Oklahoma City Thunder

Western Conference

Oklahoma City
Thunder

64-18
L2

ROSTER — IMPACT RANKINGS

Shai Gilgeous-Alexander
Guard Yr 7 68G (68S)
+27.9
31.1 pts
4.3 reb
6.6 ast
33.2 min

This mid-season stretch was defined by absolute isolation dominance that occasionally bled into stubborn hero-ball. When dialed in, his offensive initiation was flawless. He carved up drop coverage on 01/21 vs MIL, posting a massive +23.7 impact score behind 40 points and 11 assists. Yet, raw point totals often masked underlying apathy. During a 40-point outburst on 03/21 vs WAS, his impact score was dragged down to +8.8 because hidden costs like live-ball turnovers and a dismal -5.2 defensive rating bled value. That hero-ball turned disastrous on 03/27 vs CHI, where he posted a -4.5 impact score despite dropping 25 points because his stubborn insistence on forcing heavily contested threes (0-for-10) completely derailed his efficiency. Conversely, he found ways to win on the margins when his scoring completely dried up. Despite shooting a miserable 7-for-22 for just 20 points on 03/15 vs MIN, he salvaged a +6.2 impact score by generating extra possessions with a +3.8 hustle rating and stout defensive effort.

Chet Holmgren
Center-Forward Yr 2 69G (69S)
+13.8
17.1 pts
8.9 reb
1.7 ast
28.9 min

This mid-season stretch was defined by Holmgren transforming from a mere shot-blocker into a terrifying, geometry-altering defensive anchor. Even when his offensive touch vanished, his sheer presence in the paint salvaged his overall value. During the 02/24 vs TOR matchup, he managed a meager 7 points on eight shots, yet still generated a +3.5 impact score because his elite defensive positioning completely suffocated the opposing offense. Conversely, poor shot selection could easily tank his effectiveness. On 02/01 vs DEN, he settled for terrible perimeter looks, bricking six of his seven three-point attempts to drag his impact down to a dismal -6.1. When he actually blended efficient interior finishing with his natural rim deterrence, the results were devastating. He delivered an absolute masterclass on 03/15 vs MIN, posting a massive +20.1 impact score by combining 21 points on 9-of-13 shooting with a defensive footprint that warped the opponent's entire scheme.

Jalen Williams
Guard-Forward Yr 3 33G (33S)
+6.5
17.1 pts
4.6 reb
5.5 ast
28.4 min

A maddening inconsistency defined Jalen Williams's early-season stretch, bouncing wildly between two-way brilliance and inefficient shot-chucking. Sometimes his sheer motor salvaged ugly offensive nights, perfectly illustrated on 11/28 vs PHX. Despite scoring just 11 points on a brutal 3-for-12 from the floor, he still posted a +3.2 impact score by shifting his focus to high-level playmaking and stifling perimeter defense (+5.4). When his interior touch actually clicked, he was an absolute wrecking ball, peaking on 12/07 vs UTA with 25 points and a massive +21.9 impact driven by elite downhill finishing. Yet, hidden costs frequently sabotaged his overall value even when the box score looked decent. During a grueling 41-minute shift on 01/07 vs UTA, a heavy reliance on contested jumpers and poor three-point execution dragged him down to a miserable -7.8 impact despite tallying 17 points and 8 assists. He clearly possesses the physical tools to bend opposing defenses, but his stubborn shot selection remains a glaring hurdle.

Isaiah Hartenstein
Center-Forward Yr 7 47G (46S)
+5.6
9.2 pts
9.4 reb
3.5 ast
24.2 min

Isaiah Hartenstein’s midseason stretch was defined by a radical shift into a pure high-post playmaking hub, though his extreme offensive passivity created wild swings in his nightly value. He eventually figured out how to influence winning without taking shots. During a gritty 03/15 vs MIN performance, he scored zero points but still posted a +2.5 impact by sacrificing his offense to focus entirely on bruising interior defense and grabbing 12 rebounds. Conversely, even when he found the bottom of the net, hidden costs occasionally dragged him down. On 02/22 vs CLE, Hartenstein shot a perfect 6-for-6 from the floor for 13 points, but his overall impact flatlined at -2.8 because poor defensive execution completely erased his scoring contributions. When he finally balanced the scales, the results were staggering. He ripped down 20 rebounds and dished 10 assists on 03/21 vs WAS, generating a massive +14.6 impact through relentless glass activity and elite connecting play.

Ajay Mitchell
Guard Yr 1 57G (16S)
+5.1
13.6 pts
3.3 reb
3.6 ast
25.8 min

A wildly volatile stretch of erratic shot selection and brilliant flashes defined Ajay Mitchell's mid-season campaign as a rotational spark-plug. When he played within the flow of the offense, the results were devastatingly effective. This peaked on 11/23 vs POR, where a flawless 8-for-8 shooting night and an aggressive downhill mentality generated a massive +12.8 impact score. He even managed to drive winning basketball when his jumper abandoned him, logging a +6.5 impact on 01/07 vs UTA despite an ugly 5-for-15 shooting clip. During that gritty performance, exceptional defensive disruption and relentless hustle plays kept his overall value firmly in the green. However, his tendency to hijack possessions occasionally dragged down the second unit. Look no further than his disastrous outing on 01/17 vs MIA, where he tallied a respectable 15 points but bled a staggering -10.3 impact. Forcing low-percentage perimeter looks entirely erased his scoring output, turning a decent box score into a massive net negative for his team.

Cason Wallace
Guard Yr 2 77G (58S)
+1.4
8.6 pts
3.1 reb
2.6 ast
26.6 min

A chaotic offensive rollercoaster defined this twenty-game stretch for Cason Wallace, where his elite point-of-attack defense constantly warred against his own erratic shot selection. When his jumper caught fire, he looked like an absolute star. He erupted for 27 points and a massive +18.3 impact score vs DEN on 02/01 because his lethal outside shot-making completely shattered the opposing defensive scheme. Yet, a glaring inability to finish through contact routinely dragged him down on other nights. Look no further than his outing vs SAS on 02/04, where poor shot selection yielded a -4.3 impact score despite him tallying an above-average 13 points. Thankfully, he often rescued his overall value through sheer defensive terror. During a brutal shooting night vs ORL on 02/03, Wallace generated immense pressure on opposing ball handlers to salvage a +4.7 impact score while scoring just 5 points. He remains a wildly disruptive perimeter force, but his offensive aggression must stabilize.

Isaiah Joe
Guard Yr 5 71G (9S)
+0.9
11.1 pts
2.5 reb
1.3 ast
21.2 min

Extreme volatility defined this twenty-game stretch for Isaiah Joe, as he swung wildly between serving as a lethal floor-spacing weapon and an outright offensive liability. Even when his shot volume dipped, his mere presence could warp opposing defensive schemes to his team's advantage. Look at 02/20 vs BKN, where he scored just 11 points but posted a massive +12.8 impact score because his perimeter gravity relentlessly opened up the paint for his teammates. Conversely, empty scoring totals regularly masked hidden costs when his jumper abandoned him. During the 03/03 vs CHI matchup, Joe tallied a respectable 19 points, yet suffered a -2.2 impact score because a heavy volume of bricked perimeter shots—going an abysmal 2/10 from deep—severely penalized his overall value. When the three-ball vanished entirely, the results were disastrous. He bottomed out on 02/04 vs SAS with a brutal -12.1 impact score, managing only 2 points as a complete loss of shooting rhythm turned him into a severe net negative on the floor.

Alex Caruso
Guard Yr 8 56G
-1.8
6.2 pts
2.8 reb
2.0 ast
18.2 min

Extreme volatility defined Alex Caruso's midseason stint, swinging wildly between defensive mastery and offensive sabotage off the bench. Even when his jumper abandoned him, his relentless motor often salvaged his minutes. During the 01/15 vs HOU matchup, he managed just 5 points on ugly 2-for-7 shooting, yet generated a +3.2 impact score entirely through elite point-of-attack defense and constant disruptive energy. Conversely, raw scoring totals occasionally masked his on-court detriment. Look at the 02/27 vs DEN contest, where a seemingly solid 12-point outing was dragged down to a -3.7 impact because a slew of unforced passing errors actively gifted the opponent points. When he actually married smart decision-making with hot shooting, he was untouchable. He torched the nets on 02/09 vs LAL, dropping 17 points on 7-of-8 from the field to post a staggering +9.1 impact score. He remains the ultimate wild card, capable of winning a shift purely through hustle or sinking it with careless mistakes.

Kenrich Williams
Guard-Forward Yr 7 56G (2S)
-2.0
6.5 pts
3.3 reb
1.4 ast
15.3 min

This twenty-game stretch was defined by extreme volatility, swinging wildly between massive offensive outbursts and crippling defensive lapses. When Williams hunted his shots within the flow of the offense, the results were spectacular. He erupted for 25 points and 9 rebounds as a starter on 02/04 vs SAS, generating a +5.5 impact score through sheer scoring volume. Yet, his production was rarely stable. During the 01/25 vs TOR matchup, he managed 15 points but still posted a -1.3 impact score because dismal perimeter chucking—including a 1-for-7 mark from deep—erased his scoring value. Even worse were the nights when his defensive focus completely evaporated. On 01/27 vs NOP, poor rotational awareness led to a brutal -9.8 impact score. Ultimately, his nightly value fluctuated based on whether he was making decisive cuts to the rim or bleeding points through blown assignments.

Jared McCain
Guard Yr 1 30G (2S)
-2.1
10.4 pts
2.1 reb
0.9 ast
18.0 min

Jared McCain’s midseason stretch was defined by sheer volatility, swinging wildly between game-breaking perimeter barrages and disastrous cold spells. When his shot fell, he was electric, like during the 03/18 vs BKN matchup where a blistering 5-for-9 shooting display from deep fueled a massive +13.8 impact score. Even when his jumper betrayed him, he occasionally found ways to contribute. During the 02/25 vs DET game, he shot an inefficient 6-for-16 from the field but still managed a +6.4 impact score because relentless off-ball movement and hustle plays salvaged his night. But his aggression often carried a steep price. He dropped a solid 13 points on 03/23 vs PHI, yet severe defensive bleeding during his shifts erased his scoring spike and dragged his net impact down to a -2.2. If he wants to be more than a chaotic bench spark, he has to stop giving back his own points on the other end of the floor.

Aaron Wiggins
Guard Yr 4 65G (21S)
-2.2
9.4 pts
3.1 reb
1.7 ast
21.8 min

This stretch of the season was defined by maddening inconsistency, as Aaron Wiggins vacillated between a disruptive hustle player and a wildly inefficient chucker. When thrust into the starting lineup on 02/25 vs DET, his 20 points felt entirely hollow. A brutal 6-for-16 shooting night masked his high usage, dragging his overall impact down to -2.3 because his forced looks actively derailed the team's half-court rhythm. Conversely, he found ways to salvage ugly offensive nights through sheer grit, like his performance on 03/07 vs GSW. Despite scoring just 9 points on a clunky 3-for-9 from the floor, he posted a +3.2 impact score by shifting his focus to phenomenal hustle plays and connective passing. He struck a much better offensive balance on 03/03 vs CHI, where his 18 points generated a massive +8.2 impact. Even though he missed all five of his three-point attempts that night, relentless rim pressure and brilliant off-ball cutting completely offset his broken perimeter stroke.

Luguentz Dort
Guard Yr 6 69G (69S)
-2.7
8.3 pts
3.6 reb
1.2 ast
26.8 min

Luguentz Dort endured a catastrophic offensive slump during this stretch, transforming his typically rugged two-way profile into a glaring liability. Even when his raw scoring totals spiked, hidden costs routinely destroyed his value. Take his 16-point outing on 03/04 vs NYK, where severe off-ball mistakes dragged his impact score down to an abysmal -9.4 despite the scoring surge. His relentless hustle and point-of-attack defense were similarly wasted on 03/09 vs DEN. During that contest, a disastrous 2-for-11 shooting performance yielded a staggering -12.6 impact rating. He simply could not stop settling for heavily contested perimeter jumpers. He finally found a brief reprieve on 03/25 vs BOS, drilling four three-pointers to post a rare +0.7 impact score, but this stretch was otherwise defined by trigger-happy bricklaying that completely stalled his team's momentum.

Jaylin Williams
Forward Yr 3 65G (11S)
-2.7
7.2 pts
5.5 reb
2.4 ast
19.7 min

This stretch of the season was defined by extreme, high-variance swings where Jaylin Williams either broke the opposing defense with his jumper or derailed his own unit with poor execution. When his shot fell, he was an absolute offensive engine. During a spot start on 02/25 vs DET, elite shot selection and blistering perimeter efficiency drove a +8.6 impact alongside a massive 30-point, 11-rebound double-double. Even when his scoring volume dipped, he could completely tilt a game through sheer grit and dirty work. On 03/27 vs CHI, he posted a staggering +17.1 impact despite scoring just 12 points, anchoring the defense through elite rotational awareness and exceptional hustle metrics. However, his value plummeted just as quickly when he strayed from his ideal role. On 03/15 vs MIN, he logged a dismal -4.8 impact because forced shots early in the clock and poor perimeter execution completely disrupted the second unit's rhythm.

Branden Carlson
Center Yr 1 42G (4S)
-3.2
5.8 pts
3.0 reb
0.7 ast
11.6 min

Branden Carlson’s midseason stretch was defined by erratic rotational cameos punctuated by sudden, hyper-efficient flashes of brilliance. He looked like an absolute revelation on Jan 03 vs GSW, posting a massive +10.7 impact score while racking up 15 points and 11 rebounds in just 22 minutes. That stellar rating stemmed from ruthless interior finishing and a stout defensive presence (+6.0 def) that completely altered the geometry of the floor. Yet, that momentum vanished just days later on Jan 06 vs CHA. Despite logging 18 minutes, he generated a dismal -7.0 impact score because his erratic perimeter shooting entirely neutralized the floor-spacing value he was supposed to provide. He eventually learned to contribute even when his shot wasn't falling, evidenced by his gritty performance on Feb 04 vs SAS. Though he managed only 3 points in 16 minutes, he earned a robust +5.4 impact rating by setting bruising screens and fiercely protecting the paint to anchor the second unit.

Payton Sandfort
Forward Yr 0 4G
-3.5
8.8 pts
2.5 reb
0.0 ast
15.8 min
Ousmane Dieng
Forward Yr 3 27G
-6.5
3.7 pts
1.6 reb
1.0 ast
10.9 min

This stretch of the season was a chaotic rollercoaster defined by maddening inconsistency. Dieng reached his absolute ceiling during the 02/12 vs OKC matchup, posting 19 points, 11 rebounds, and six assists. He earned a massive +10.8 impact score that night because his highly efficient perimeter scoring was perfectly paired with elite defensive metrics. However, those flashes of two-way dominance vanished once he stepped into a starting role in March. Look at the 03/04 vs ATL game. He scored 14 points, yet still posted a disastrous -9.4 impact score. That brutal rating was driven entirely by hidden costs, specifically poor shot selection and defensive lapses that conceded easy baskets. He had already exposed his terrifying floor on 02/22 vs TOR, logging zero points and a -14.4 impact mark due to a complete offensive blackout.

Chris Youngblood
Guard Yr 0 32G
-7.1
2.0 pts
0.9 reb
0.3 ast
5.4 min

Chris Youngblood’s early season was defined by a desperate struggle to stay on the floor, plagued by constant defensive lapses and rushed decisions in fleeting bench cameos. Time and again, coaches handed him brief rotational windows only to watch him immediately bleed value. On 11/07 vs SAC, he posted a brutal -6.7 impact score in just eight minutes, entirely because blown defensive assignments and panicked offensive choices torpedoed his lineup. Even when he managed to find the basket, like his three points in nine minutes on 12/05 vs DAL, his atrocious defensive execution erased that minor production and dragged him down to a -4.8 impact rating. He did offer a rare flash of maximum efficiency on 01/19 vs CLE. By decisively stepping into consecutive perimeter looks during garbage time, he generated a massive +5.2 impact score in a mere three minutes. Ultimately, these sparse moments of shot-making could not mask his overall failure to adapt to the professional pace.

Brooks Barnhizer
Guard Yr 0 40G
-7.4
1.7 pts
1.9 reb
0.6 ast
8.7 min

This brutal stretch of the season was defined by empty cardio minutes and offensive invisibility that actively handicapped the second unit. Look no further than the Feb 25 vs DET matchup. Despite logging 22 minutes, Barnhizer scored zero points and posted a devastating -12.3 impact score because his absolute refusal to attack destroyed the team's floor spacing. Even when he found the bottom of the net, the hidden costs were staggering. During the Feb 04 vs SAS contest, he dropped 14 points, yet generated a massive -10.7 impact score because those empty offensive calories masked glaring defensive liabilities. Ironically, he offered far more value when he stopped hunting shots. On Mar 07 vs GSW, he managed just 2 points but earned a +1.0 impact score by playing a disciplined, mistake-free brand of basketball fueled by crisp passing. Until he balances his defensive effort with actual offensive gravity, these hollow rotation minutes will continue hurting the roster.

Buddy Boeheim
Forward Yr 2 4G
-7.7
1.5 pts
0.0 reb
0.0 ast
3.7 min
Nikola Topić
Guard Yr 0 10G (2S)
-10.0
5.2 pts
1.9 reb
4.4 ast
16.0 min

GAME LOG

L
PHX PHX 135
103 OKC OKC
Apr 12 Analysis available
-32
L
OKC OKC 107
127 DEN DEN
Apr 10 Analysis available
-20
W
OKC OKC 128
110 LAC LAC
Apr 8 Analysis available
+18
W
OKC OKC 123
87 LAL LAL
Apr 7 Analysis available
+36
W
UTA UTA 111
146 OKC OKC
Apr 5 Analysis available
+35
W
LAL LAL 96
139 OKC OKC
Apr 2 Analysis available
+43
W
DET DET 110
114 OKC OKC
Mar 30 Analysis available
+4
W
NYK NYK 100
111 OKC OKC
Mar 29 Analysis available
+11
W
CHI CHI 113
131 OKC OKC
Mar 28 Analysis available
+18
L
OKC OKC 109
119 BOS BOS
Mar 25 Analysis available
-10
W
OKC OKC 123
103 PHI PHI
Mar 23 Analysis available
+20
W
OKC OKC 132
111 WAS WAS
Mar 21 Analysis available
+21
W
OKC OKC 121
92 BKN BKN
Mar 18 Analysis available
+29
W
OKC OKC 113
108 ORL ORL
Mar 17 Analysis available
+5
W
MIN MIN 103
116 OKC OKC
Mar 15 Analysis available
+13
W
BOS BOS 102
104 OKC OKC
Mar 12 Analysis available
+2
W
DEN DEN 126
129 OKC OKC
Mar 9 Analysis available
+3
W
GSW GSW 97
104 OKC OKC
Mar 7 Analysis available
+7
W
OKC OKC 103
100 NYK NYK
Mar 4 Analysis available
+3
W
OKC OKC 116
108 CHI CHI
Mar 3 Analysis available
+8
W
OKC OKC 100
87 DAL DAL
Mar 1 Analysis available
+13
W
DEN DEN 121
127 OKC OKC
Feb 27 Analysis available
+6
L
OKC OKC 116
124 DET DET
Feb 25 Analysis available
-8
W
OKC OKC 116
107 TOR TOR
Feb 24 Analysis available
+9
W
CLE CLE 113
121 OKC OKC
Feb 22 Analysis available
+8
W
BKN BKN 86
105 OKC OKC
Feb 20 Analysis available
+19
L
MIL MIL 110
93 OKC OKC
Feb 12 Analysis available
-17
W
OKC OKC 136
109 PHX PHX
Feb 11 Analysis available
+27
W
OKC OKC 119
110 LAL LAL
Feb 9 Analysis available
+9
L
HOU HOU 112
106 OKC OKC
Feb 7 Analysis available
-6
L
OKC OKC 106
116 SAS SAS
Feb 4 Analysis available
-10
W
ORL ORL 92
128 OKC OKC
Feb 3 Analysis available
+36
W
OKC OKC 121
111 DEN DEN
Feb 1 Analysis available
+10
L
OKC OKC 111
123 MIN MIN
Jan 29 Analysis available
-12
W
NOP NOP 95
104 OKC OKC
Jan 28 Analysis available
+9
L
TOR TOR 103
101 OKC OKC
Jan 26 Analysis available
-2
L
IND IND 117
114 OKC OKC
Jan 24 Analysis available
-3
W
OKC OKC 122
102 MIL MIL
Jan 22 Analysis available
+20
W
OKC OKC 136
104 CLE CLE
Jan 19 Analysis available
+32
L
OKC OKC 120
122 MIA MIA
Jan 18 Analysis available
-2
W
OKC OKC 111
91 HOU HOU
Jan 16 Analysis available
+20
W
SAS SAS 98
119 OKC OKC
Jan 14 Analysis available
+21
W
MIA MIA 112
124 OKC OKC
Jan 12 Analysis available
+12
W
OKC OKC 117
116 MEM MEM
Jan 10 Analysis available
+1
W
UTA UTA 125
129 OKC OKC
Jan 8 Analysis available
+4
L
CHA CHA 124
97 OKC OKC
Jan 6 Analysis available
-27
L
OKC OKC 105
108 PHX PHX
Jan 5 Analysis available
-3
W
OKC OKC 131
94 GSW GSW
Jan 3 Analysis available
+37
W
POR POR 95
124 OKC OKC
Jan 1 Analysis available
+29
W
ATL ATL 129
140 OKC OKC
Dec 30 Analysis available
+11
W
PHI PHI 104
129 OKC OKC
Dec 28 Analysis available
+25
L
SAS SAS 117
102 OKC OKC
Dec 25 Analysis available
-15
L
OKC OKC 110
130 SAS SAS
Dec 24 Analysis available
-20
W
MEM MEM 103
119 OKC OKC
Dec 23 Analysis available
+16
L
OKC OKC 107
112 MIN MIN
Dec 20 Analysis available
-5
W
LAC LAC 101
122 OKC OKC
Dec 19 Analysis available
+21
L
SAS SAS 111
109 OKC OKC
Dec 14 Analysis available
-2
W
PHX PHX 89
138 OKC OKC
Dec 11 Analysis available
+49
W
OKC OKC 131
101 UTA UTA
Dec 8 Analysis available
+30
W
DAL DAL 111
132 OKC OKC
Dec 6 Analysis available
+21
W
OKC OKC 124
112 GSW GSW
Dec 3 Analysis available
+12
W
OKC OKC 123
115 POR POR
Nov 30 Analysis available
+8
W
PHX PHX 119
123 OKC OKC
Nov 29 Analysis available
+4
W
MIN MIN 105
113 OKC OKC
Nov 27 Analysis available
+8
W
POR POR 95
122 OKC OKC
Nov 24 Analysis available
+27
W
OKC OKC 144
112 UTA UTA
Nov 22 Analysis available
+32
W
SAC SAC 99
113 OKC OKC
Nov 20 Analysis available
+14
W
OKC OKC 126
109 NOP NOP
Nov 18 Analysis available
+17
W
OKC OKC 109
96 CHA CHA
Nov 16 Analysis available
+13
W
LAL LAL 92
121 OKC OKC
Nov 13 Analysis available
+29
W
GSW GSW 102
126 OKC OKC
Nov 12 Analysis available
+24
W
OKC OKC 114
100 MEM MEM
Nov 9 Analysis available
+14
W
OKC OKC 132
101 SAC SAC
Nov 8 Analysis available
+31
L
OKC OKC 119
121 POR POR
Nov 6 Analysis available
-2
W
OKC OKC 126
107 LAC LAC
Nov 5 Analysis available
+19
W
NOP NOP 106
137 OKC OKC
Nov 2 Analysis available
+31
W
WAS WAS 108
127 OKC OKC
Oct 31 Analysis available
+19
W
SAC SAC 101
107 OKC OKC
Oct 29 Analysis available
+6
W
OKC OKC 101
94 DAL DAL
Oct 27 Analysis available
+7
W
OKC OKC 117
100 ATL ATL
Oct 25 Analysis available
+17
W
OKC OKC 141
135 IND IND
Oct 23 Analysis available
+6
W
HOU HOU 124
125 OKC OKC
Oct 21 Analysis available
+1