LA Clippers

Western Conference

Los Angeles
Clippers

42-41
L1

ROSTER — IMPACT RANKINGS

Kawhi Leonard
Forward Yr 14 66G (66S)
+23.3
27.8 pts
6.4 reb
3.6 ast
32.2 min

This late-season stretch was defined by a terrifying return to Terminator-level offensive efficiency, right until the physical toll finally caught up with him. During the 03/11 vs MIN contest, Leonard was virtually unguardable. He torched the nets for 45 points on a blistering 15-for-20 shooting night, generating a monstrous +53.1 Impact score because his shot selection was flawless and he relentlessly attacked his spots. Even when his jumper abandoned him, as it did during the 03/31 vs POR matchup where he went 0-for-5 from deep, he still managed a +16.6 Impact score. He salvaged that rough shooting night by grabbing 8 rebounds and relying on suffocating defensive effort to create value without scoring. However, the heavy workload eventually broke him down. Logging a grueling 40 minutes on 04/15 vs GSW, Leonard managed 21 points but ultimately posted a -4.9 Impact score. Despite the respectable scoring total, cold perimeter shooting and the hidden costs of sluggish defensive rotations dragged his overall value firmly into the red.

James Harden
Guard Yr 16 44G (44S)
+14.0
25.4 pts
4.8 reb
8.1 ast
35.4 min

This late-season stretch was defined by James Harden's masterful transition from a pure volume scorer into a calculating, high-leverage floor general. He still had nights where his legs looked heavy, like the 03/15 vs DAL matchup where he forced bad jumpers to shoot just 4-for-12, dragging his effectiveness down to a brutal -11.5 Impact. Yet, when he ruthlessly picked his spots, he completely dictated the terms of engagement. During the 03/17 vs MIL game, he operated with surgical precision, pouring in 27 points on a hyper-efficient 7-for-10 shooting night to generate a staggering +26.1 Impact. Even when his scoring vanished, his veteran cunning salvaged his minutes. Take the 03/30 vs UTA contest, where he managed a mere 13 points but still posted a +7.2 Impact by tearing apart the defense with 14 assists. He might lack the explosive isolation burst of his prime, but his elite court vision keeps his offensive engine humming.

Ivica Zubac
Center Yr 9 43G (42S)
+10.6
14.4 pts
11.0 reb
2.2 ast
30.9 min

Relentless interior bullying and sheer rebounding volume defined this mid-season stretch for Ivica Zubac. He transformed into an absolute terror on the glass. Look no further than his monstrous 01/23 vs LAL performance, where he ripped down 19 rebounds alongside 18 points. That overwhelming paint control and steady finishing generated a massive +26.5 impact score. He followed a similar blueprint on 02/01 vs PHX, grabbing a staggering 20 rebounds and hitting all five of his shot attempts to post a +12.7 impact despite scoring just 14 points. However, when his efficiency slipped, his overall value tanked. During the 03/15 vs MIL matchup, he posted a dismal -6.2 impact; his 10 points masked a sloppy 4-for-10 shooting night where forced shots and a quiet seven rebounds actively hurt his squad.

Bennedict Mathurin
Guard-Forward Yr 3 27G (1S)
+6.3
17.6 pts
5.4 reb
2.5 ast
28.1 min

Mathurin's late-season run was defined by extreme volatility, operating as a true boom-or-bust bench weapon who either carried the second unit or vanished entirely. When he caught fire, he was devastating. Look at the 03/29 vs MIL matchup, where he poured in 28 points on a hyper-efficient 7-for-10 from the floor to earn a +14.6 Impact score. Even when his field goal attempts failed him, he occasionally found gritty ways to salvage his minutes. During the 03/27 vs IND contest, he managed a +9.7 Impact despite a miserable 2-for-8 shooting performance because he relentlessly attacked the glass for seven rebounds and clearly manufactured his 17 points by getting to the foul line. However, his tunnel vision often crippled the team when his jumper stopped falling. In the 03/31 vs POR game, Mathurin was an absolute ghost, posting a dismal -13.9 Impact score by forcing bad looks for just four points while offering zero rebounds or assists in 22 minutes of empty floor time. He remains an electric scorer, but his refusal to adapt as a playmaker on cold shooting nights makes him a chaotic gamble.

Darius Garland
Guard Yr 6 20G (18S)
+5.8
19.9 pts
2.5 reb
6.5 ast
29.2 min

This fifteen-game stretch was a volatile rollercoaster of offensive brilliance and baffling inefficiency for Darius Garland. You can see the frustrating duality perfectly in the 03/16 vs SAS matchup. He stuffed the stat sheet with 25 points and 10 assists, yet posted a -0.8 Impact score because hidden costs like defensive lapses dragged his overall value into the red. Just days later, he caught absolute fire. During the 03/21 vs DAL game, Garland erupted for 41 points and 11 assists on blistering 15-for-24 shooting, generating a massive +28.0 Impact by combining elite shot-making with flawless offensive orchestration. Still, his underlying worth occasionally surfaced even when his jumper completely abandoned him. Take the 04/10 vs POR contest, where he shot a miserable 5-for-16 from the floor but still registered a +8.2 Impact since his relentless hustle plays and defensive effort kept the team afloat.

John Collins
Forward-Center Yr 8 70G (56S)
+4.5
13.5 pts
5.4 reb
1.0 ast
27.0 min

John Collins spent this late-season stretch oscillating wildly between dominant offensive force and complete rotational ghost, eventually losing his full-time starting job. He looked like a foundational piece during a blistering 02/06 vs SAC matchup, pouring in 22 points on highly efficient 8-for-12 shooting to generate a massive +16.4 Impact score. Even when his shot deserted him, he occasionally salvaged his minutes through sheer grit. During his 02/19 vs DEN performance, a modest 11 points still yielded a +4.4 Impact score because he relentlessly crashed the glass for 12 rebounds and kept the ball moving with four assists. Unfortunately, those well-rounded nights were often erased by stretches of total apathy. In a disastrous 03/21 vs DAL outing, Collins managed a meager eight points on 3-for-7 shooting, sleepwalking defensively to post a brutal -14.1 Impact score. When he failed to finish plays at the rim or stretch the floor, his poor defensive effort and lack of hustle completely torpedoed his value on the court.

Derrick Jones Jr.
Forward Yr 9 51G (46S)
+1.0
10.1 pts
3.4 reb
1.4 ast
26.9 min

Derrick Jones Jr. spent this late-season stretch trapped in a maddening cycle of offensive invisibility and sudden, fleeting brilliance. As a full-time starter, his nightly value swung wildly depending on his shot selection and overall engagement. He looked like a legitimate weapon during the 03/19 vs NOP matchup, racking up 22 points on sharp 7/11 shooting to post a stellar +14.2 Impact. Yet, that aggressive finishing rarely lasted, and even when he did score efficiently, hidden costs often ruined his overall value. Take the 03/29 vs MIL contest, where he tallied 13 points on 6/9 shooting but still recorded a -0.5 Impact because his complete lack of playmaking—zero assists—and defensive lapses bled points the other way. Conversely, he occasionally found ways to contribute without filling it up. During the 03/23 vs MIL game, he managed a +2.6 Impact despite scoring just 7 points, salvaging his night by grabbing 5 rebounds and playing highly disruptive defense.

Jordan Miller
Guard Yr 2 61G (1S)
+0.6
9.9 pts
3.0 reb
2.3 ast
22.0 min

This late-season stretch was defined by maddening inconsistency, with Jordan Miller oscillating between ruthless two-way efficiency and completely invisible floor minutes. When he attacked the glass and took smart shots, the results were spectacular. Look at his 03/16 vs SAS performance, where he racked up 22 points and 9 rebounds on 10/13 from the floor to generate a massive +24.7 Impact score. He could also tilt the floor without his jumper, as seen during his lone start on 03/19 vs NOP. Despite shooting an ugly 2/8 from the field in that contest, Miller posted a +5.9 Impact by doing the dirty work as a connector with 8 boards and 5 assists. However, his tendency to occasionally force bad looks and float on the perimeter led to brutal lows. His disastrous 03/09 vs NYK outing yielded a -16.3 Impact score because he bricked his way to 2 points on 1/5 shooting while failing to grab a single rebound.

Isaiah Jackson
Forward Yr 4 17G
-0.3
7.5 pts
4.6 reb
1.2 ast
15.9 min

This mid-season stretch was defined by maddening inconsistency, as Isaiah Jackson oscillated wildly between high-energy paint enforcer and invisible rotation piece. When he actually engaged on the glass, he was a massive plus for the second unit. This was obvious during his rugged 12-point, 12-rebound effort on 03/07 vs MEM, which generated a stellar +11.9 Impact score. Yet, he frequently gave those gains right back with hollow scoring nights where his lack of rebounding dragged down his overall value. Look at his 03/16 vs SAS appearance, where he tallied 11 points on an efficient 4-for-5 from the floor but grabbed just a single rebound, resulting in a -1.4 Impact score. A big man cannot survive on scoring alone, and his inability to secure missed shots on those nights killed the second unit's momentum. He finally found the right balance during the 03/25 vs TOR matchup, putting together a flawless 6-for-6 shooting night for 12 points while adding six boards to earn a massive +14.0 Impact mark. If he wants consistent minutes, Jackson must realize that flashy finishing means nothing without the requisite grit in the trenches.

Kris Dunn
Guard Yr 9 83G (69S)
-2.0
7.3 pts
3.3 reb
3.7 ast
27.3 min

Kris Dunn's late-season stretch was defined by a jarring mid-March demotion to the bench and wild swings in his overall value. He could still flip a game without high volume. On 03/01 vs NOP, Dunn generated a robust +9.8 Impact score by pairing just 9 points with relentless defensive hustle and hyper-efficient 4-for-5 shooting. More often, however, his offensive limitations dragged the team down. During a brutal -14.6 Impact performance on 03/06 vs SAS, his passive 4-point outing created a stagnant half-court offense that completely negated his 7 rebounds and 5 assists. His scoring gravity simply vanished as the season closed. By the time he shot a miserable 1-for-7 from the field on 04/08 vs OKC to post a -12.9 Impact score, his inability to bend a defense was actively harming the rotation.

Brook Lopez
Center Yr 17 76G (41S)
-2.0
8.6 pts
3.7 reb
1.3 ast
22.0 min

Brook Lopez spent this late-season stretch riding a dizzying rollercoaster, oscillating wildly between vintage floor-spacing dominance and total offensive invisibility. When he found his rhythm, he was utterly lethal. He erupted on 03/06 vs SAS for 26 points and four triples, generating a massive +22.3 impact score because of his aggressive shot selection and sheer volume of made baskets. Yet, those highs were frequently interrupted by baffling disappearing acts, bottoming out during a disastrous 03/14 vs SAC outing. He logged zero points and zero rebounds in 22 minutes that night, earning a -11.1 impact score that reflected the hidden cost of complete passivity and a refusal to attack the glass. Fortunately, the veteran big man still found ways to salvage value even when his scoring volume plummeted. During his 03/29 vs MIL performance, he managed a respectable +5.0 impact despite scoring just eight points, anchoring the interior with seven hard-fought rebounds and maintaining flawless efficiency on his rare touches.

Yanic Konan Niederhäuser
Center Yr 0 41G
-4.8
4.3 pts
2.9 reb
0.3 ast
10.3 min

Yanic Konan Niederhäuser spent this midseason stretch wrestling with the stark difference between filling a box score and actually playing winning basketball. During an extended rut in early February, his counting stats often masked severe defensive liabilities and disjointed rotations. Take his outing on 02/04 vs CLE, where a flawless shooting night yielded 10 points and 8 rebounds, yet his team bled points during his 25 minutes to result in a bleak -4.3 Impact score. He slowly learned to anchor a lineup without demanding touches, highlighted by a gritty shift on 02/22 vs ORL. Despite scoring just 7 points, he battled for 8 rebounds and contested everything at the rim to earn a positive +1.5 Impact. This evolution peaked on 03/02 vs GSW. He posted a modest 11 points and 9 rebounds but generated a staggering +15.2 Impact by ditching the empty calories for hard closeouts, relentless glass-cleaning, and crucial hustle plays.

Bogdan Bogdanović
Guard Yr 8 23G (3S)
-5.5
7.4 pts
2.6 reb
2.2 ast
19.7 min

Bogdan Bogdanović endured a wildly erratic stretch where his spot in the rotation fluctuated between lethal sharpshooter and total non-factor. Even when his jumper abandoned him during the 02/26 vs MIN matchup, he managed to generate a solid +5.7 Impact score by crashing the glass for six rebounds and dishing four assists to create crucial non-scoring value. On the flip side, his offensive outbursts occasionally masked underlying flaws. During the 03/19 vs NOP contest, he poured in 16 points on efficient shooting, yet barely moved the needle with a +0.5 Impact score. That meager rating stemmed from a complete lack of peripheral production. He tallied just one rebound and one assist over 27 minutes while offering little defensive resistance. Worse yet were the nights he simply took up space, like his brief three-minute stint on 04/05 vs SAC. That outing resulted in a brutal -12.2 Impact score, driven by rushed, empty possessions where he offered nothing but two missed shots.

Norchad Omier
Forward Yr 0 6G
-5.5
2.8 pts
1.2 reb
0.3 ast
4.0 min
Cam Christie
Guard Yr 1 55G
-6.3
2.8 pts
1.4 reb
0.6 ast
8.7 min

This grueling late-season stretch was defined by pure survival mode at the end of the bench, as Cam Christie desperately fought to justify his spot in the rotation. Most nights were a disaster. Given an extended look on 03/19 vs NOP, he logged 12 minutes but put up zero points on 0/2 shooting, resulting in a dismal -11.8 Impact score driven by hesitant shot selection and defensive lapses. He finally found a fleeting rhythm on 03/23 vs MIL, pouring in 8 points on crisp 3-for-4 shooting across 16 minutes. That rare burst of offensive efficiency earned him a +5.1 Impact score, marking the only time his shot-making actually punished the opposition instead of his own squad. He tried to manufacture value elsewhere, frantically grabbing 4 rebounds in just 4 minutes on 03/25 vs TOR to keep possessions alive. Ultimately, that erratic hustle couldn't mask his overall deficiencies, leaving him buried as a fringe prospect who bleeds value the second he steps on the hardwood.

Kobe Sanders
Guard Yr 0 69G (16S)
-6.4
7.2 pts
2.2 reb
1.6 ast
19.7 min

Kobe Sanders spent this stretch bouncing between the starting lineup and the bench, battling a maddening inconsistency that made him a liability on most nights. Even when his counting stats looked respectable, like his 11-point, six-rebound effort on 03/13 vs CHI, his actual floor presence remained a net negative. He posted a -4.6 Impact score that night, dragged down by empty-calorie production and costly hidden mistakes in the half-court offense. Things bottomed out completely a few days later on 03/18 vs NOP. A dismal 1-for-6 shooting performance yielded a brutal -15.9 Impact score, as his forced, erratic shot selection actively crippled the team's spacing. Yet, just when it seemed he was playing himself out of the rotation entirely, Sanders caught fire off the bench on 03/23 vs MIL. He poured in 19 points on blistering 8-of-10 shooting, generating a +10.2 Impact score by finally taking high-quality looks and finishing with ruthless efficiency.

Nicolas Batum
Guard-Forward Yr 17 74G (6S)
-6.7
4.0 pts
2.5 reb
0.9 ast
17.5 min

Nicolas Batum’s late-season stretch was defined by a stark, painful fade into irrelevance. The aging veteran routinely struggled to stay on the floor or generate any meaningful production. Even when pressed into the starting lineup on 02/26 vs MIN, he went completely scoreless across 26 minutes. His dismal -9.0 Impact score that night stemmed directly from a total lack of offensive gravity, allowing defenders to freely pack the paint and ignore him on the perimeter. The bottom fell out completely on 03/02 vs GSW, where a brief six-minute cameo yielded zeroes across the box score and a staggering -11.8 Impact. He managed exactly one positive outing during this brutal run, hitting three triples for nine points on 03/25 vs TOR to scrape together a +2.4 Impact. Aside from that fleeting spark, Batum looked entirely spent.

Kobe Brown
Forward Yr 2 34G
-7.0
2.9 pts
1.6 reb
0.8 ast
8.7 min

Kobe Brown's late-season stretch was a chaotic pendulum swing from unplayable bench liability to indispensable rotation linchpin. He frequently struggled to translate empty counting stats into winning basketball early on. On 03/17 vs NYK, he logged a seemingly efficient 13 points, but bled value with a -1.7 Impact score because his total lack of passing and porous defense actively harmed the unit. Conversely, he salvaged a brutal shooting night on 04/05 vs CLE. Despite clanking his way to 11 points on 3-for-10 from the floor, Brown fought his way to a +5.8 Impact by crashing the glass for seven rebounds, dishing five assists, and locking in defensively. The real offensive explosion finally arrived on 04/12 vs DET. He torched the nets for 20 points on 7-of-13 shooting, generating a massive +14.3 Impact by pairing his scoring punch with active, disruptive defense. When he stops forcing bad shots and actually guards his yard, Brown transforms from a fringe afterthought into a genuine difference-maker.

TyTy Washington Jr.
Guard Yr 3 16G
-7.1
1.3 pts
0.4 reb
1.1 ast
5.5 min
Bradley Beal
Guard Yr 13 6G (6S)
-7.4
8.2 pts
0.8 reb
1.7 ast
20.1 min
Chris Paul
Guard Yr 20 16G
-8.3
2.9 pts
1.8 reb
3.3 ast
14.2 min
Sean Pedulla
Guard Yr 0 7G
-8.3
1.9 pts
0.4 reb
0.7 ast
4.4 min
Jahmyl Telfort
Guard Yr 0 8G
-10.5
0.1 pts
0.4 reb
0.1 ast
4.0 min
L
vs GSW GSW
126 GSW LAC 121
GSW vs GSW
121 126
Wed, Apr 15
Play-In Analysis
-5
W
vs GSW GSW
110 GSW LAC 115
GSW vs GSW
115 110
Sun, Apr 12
Analysis
+5
L
@ POR POR
97 LAC POR 116
POR @ POR
97 116
Fri, Apr 10
Analysis
-19
L
vs OKC OKC
128 OKC LAC 110
OKC vs OKC
110 128
Wed, Apr 8
Analysis
-18
W
vs DAL DAL
103 DAL LAC 116
DAL vs DAL
116 103
Tue, Apr 7
Analysis
+13
W
@ SAC SAC
138 LAC SAC 109
SAC @ SAC
138 109
Sun, Apr 5
Analysis
+29
L
vs SAS SAS
118 SAS LAC 99
SAS vs SAS
99 118
Thu, Apr 2
Analysis
-19
L
vs POR POR
114 POR LAC 104
POR vs POR
104 114
Tue, Mar 31
Analysis
-10
W
@ MIL MIL
127 LAC MIL 113
MIL @ MIL
127 113
Sun, Mar 29
Analysis
+14
W
@ IND IND
114 LAC IND 113
IND @ IND
114 113
Fri, Mar 27
Analysis
+1
W
vs TOR TOR
94 TOR LAC 119
TOR vs TOR
119 94
Wed, Mar 25
Analysis
+25
W
vs MIL MIL
96 MIL LAC 129
MIL vs MIL
129 96
Mon, Mar 23
Analysis
+33
W
@ DAL DAL
138 LAC DAL 131
DAL @ DAL
138 131
Sat, Mar 21
Analysis
+7
L
@ NOP NOP
99 LAC NOP 105
NOP @ NOP
99 105
Thu, Mar 19
Analysis
-6
L
@ NOP NOP
109 LAC NOP 124
NOP @ NOP
109 124
Wed, Mar 18
Analysis
-15
L
vs SAS SAS
119 SAS LAC 115
SAS vs SAS
115 119
Mon, Mar 16
Analysis
-4
L
vs SAC SAC
118 SAC LAC 109
SAC vs SAC
109 118
Sat, Mar 14
Analysis
-9
W
vs CHI CHI
108 CHI LAC 119
CHI vs CHI
119 108
Fri, Mar 13
Analysis
+11
W
vs MIN MIN
128 MIN LAC 153
MIN vs MIN
153 128
Wed, Mar 11
Analysis
+25
W
vs NYK NYK
118 NYK LAC 126
NYK vs NYK
126 118
Mon, Mar 9
Analysis
+8
W
@ MEM MEM
123 LAC MEM 120
MEM @ MEM
123 120
Sat, Mar 7
Analysis
+3
L
@ SAS SAS
112 LAC SAS 116
SAS @ SAS
112 116
Fri, Mar 6
Analysis
-4
W
vs IND IND
107 IND LAC 130
IND vs IND
130 107
Wed, Mar 4
Analysis
+23
W
@ GSW GSW
114 LAC GSW 101
GSW @ GSW
114 101
Mon, Mar 2
Analysis
+13
W
vs NOP NOP
117 NOP LAC 137
NOP vs NOP
137 117
Sun, Mar 1
Analysis
+20
L
vs MIN MIN
94 MIN LAC 88
MIN vs MIN
88 94
Thu, Feb 26
Analysis
-6
L
vs ORL ORL
111 ORL LAC 109
ORL vs ORL
109 111
Sun, Feb 22
Analysis
-2
L
@ LAL LAL
122 LAC LAL 125
LAL @ LAL
122 125
Fri, Feb 20
Analysis
-3
W
vs DEN DEN
114 DEN LAC 115
DEN vs DEN
115 114
Thu, Feb 19
Analysis
+1
W
@ HOU HOU
105 LAC HOU 102
HOU @ HOU
105 102
Wed, Feb 11
Analysis
+3
L
@ HOU HOU
95 LAC HOU 102
HOU @ HOU
95 102
Tue, Feb 10
Analysis
-7
W
@ MIN MIN
115 LAC MIN 96
MIN @ MIN
115 96
Sun, Feb 8
Analysis
+19
W
@ SAC SAC
114 LAC SAC 111
SAC @ SAC
114 111
Fri, Feb 6
Analysis
+3
L
vs CLE CLE
124 CLE LAC 91
CLE vs CLE
91 124
Wed, Feb 4
Analysis
-33
L
vs PHI PHI
128 PHI LAC 113
PHI vs PHI
113 128
Mon, Feb 2
Analysis
-15
W
@ PHX PHX
117 LAC PHX 93
PHX @ PHX
117 93
Sun, Feb 1
Analysis
+24
L
@ DEN DEN
109 LAC DEN 122
DEN @ DEN
109 122
Fri, Jan 30
Analysis
-13
W
@ UTA UTA
115 LAC UTA 103
UTA @ UTA
115 103
Wed, Jan 28
Analysis
+12
W
vs BKN BKN
89 BKN LAC 126
BKN vs BKN
126 89
Mon, Jan 26
Analysis
+37
W
vs LAL LAL
104 LAL LAC 112
LAL vs LAL
112 104
Fri, Jan 23
Analysis
+8
L
@ CHI CHI
110 LAC CHI 138
CHI @ CHI
110 138
Wed, Jan 21
Analysis
-28
W
@ WAS WAS
110 LAC WAS 106
WAS @ WAS
110 106
Mon, Jan 19
Analysis
+4
W
@ TOR TOR
121 LAC TOR 117
TOR @ TOR
121 117
Sat, Jan 17
Analysis
+4
W
vs WAS WAS
105 WAS LAC 119
WAS vs WAS
119 105
Thu, Jan 15
Analysis
+14
W
vs CHA CHA
109 CHA LAC 117
CHA vs CHA
117 109
Tue, Jan 13
Analysis
+8
W
@ DET DET
98 LAC DET 92
DET @ DET
98 92
Sun, Jan 11
Analysis
+6
W
@ BKN BKN
121 LAC BKN 105
BKN @ BKN
121 105
Sat, Jan 10
Analysis
+16
L
@ NYK NYK
111 LAC NYK 123
NYK @ NYK
111 123
Thu, Jan 8
Analysis
-12
W
vs GSW GSW
102 GSW LAC 103
GSW vs GSW
103 102
Tue, Jan 6
Analysis
+1
L
vs BOS BOS
146 BOS LAC 115
BOS vs BOS
115 146
Sun, Jan 4
Analysis
-31
W
vs UTA UTA
101 UTA LAC 118
UTA vs UTA
118 101
Fri, Jan 2
Analysis
+17
W
vs SAC SAC
90 SAC LAC 131
SAC vs SAC
131 90
Wed, Dec 31
Analysis
+41
W
vs DET DET
99 DET LAC 112
DET vs DET
112 99
Mon, Dec 29
Analysis
+13
W
@ POR POR
119 LAC POR 103
POR @ POR
119 103
Sat, Dec 27
Analysis
+16
W
vs HOU HOU
108 HOU LAC 128
HOU vs HOU
128 108
Wed, Dec 24
Analysis
+20
W
vs LAL LAL
88 LAL LAC 103
LAL vs LAL
103 88
Sun, Dec 21
Analysis
+15
L
@ OKC OKC
101 LAC OKC 122
OKC @ OKC
101 122
Fri, Dec 19
Analysis
-21
L
vs MEM MEM
121 MEM LAC 103
MEM vs MEM
103 121
Tue, Dec 16
Analysis
-18
L
@ HOU HOU
113 LAC HOU 115
HOU @ HOU
113 115
Fri, Dec 12
Analysis
-2
L
@ MIN MIN
106 LAC MIN 109
MIN @ MIN
106 109
Sun, Dec 7
Analysis
-3
L
@ MEM MEM
98 LAC MEM 107
MEM @ MEM
98 107
Sat, Dec 6
Analysis
-9
W
@ ATL ATL
115 LAC ATL 92
ATL @ ATL
115 92
Thu, Dec 4
Analysis
+23
L
@ MIA MIA
123 LAC MIA 140
MIA @ MIA
123 140
Tue, Dec 2
Analysis
-17
L
vs DAL DAL
114 DAL LAC 110
DAL vs DAL
110 114
Sun, Nov 30
Analysis
-4
L
vs MEM MEM
112 MEM LAC 107
MEM vs MEM
107 112
Sat, Nov 29
Analysis
-5
L
@ LAL LAL
118 LAC LAL 135
LAL @ LAL
118 135
Wed, Nov 26
Analysis
-17
L
@ CLE CLE
105 LAC CLE 120
CLE @ CLE
105 120
Sun, Nov 23
Analysis
-15
W
@ CHA CHA
131 LAC CHA 116
CHA @ CHA
131 116
Sat, Nov 22
Analysis
+15
L
@ ORL ORL
101 LAC ORL 129
ORL @ ORL
101 129
Fri, Nov 21
Analysis
-28
L
@ PHI PHI
108 LAC PHI 110
PHI @ PHI
108 110
Tue, Nov 18
Analysis
-2
L
@ BOS BOS
118 LAC BOS 121
BOS @ BOS
118 121
Sun, Nov 16
Analysis
-3
W
@ DAL DAL
133 LAC DAL 127
DAL @ DAL
133 127
Sat, Nov 15
Analysis
+6
L
vs DEN DEN
130 DEN LAC 116
DEN vs DEN
116 130
Thu, Nov 13
Analysis
-14
L
vs ATL ATL
105 ATL LAC 102
ATL vs ATL
102 105
Tue, Nov 11
Analysis
-3
L
vs PHX PHX
114 PHX LAC 103
PHX vs PHX
103 114
Sun, Nov 9
Analysis
-11
L
@ PHX PHX
102 LAC PHX 115
PHX @ PHX
102 115
Fri, Nov 7
Analysis
-13
L
vs OKC OKC
126 OKC LAC 107
OKC vs OKC
107 126
Wed, Nov 5
Analysis
-19
L
vs MIA MIA
120 MIA LAC 119
MIA vs MIA
119 120
Tue, Nov 4
Analysis
-1
W
vs NOP NOP
124 NOP LAC 126
NOP vs NOP
126 124
Sat, Nov 1
Analysis
+2
L
@ GSW GSW
79 LAC GSW 98
GSW @ GSW
79 98
Wed, Oct 29
Analysis
-19
W
vs POR POR
107 POR LAC 114
POR vs POR
114 107
Sun, Oct 26
Analysis
+7
W
vs PHX PHX
102 PHX LAC 129
PHX vs PHX
129 102
Fri, Oct 24
Analysis
+27
L
@ UTA UTA
108 LAC UTA 129
UTA @ UTA
108 129
Wed, Oct 22
Analysis
-21