Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

Every shot, every lead change, every rotation — visualized.

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
NOP lead MEM lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
MEM 2P — 3P —
NOP 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 198 attempts

MEM MEM Shot-making Δ

Jackson Jr. 9/23 -2.5
Edey Open 10/15 +1.6
Wells Hard 9/11 +11.7
Landale Open 5/11 -2.5
Coward 5/10 -1.7
Aldama 5/9 +2.4
Williams Jr. 2/6 -2.4
Spencer Hard 4/5 +6.2
Konchar 3/4 +1.9
Caldwell-Pope Hard 0/3 -3.1

NOP NOP Shot-making Δ

Alvarado Hard 9/15 +8.4
Williamson Open 7/15 -5.0
Bey Hard 6/13 +1.7
Murphy III 5/12 -1.0
Fears 4/11 -2.5
Hawkins Hard 5/9 +4.5
Peavy 4/9 -2.1
Queen 5/8 +2.2
Missi Open 3/6 -1.3
McGowens Hard 2/3 +2.8
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
MEM
NOP
52/97 Field Goals 50/101
53.6% Field Goal % 49.5%
17/37 3-Pointers 19/45
45.9% 3-Point % 42.2%
12/14 Free Throws 9/10
85.7% Free Throw % 90.0%
64.5% True Shooting % 60.7%
53 Total Rebounds 46
11 Offensive 10
38 Defensive 30
38 Assists 34
2.38 Assist/TO Ratio 2.27
16 Turnovers 14
9 Steals 10
8 Blocks 9
18 Fouls 18
66 Points in Paint 50
9 Fast Break Pts 16
27 Points off TOs 23
10 Second Chance Pts 17
43 Bench Points 61
9 Largest Lead 17
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Saddiq Bey
18 PTS · 10 REB · 2 AST · 38.7 MIN
+25.04
2
Zach Edey
21 PTS · 15 REB · 0 AST · 34.7 MIN
+24.26
3
Jaylen Wells
25 PTS · 3 REB · 1 AST · 32.5 MIN
+23.74
4
Jaren Jackson Jr.
27 PTS · 5 REB · 2 AST · 36.1 MIN
+22.03
5
Jose Alvarado
24 PTS · 5 REB · 2 AST · 26.6 MIN
+21.21
6
Santi Aldama
14 PTS · 5 REB · 4 AST · 24.4 MIN
+15.17
7
Derik Queen
10 PTS · 2 REB · 9 AST · 22.8 MIN
+13.16
8
Jordan Hawkins
14 PTS · 1 REB · 1 AST · 15.3 MIN
+12.55
9
Cam Spencer
11 PTS · 2 REB · 7 AST · 19.1 MIN
+11.88
10
Micah Peavy
11 PTS · 4 REB · 2 AST · 21.4 MIN
+9.57
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q5 0:01 TEAM offensive REBOUND 133–128
Q5 0:02 MISS J. Hawkins 25' pullup 3PT 133–128
Q5 0:05 J. Jackson Jr. Free Throw 2 of 2 (27 PTS) 133–128
Q5 0:05 J. Jackson Jr. Free Throw 1 of 2 (26 PTS) 132–128
Q5 0:05 J. Alvarado personal FOUL (5 PF) (Jackson Jr. 2 FT) 131–128
Q5 0:05 V. Williams Jr. STEAL (2 STL) 131–128
Q5 0:05 J. Alvarado bad pass TURNOVER (1 TO) 131–128
Q5 0:08 S. Bey STEAL (3 STL) 131–128
Q5 0:08 Z. Edey lost ball TURNOVER (2 TO) 131–128
Q5 0:09 Z. Edey REBOUND (Off:5 Def:10) 131–128
Q5 0:12 MISS Z. Williamson 24' pullup 3PT 131–128
Q5 0:31 Z. Williamson REBOUND (Off:2 Def:3) 131–128
Q5 0:34 MISS V. Williams Jr. Free Throw 2 of 2 131–128
Q5 0:34 V. Williams Jr. Free Throw 1 of 2 (5 PTS) 131–128
Q5 0:34 J. Alvarado personal FOUL (4 PF) (Williams Jr. 2 FT) 130–128

GAME ANALYSIS

KEEP READING

Create a free account and follow your team to get the full analysis every morning.

Create Free Account

Already have an account? Log in

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

NOP New Orleans Pelicans
S Saddiq Bey 38.7m
18
pts
10
reb
2
ast
Impact
+23.8

Floor-spacing gravity and elite perimeter containment (+10.1 Def) anchored a highly effective two-way performance. By consistently punishing drop coverage from deep, he forced defensive adjustments that opened up driving lanes for his teammates.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 4/9 (44.4%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.8%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg -16.7
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.7m
Scoring +12.7
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +4.8
Hustle +12.7
Defense +6.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 72.7%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 0
S Trey Murphy III 38.5m
12
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
-6.7

A brutal -12.7 net rating stemmed from an inability to consistently bend the defense with his perimeter shot. Settling for heavily contested jumpers rather than attacking closeouts stalled the offensive flow during his extended minutes on the floor.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 16.3%
Net Rtg -15.6
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.5m
Scoring +6.7
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +1.2
Defense +2.6
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 42.1%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
S Zion Williamson 32.4m
17
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
-4.5

Getting repeatedly walled off at the rim tanked his usual hyper-efficiency, dragging his total impact into the red (-6.2). Despite generating significant physical pressure, his forced drives into heavy traffic resulted in empty possessions that fueled opponent transition attacks.

Shooting
FG 7/15 (46.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.1%
USG% 27.6%
Net Rtg -11.6
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.4m
Scoring +11.1
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +5.4
Defense +0.1
Turnovers -11.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 5
S Jeremiah Fears 26.4m
10
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
-3.3

A severe regression in shot quality derailed his offensive rhythm and dragged down his overall impact. Struggling to separate from primary defenders, he forced contested mid-range looks that routinely bailed out the opposing defense.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 43.7%
USG% 18.6%
Net Rtg -50.9
+/- -28
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.4m
Scoring +5.2
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
S Derik Queen 22.8m
10
pts
2
reb
9
ast
Impact
-1.7

Operating as an unexpected offensive hub, his brilliant interior passing picked apart defensive rotations. A sharp uptick in finishing efficiency at the rim kept defenders honest, allowing him to orchestrate a highly positive +3.8 net impact.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 17.3%
Net Rtg -54.0
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.8m
Scoring +8.0
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 23
FGM Against 15
Opp FG% 65.2%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
Yves Missi 29.4m
6
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
-6.1

Strong rim deterrence (+5.5 Def) was largely undone by a lack of offensive assertiveness. Being a non-factor in the pick-and-roll allowed the opposition to aggressively trap ball-handlers, resulting in a slightly negative overall rating.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 9.9%
Net Rtg +31.1
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.4m
Scoring +3.6
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +4.7
Defense +1.2
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 1
24
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+17.1

Catching absolute fire from the perimeter completely inverted the defense and drove a massive +8.3 impact score. This staggering offensive explosion (+445% above average) punished every under-screen coverage and single-handedly swung the momentum of the second half.

Shooting
FG 9/15 (60.0%)
3PT 6/11 (54.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 80.0%
USG% 24.2%
Net Rtg +37.0
+/- +23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.6m
Scoring +19.7
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +7.1
Hustle +4.4
Defense +2.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
Micah Peavy 21.4m
11
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.5

An unexpected scoring surge was heavily mitigated by poor perimeter spacing. Missing all his attempts from beyond the arc allowed defenders to pack the paint, resulting in a slightly negative overall footprint despite the raw production.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.3%
USG% 22.9%
Net Rtg +17.6
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.4m
Scoring +6.9
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +3.1
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
14
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+2.4

Lethal off-ball movement generated a barrage of open perimeter looks that instantly supercharged the second unit. By hunting his shot aggressively from deep, he stretched the opposing defense to its breaking point in just 15 minutes of action.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 77.8%
USG% 25.6%
Net Rtg +9.1
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.3m
Scoring +11.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +4.4
Hustle +0.3
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
6
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.7

Defensive liabilities at the point of attack erased the value of his highly efficient spot-up shooting. Opposing guards consistently targeted him in isolation, turning his minutes into a net negative (-1.8) despite his perfect marksmanship from deep.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 87.2%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg +14.9
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.5m
Scoring +4.7
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.4
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
MEM Memphis Grizzlies
27
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+14.1

Defensive intimidation anchored his positive impact (+8.0 Def), compensating for a highly inefficient night inside the arc. Forcing the issue in the paint led to a slew of missed contested twos, though his willingness to generate extra possessions through hustle kept his overall rating firmly in the green.

Shooting
FG 9/23 (39.1%)
3PT 5/11 (45.5%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.5%
USG% 28.7%
Net Rtg +11.6
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.1m
Scoring +15.8
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +6.5
Hustle +1.5
Defense +2.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 58.8%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 0
5
pts
4
reb
17
ast
Impact
-12.5

Being a complete non-threat as a scorer allowed the defense to aggressively play the passing lanes, severely dampening the value of his elite playmaking volume. Even with fantastic point-of-attack defense (+6.0), his reluctance to shoot crippled the team's offensive spacing and drove a steep -11.0 net rating.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 36.3%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg +36.5
+/- +27
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.0m
Scoring +1.4
Creation +2.9
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +4.1
Defense +4.9
Turnovers -13.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 6
S Zach Edey 34.6m
21
pts
15
reb
0
ast
Impact
+23.3

Absolute dominance in the painted area fueled a massive +10.5 total impact score. By combining highly efficient interior finishing with imposing rim protection, he completely dictated the physical terms of the matchup and overwhelmed opposing bigs.

Shooting
FG 10/15 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.0%
USG% 22.0%
Net Rtg +52.3
+/- +39
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.6m
Scoring +16.8
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +19.1
Defense +2.5
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 35.3%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 2
S Cedric Coward 34.1m
12
pts
9
reb
4
ast
Impact
+1.3

Hidden negatives cratered his overall rating (-9.9) despite respectable defensive metrics. An inability to stretch the floor allowed defenders to sag off, bogging down half-court sets and leading to costly empty possessions that killed momentum.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 53.0%
USG% 17.1%
Net Rtg +34.6
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.1m
Scoring +7.6
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +8.5
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -5.3
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
S Jaylen Wells 32.5m
25
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+15.1

Elite shot selection defined this breakout performance, as he punished defensive rotations with lethal perimeter efficiency. The massive scoring spike (+172% above average) drove a staggering +21.9 box score metric, completely warping the opponent's defensive scheme.

Shooting
FG 9/11 (81.8%)
3PT 5/6 (83.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 105.2%
USG% 17.6%
Net Rtg +25.8
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.5m
Scoring +23.7
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +6.4
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.7
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
Santi Aldama 24.4m
14
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
+3.5

Capitalizing on defensive rotations, he provided a highly efficient secondary scoring punch that stabilized the second unit. Strong weak-side defensive rotations perfectly complemented his tidy offensive execution, keeping his impact comfortably positive.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 70.9%
USG% 17.9%
Net Rtg -35.3
+/- -21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.4m
Scoring +11.1
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +3.3
Hustle +1.5
Defense +0.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Cam Spencer 19.1m
11
pts
2
reb
7
ast
Impact
-1.3

Crisp ball movement and lethal spot-up shooting defined a highly productive stint off the bench. He punished late closeouts with near-perfect perimeter execution, driving a positive impact despite limited floor time.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 110.0%
USG% 16.3%
Net Rtg -47.5
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.1m
Scoring +10.2
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 70.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
Jock Landale 18.1m
11
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.3

A high-motor approach generated valuable extra possessions (+3.5 Hustle), keeping his overall impact barely in the green. However, a slightly forced shot diet around the basket prevented him from capitalizing fully on those second-chance opportunities.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 31.7%
Net Rtg -82.3
+/- -34
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.1m
Scoring +6.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +3.8
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
0
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-16.3

An absolute zero on the offensive end, his inability to knock down open perimeter looks allowed the defense to freely double the post. This lack of gravity completely stalled the half-court offense, resulting in a brutal -8.9 net impact during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 7.7%
Net Rtg -52.0
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.4m
Scoring -2.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 87.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
John Konchar 13.7m
7
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.3

Relentless energy defined this short stint, with elite hustle metrics driving a highly positive momentum shift. He perfectly executed the role of an opportunistic cutter, converting broken plays into easy baskets while the defense scrambled.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 87.5%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg +22.5
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.7m
Scoring +6.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0