minute disaster, his forced jumpers and total lack of defensive effort actively bled points for his team. Aside from one random night of vintage marksmanship, this was a grim stretch for a declining veteran struggling to find his footing.

Tyler Smith
Forward Yr 1 12G
-4.6
4.7 pts
2.8 reb
0.4 ast
13.8 min
Dereck Lively II
Center Yr 2 8G (4S)
-4.7
4.0 pts
5.1 reb
1.6 ast
17.4 min
Jeremiah Robinson-Earl
Forward Yr 4 5G
-4.7
4.4 pts
3.0 reb
0.6 ast
12.2 min

This seven-game stretch was defined by erratic playing time and brutal offensive inefficiency, interrupted by a lone flash of competence. Robinson-Earl actually looked like a viable frontcourt piece on 01/16 vs UTA, posting a +5.7 impact score by efficiently knocking down his looks (5-of-8 shooting) and working the glass for seven rebounds. Unfortunately, that performance was a massive outlier. When his jumper abandons him, his lack of playmaking turns him into a glaring liability. Take his 12/02 vs CLE appearance, where a clunky 1-of-5 shooting night and zero assists dragged his impact down to a rough -8.6. By the end of this run, his minutes had completely evaporated. During a fleeting three-minute shift on 01/25 vs LAL, he grabbed just a single rebound and generated a disastrous -12.4 impact score, revealing the severe hidden costs of occupying space without offering any real defensive resistance or offensive threat.

Dwight Powell
Forward-Center Yr 11 64G (12S)
-6.3
3.3 pts
4.0 reb
1.1 ast
14.2 min

Dwight Powell’s late-season stretch was defined by extreme offensive passivity punctuated by random bursts of rebounding dominance. When fully engaged, he could still swing a contest purely through interior hustle. He logged a massive +15.6 Impact score during the 03/13 vs CLE matchup by hauling in 11 rebounds and missing just one of his five shot attempts. He even found ways to generate value without looking at the rim. On 03/30 vs MIN, Powell posted a +9.5 Impact despite attempting zero field goals, relying entirely on drawing fouls for his nine points and using relentless board work to create non-scoring equity. Yet that same reluctance to shoot frequently crippled his unit's spacing. During a brutal 24-minute stint on 04/03 vs ORL, Powell refused to take a single shot and tallied zero points, dragging his Impact down to -10.1 because his total offensive invisibility allowed defenders to freely roam the paint.

Ryan Nembhard
Guard Yr 0 60G (27S)
-7.1
6.6 pts
2.2 reb
5.3 ast
19.5 min

Ryan Nembhard’s bumpy transition from the end of the bench to the starting rotation was defined by severe growing pains and erratic shot selection. When given heavy minutes on 03/16 vs NOP, he posted a disastrous -16.0 Impact score. He forced bad looks all night, bricking seven of his eight field goal attempts while his modest five assists failed to offset the offensive bleeding. Even when he found his scoring touch on 04/10 vs SAS with 13 points and seven assists, his -6.4 Impact score revealed the hidden costs of his inefficiency. He needed 13 shot attempts to get those points, stalling the offensive flow and dragging down his overall value on the floor. However, the guard finally put the puzzle pieces together on 04/12 vs CHI. Racking up 15 points, nine rebounds, and an absurd 23 assists, Nembhard earned a +3.8 Impact score by abandoning the selfish chucking to masterfully orchestrate the offense.

Jaden Hardy
Guard Yr 3 35G (4S)
-7.2
6.7 pts
1.3 reb
0.8 ast
12.3 min

Jaden Hardy’s late-season stretch was defined by empty-calorie scoring and maddening inconsistency as a one-dimensional bench gunner. When his jumper caught fire, he looked like a legitimate spark plug, erupting for 25 points on 03/22 vs NYK to generate a +7.3 Impact score. But that same trigger-happy approach frequently sabotaged his team. Just three days later on 03/25 vs UTA, he poured in 21 points but dragged the lineup down with a dismal -9.3 Impact score. That negative rating stemmed directly from his extreme tunnel vision and selfish shot selection, as he hoisted 18 attempts without recording a single assist. His floor completely collapsed when he wasn't actively hunting baskets. During a bizarre stint on 03/16 vs GSW, Hardy logged 12 cardio-filled minutes without attempting a single field goal or grabbing a rebound, resulting in a catastrophic -18.8 Impact score due to his total lack of off-ball engagement and defensive apathy.

AJ Johnson
Guard Yr 1 23G
-7.4
3.9 pts
1.0 reb
1.1 ast
10.4 min

A catastrophic shooting slump defined AJ Johnson's late-season stretch, relegating him to the deep end of the bench as a severe offensive liability. He opened this bleak run on 02/27 vs MEM by forcing up terrible looks, bricking his way to a 3-for-13 shooting night and a -6.9 Impact score. His minutes quickly evaporated. The shot selection completely bottomed out on 04/08 vs PHX, where an abysmal 1-for-11 shooting performance yielded a -8.7 Impact score. Even when the ball finally went through the hoop on 04/12 vs CHI, the underlying metrics painted an ugly picture. Despite pouring in a stretch-high 20 points, Johnson registered a brutal -10.5 Impact score. Those empty-calorie buckets came with massive hidden costs, as poor defensive rotations and a stubborn 0-for-3 night from beyond the arc actively hurt the team while he was on the floor.

Caleb Martin
Forward Yr 6 58G (12S)
-7.7
3.9 pts
2.5 reb
1.4 ast
14.8 min

This midseason stretch was defined by a brutal loss of rhythm as Martin bounced erratically between the starting lineup and the bench. He found a rare offensive spark on 03/01 vs OKC. Pouring in 18 points on crisp 6-for-11 shooting, he generated a stellar +9.6 impact score by knocking down three triples. Unfortunately, his minutes routinely devolved into empty cardio. Look no further than 03/03 vs CHA. Despite a decent 9-point scoring night, his complete lack of playmaking and singular rebound dragged his impact down to an abysmal -10.7. He eventually hit rock bottom on 03/08 vs TOR, putting up zero points and generating zero assists to post a catastrophic -12.4 impact. When his outside shot abandons him, his failure to consistently create for others makes him a glaring on-court liability.

Miles Kelly
Guard Yr 0 14G
-7.9
3.1 pts
1.7 reb
0.9 ast
9.6 min
Tyus Jones
Guard Yr 10 8G (2S)
-9.2
3.9 pts
1.1 reb
3.8 ast
16.6 min

Tyus Jones spent this late-season stretch tumbling into irrelevance. He battled a brutal slump that banished him to the deep bench. Just look at his outing on 03/05 vs LAL, where he posted a dreadful -15.6 impact score while failing to score or register a single assist in six ghost-like minutes. His abysmal metrics throughout this period stemmed from extreme passivity, rushed shot selection, and a total inability to organize the offense. He found a rare spark when thrust into the starting lineup on 02/20 vs MIN, logging 13 points and six assists to scrape together a +0.3 impact score. During an April start on 04/10 vs OKC, Jones hit all three of his attempts from deep to finish with nine points, but still posted a miserable -7.9 impact. That negative mark reveals the hidden costs of his floor time: opposing guards relentlessly hunted his lack of size on defense, entirely erasing the value of his perimeter shooting.

W
vs CHI CHI
128 CHI DAL 149
CHI vs CHI
149 128
Sun, Apr 12
Analysis
+21
L
@ SAS SAS
120 DAL SAS 139
SAS @ SAS
120 139
Fri, Apr 10
Analysis
-19
L
@ PHX PHX
107 DAL PHX 112
PHX @ PHX
107 112
Wed, Apr 8
Analysis
-5
L
@ LAC LAC
103 DAL LAC 116
LAC @ LAC
103 116
Tue, Apr 7
Analysis
-13
W
vs LAL LAL
128 LAL DAL 134
LAL vs LAL
134 128
Sun, Apr 5
Analysis
+6
L
vs ORL ORL
138 ORL DAL 127
ORL vs ORL
127 138
Fri, Apr 3
Analysis
-11
L
vs MIN MIN
124 MIN DAL 94
MIN vs MIN
94 124
Mon, Mar 30
Analysis
-30
W
@ POR POR
100 DAL POR 93
POR @ POR
100 93
Sat, Mar 28
Analysis
+7
L
@ DEN DEN
135 DAL DEN 142
DEN @ DEN
135 142
Wed, Mar 25
Analysis
-7
L
vs GSW GSW
137 GSW DAL 131
GSW vs GSW
131 137
Mon, Mar 23
Analysis
-6
L
vs LAC LAC
138 LAC DAL 131
LAC vs LAC
131 138
Sat, Mar 21
Analysis
-7
L
vs ATL ATL
135 ATL DAL 120
ATL vs ATL
120 135
Wed, Mar 18
Analysis
-15
L
@ NOP NOP
111 DAL NOP 129
NOP @ NOP
111 129
Mon, Mar 16
Analysis
-18
W
@ CLE CLE
130 DAL CLE 120
CLE @ CLE
130 120
Sun, Mar 15
Analysis
+10
L
vs CLE CLE
138 CLE DAL 105
CLE vs CLE
105 138
Fri, Mar 13
Analysis
-33
W
@ MEM MEM
120 DAL MEM 112
MEM @ MEM
120 112
Thu, Mar 12
Analysis
+8
L
@ ATL ATL
112 DAL ATL 124
ATL @ ATL
112 124
Tue, Mar 10
Analysis
-12
L
@ TOR TOR
92 DAL TOR 122
TOR @ TOR
92 122
Sun, Mar 8
Analysis
-30
L
@ BOS BOS
100 DAL BOS 120
BOS @ BOS
100 120
Fri, Mar 6
Analysis
-20
L
@ ORL ORL
114 DAL ORL 115
ORL @ ORL
114 115
Thu, Mar 5
Analysis
-1
L
@ CHA CHA
90 DAL CHA 117
CHA @ CHA
90 117
Tue, Mar 3
Analysis
-27
L
vs OKC OKC
100 OKC DAL 87
OKC vs OKC
87 100
Sun, Mar 1
Analysis
-13
L
vs MEM MEM
124 MEM DAL 105
MEM vs MEM
105 124
Fri, Feb 27
Analysis
-19
L
vs SAC SAC
130 SAC DAL 121
SAC vs SAC
121 130
Thu, Feb 26
Analysis
-9
W
@ BKN BKN
123 DAL BKN 114
BKN @ BKN
123 114
Tue, Feb 24
Analysis
+9
W
@ IND IND
134 DAL IND 130
IND @ IND
134 130
Sun, Feb 22
Analysis
+4
L
@ MIN MIN
111 DAL MIN 122
MIN @ MIN
111 122
Fri, Feb 20
Analysis
-11
L
@ LAL LAL
104 DAL LAL 124
LAL @ LAL
104 124
Thu, Feb 12
Analysis
-20
L
@ PHX PHX
111 DAL PHX 120
PHX @ PHX
111 120
Tue, Feb 10
Analysis
-9
L
@ SAS SAS
125 DAL SAS 138
SAS @ SAS
125 138
Sat, Feb 7
Analysis
-13
L
vs SAS SAS
135 SAS DAL 123
SAS vs SAS
123 135
Thu, Feb 5
Analysis
-12
L
vs BOS BOS
110 BOS DAL 100
BOS vs BOS
100 110
Tue, Feb 3
Analysis
-10
L
@ HOU HOU
107 DAL HOU 111
HOU @ HOU
107 111
Sat, Jan 31
Analysis
-4
L
vs CHA CHA
123 CHA DAL 121
CHA vs CHA
121 123
Thu, Jan 29
Analysis
-2
L
vs MIN MIN
118 MIN DAL 105
MIN vs MIN
105 118
Wed, Jan 28
Analysis
-13
L
vs LAL LAL
116 LAL DAL 110
LAL vs LAL
110 116
Sun, Jan 25
Analysis
-6
L
@ MIL MIL
99 DAL MIL 123
MIL @ MIL
99 123
Sun, Jan 25
Analysis
-24
W
vs GSW GSW
115 GSW DAL 123
GSW vs GSW
123 115
Fri, Jan 23
Analysis
+8
W
@ NYK NYK
114 DAL NYK 97
NYK @ NYK
114 97
Mon, Jan 19
Analysis
+17
W
vs UTA UTA
120 UTA DAL 138
UTA vs UTA
138 120
Sat, Jan 17
Analysis
+18
W
vs UTA UTA
122 UTA DAL 144
UTA vs UTA
144 122
Fri, Jan 16
Analysis
+22
L
vs DEN DEN
118 DEN DAL 109
DEN vs DEN
109 118
Thu, Jan 15
Analysis
-9
W
vs BKN BKN
105 BKN DAL 113
BKN vs BKN
113 105
Tue, Jan 13
Analysis
+8
L
@ CHI CHI
107 DAL CHI 125
CHI @ CHI
107 125
Sun, Jan 11
Analysis
-18
L
@ UTA UTA
114 DAL UTA 116
UTA @ UTA
114 116
Fri, Jan 9
Analysis
-2
W
@ SAC SAC
100 DAL SAC 98
SAC @ SAC
100 98
Wed, Jan 7
Analysis
+2
W
vs HOU HOU
104 HOU DAL 110
HOU vs HOU
110 104
Sun, Jan 4
Analysis
+6
L
vs PHI PHI
123 PHI DAL 108
PHI vs PHI
108 123
Fri, Jan 2
Analysis
-15
L
@ POR POR
122 DAL POR 125
POR @ POR
122 125
Tue, Dec 30
Analysis
-3
L
@ SAC SAC
107 DAL SAC 113
SAC @ SAC
107 113
Sat, Dec 27
Analysis
-6
L
@ GSW GSW
116 DAL GSW 126
GSW @ GSW
116 126
Thu, Dec 25
Analysis
-10
W
vs DEN DEN
130 DEN DAL 131
DEN vs DEN
131 130
Wed, Dec 24
Analysis
+1
L
@ NOP NOP
113 DAL NOP 119
NOP @ NOP
113 119
Tue, Dec 23
Analysis
-6
L
@ PHI PHI
114 DAL PHI 121
PHI @ PHI
114 121
Sun, Dec 21
Analysis
-7
W
vs DET DET
114 DET DAL 116
DET vs DET
116 114
Fri, Dec 19
Analysis
+2
L
@ UTA UTA
133 DAL UTA 140
UTA @ UTA
133 140
Tue, Dec 16
Analysis
-7
W
vs BKN BKN
111 BKN DAL 119
BKN vs BKN
119 111
Sat, Dec 13
Analysis
+8
W
vs HOU HOU
109 HOU DAL 122
HOU vs HOU
122 109
Sun, Dec 7
Analysis
+13
L
@ OKC OKC
111 DAL OKC 132
OKC @ OKC
111 132
Sat, Dec 6
Analysis
-21
W
vs MIA MIA
108 MIA DAL 118
MIA vs MIA
118 108
Thu, Dec 4
Analysis
+10
W
@ DEN DEN
131 DAL DEN 121
DEN @ DEN
131 121
Tue, Dec 2
Analysis
+10
W
@ LAC LAC
114 DAL LAC 110
LAC @ LAC
114 110
Sun, Nov 30
Analysis
+4
L
@ LAL LAL
119 DAL LAL 129
LAL @ LAL
119 129
Sat, Nov 29
Analysis
-10
L
@ MIA MIA
102 DAL MIA 106
MIA @ MIA
102 106
Tue, Nov 25
Analysis
-4
L
vs MEM MEM
102 MEM DAL 96
MEM vs MEM
96 102
Sun, Nov 23
Analysis
-6
W
vs NOP NOP
115 NOP DAL 118
NOP vs NOP
118 115
Sat, Nov 22
Analysis
+3
L
vs NYK NYK
113 NYK DAL 111
NYK vs NYK
111 113
Thu, Nov 20
Analysis
-2
L
@ MIN MIN
96 DAL MIN 120
MIN @ MIN
96 120
Tue, Nov 18
Analysis
-24
W
vs POR POR
133 POR DAL 138
POR vs POR
138 133
Mon, Nov 17
Analysis
+5
L
vs LAC LAC
133 LAC DAL 127
LAC vs LAC
127 133
Sat, Nov 15
Analysis
-6
L
vs PHX PHX
123 PHX DAL 114
PHX vs PHX
114 123
Thu, Nov 13
Analysis
-9
L
vs MIL MIL
116 MIL DAL 114
MIL vs MIL
114 116
Tue, Nov 11
Analysis
-2
W
@ WAS WAS
111 DAL WAS 105
WAS @ WAS
111 105
Sun, Nov 9
Analysis
+6
L
@ MEM MEM
104 DAL MEM 118
MEM @ MEM
104 118
Sat, Nov 8
Analysis
-14
L
vs NOP NOP
101 NOP DAL 99
NOP vs NOP
99 101
Thu, Nov 6
Analysis
-2
L
@ HOU HOU
102 DAL HOU 110
HOU @ HOU
102 110
Tue, Nov 4
Analysis
-8
L
@ DET DET
110 DAL DET 122
DET @ DET
110 122
Sun, Nov 2
Analysis
-12
W
vs IND IND
105 IND DAL 107
IND vs IND
107 105
Thu, Oct 30
Analysis
+2
L
vs OKC OKC
101 OKC DAL 94
OKC vs OKC
94 101
Mon, Oct 27
Analysis
-7
W
vs TOR TOR
129 TOR DAL 139
TOR vs TOR
139 129
Sun, Oct 26
Analysis
+10
L
vs WAS WAS
117 WAS DAL 107
WAS vs WAS
107 117
Fri, Oct 24
Analysis
-10
L
vs SAS SAS
125 SAS DAL 92
SAS vs SAS
92 125
Wed, Oct 22
Analysis
-33