GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

LAC LA Clippers
S James Harden 39.0m
24
pts
5
reb
14
ast
Impact
+0.9

Elite playmaking and defensive hands were almost entirely offset by a high volume of missed perimeter shots and live-ball turnovers. His insistence on hunting step-back threes against set defenses dragged down an otherwise brilliant facilitation game.

Shooting
FG 8/19 (42.1%)
3PT 4/13 (30.8%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.6%
USG% 27.5%
Net Rtg +3.7
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.0m
Offense +14.0
Hustle +5.2
Defense +7.0
Raw total +26.2
Avg player in 39.0m -25.3
Impact +0.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 4
S Kawhi Leonard 36.2m
34
pts
5
reb
5
ast
Impact
+24.2

An absolute masterclass in two-way efficiency, driven by suffocating point-of-attack defense and flawless shot selection. He systematically dismantled his primary matchup in isolation, generating massive value without forcing a single action.

Shooting
FG 11/16 (68.8%)
3PT 5/8 (62.5%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 89.1%
USG% 24.4%
Net Rtg +6.2
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.2m
Offense +29.0
Hustle +4.7
Defense +14.2
Raw total +47.9
Avg player in 36.2m -23.7
Impact +24.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 85.7%
STL 6
BLK 0
TO 2
S Ivica Zubac 33.6m
14
pts
11
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.7

Anchored the paint effectively by altering shots at the rim and securing crucial contested rebounds. His ability to seal off defenders early in the shot clock created easy pathways for the guards to operate.

Shooting
FG 5/7 (71.4%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 79.9%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg +6.5
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.6m
Offense +15.7
Hustle +3.9
Defense +6.9
Raw total +26.5
Avg player in 33.6m -21.8
Impact +4.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 30.8%
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 0
16
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+3.4

Capitalized on defensive breakdowns by consistently cutting into open space for high-percentage finishes. However, a few missed assignments on the perimeter kept his overall impact from matching his gaudy offensive efficiency.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 80.0%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg +16.7
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.7m
Offense +16.7
Hustle +3.2
Defense +2.1
Raw total +22.0
Avg player in 28.7m -18.6
Impact +3.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 22.2%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
S Bradley Beal 21.2m
9
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.6

Offensive stagnation and poor spacing gravity severely hindered the starting unit during his minutes. He repeatedly forced heavily contested mid-range jumpers, bailing out the defense and fueling opponent transition opportunities.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.7%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +8.7
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.2m
Offense +4.0
Hustle +1.2
Defense -0.1
Raw total +5.1
Avg player in 21.2m -13.7
Impact -8.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Kris Dunn 22.8m
6
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.3

High-level defensive disruption was negated by an inability to space the floor or organize the offense effectively. Opponents aggressively sagged off him on the perimeter, completely clogging the driving lanes for his teammates.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 12.7%
Net Rtg -4.1
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.8m
Offense +1.6
Hustle +3.0
Defense +6.9
Raw total +11.5
Avg player in 22.8m -14.8
Impact -3.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
John Collins 18.8m
14
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+2.6

Provided a reliable vertical threat that forced the opposing defense to collapse on pick-and-roll actions. His timely weak-side rotations also helped clean up several defensive breakdowns at the rim.

Shooting
FG 6/10 (60.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.0%
USG% 23.9%
Net Rtg -23.3
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.8m
Offense +10.5
Hustle +1.2
Defense +3.1
Raw total +14.8
Avg player in 18.8m -12.2
Impact +2.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
3
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.2

Passed up several open looks, leading to late-clock grenades that tanked the team's offensive efficiency. A step slow on closeouts, he was repeatedly targeted by quicker wings on the perimeter.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg -34.0
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.4m
Offense +0.5
Hustle +2.6
Defense +0.4
Raw total +3.5
Avg player in 16.4m -10.7
Impact -7.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Brook Lopez 14.3m
3
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.2

Brick-heavy perimeter shooting stalled the offense and allowed the opposing bigs to camp in the paint. While his drop-coverage rim protection remained solid, the offensive spacing issues were too costly to overcome.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.5%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg -12.1
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.3m
Offense -2.1
Hustle +2.3
Defense +5.8
Raw total +6.0
Avg player in 14.3m -9.2
Impact -3.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
Chris Paul 8.9m
3
pts
1
reb
4
ast
Impact
-2.0

Struggled to dictate the tempo during a brief stint, looking uncharacteristically out of sync with the second unit. A lack of defensive pressure at the point of attack allowed opposing guards to initiate their sets with zero friction.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -16.7
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.9m
Offense +3.8
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total +3.8
Avg player in 8.9m -5.8
Impact -2.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
NOP New Orleans Pelicans
S Trey Murphy III 33.5m
17
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
-0.0

Elite perimeter spacing was completely neutralized by hidden negative plays elsewhere on the floor. His defensive metrics suggest solid contests, but poor rotational awareness or live-ball turnovers likely drained his overall value to exactly neutral.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 5/10 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.7%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg -6.0
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.5m
Offense +12.6
Hustle +3.5
Defense +5.7
Raw total +21.8
Avg player in 33.5m -21.8
Impact -0.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 64.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Zion Williamson 32.6m
29
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
+1.5

Dominant interior finishing masked significant defensive liabilities that bled points on the other end. His inability to contain the pick-and-roll ball handler dragged down an otherwise stellar offensive output.

Shooting
FG 9/17 (52.9%)
3PT 0/0
FT 11/13 (84.6%)
Advanced
TS% 63.8%
USG% 31.7%
Net Rtg -6.9
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.6m
Offense +21.0
Hustle +2.0
Defense -0.3
Raw total +22.7
Avg player in 32.6m -21.2
Impact +1.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 69.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Herbert Jones 30.2m
11
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
-3.4

Despite excellent defensive metrics and highly efficient spot-up shooting, his overall impact slipped into the red. This discrepancy points to costly offensive fouls or getting caught out of position during transition defense sequences.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 110.0%
USG% 9.9%
Net Rtg -5.9
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.2m
Offense +8.2
Hustle +2.0
Defense +6.0
Raw total +16.2
Avg player in 30.2m -19.6
Impact -3.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Jeremiah Fears 29.2m
13
pts
4
reb
8
ast
Impact
+8.1

Defensive tenacity and relentless hustle completely overshadowed a rough shooting night. He generated massive value by blowing up passing lanes and creating extra possessions, proving you don't need to hit shots to control a game.

Shooting
FG 4/14 (28.6%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 42.4%
USG% 22.1%
Net Rtg +6.7
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.2m
Offense +10.4
Hustle +7.0
Defense +9.7
Raw total +27.1
Avg player in 29.2m -19.0
Impact +8.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 0
S Yves Missi 27.6m
6
pts
9
reb
3
ast
Impact
-5.9

Impact cratered due to likely foul trouble and poor positioning against veteran bigs, negating his efficient rim-running. He struggled to anchor the drop coverage effectively, allowing too many high-value looks in the paint.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 10.8%
Net Rtg +2.1
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.6m
Offense +7.8
Hustle +1.0
Defense +3.2
Raw total +12.0
Avg player in 27.6m -17.9
Impact -5.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
Jordan Poole 32.5m
30
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-1.5

Sizzling perimeter shot-making was entirely undone by empty defensive possessions and momentum-killing turnovers. His tendency to gamble in passing lanes rather than staying solid on the ball gave the opposition too many easy release valves.

Shooting
FG 9/15 (60.0%)
3PT 7/13 (53.8%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 87.2%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg -0.6
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.5m
Offense +16.3
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.5
Raw total +19.7
Avg player in 32.5m -21.2
Impact -1.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 5
Saddiq Bey 21.9m
8
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.0

A lack of secondary effort plays and poor floor spacing gravity severely limited his effectiveness. He failed to make an imprint on the glass or in transition, rendering his minutes largely empty.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.2%
USG% 13.5%
Net Rtg +12.6
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.9m
Offense +6.0
Hustle +0.8
Defense +2.4
Raw total +9.2
Avg player in 21.9m -14.2
Impact -5.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.0

Failed to provide his usual spark off the bench, struggling to navigate screens at the point of attack. The defensive pressure didn't translate to steals, and poor shot selection early in the clock stalled the second unit's momentum.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.5%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg +1.4
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.3m
Offense +2.0
Hustle +2.6
Defense +2.0
Raw total +6.6
Avg player in 16.3m -10.6
Impact -4.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Derik Queen 12.7m
6
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.8

Struggled to find the rhythm of the game during his short stint, often looking a step slow on defensive rotations. Missed box-outs and soft screens limited his ability to positively influence the offensive flow.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.0%
USG% 23.3%
Net Rtg +12.8
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.7m
Offense +4.5
Hustle +1.4
Defense +0.5
Raw total +6.4
Avg player in 12.7m -8.2
Impact -1.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 87.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.6

Made the most of a brief cameo by focusing strictly on rim protection and hustle plays. A quick defensive rotation to alter a shot at the rim showcased his situational awareness in limited action.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -64.3
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.5m
Offense -0.8
Hustle +1.2
Defense +2.4
Raw total +2.8
Avg player in 3.5m -2.2
Impact +0.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0