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

Share Post

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

BOS Boston Celtics
16
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.6

Errant long-range shot selection neutralized an otherwise gritty performance defined by excellent point-of-attack defense. His inability to connect from beyond the arc stalled out multiple transition opportunities, dragging his net score slightly into the red.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.8%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +7.8
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.1m
Scoring +9.3
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +3.2
Hustle +3.4
Defense +2.6
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S Jaylen Brown 36.2m
25
pts
6
reb
4
ast
Impact
+11.8

A steady diet of mid-range isolation scoring yielded solid baseline numbers, but his overall influence hovered just below neutral. Defensive indifference on off-ball assignments allowed back-door cuts that quietly erased his offensive contributions.

Shooting
FG 9/18 (50.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 60.6%
USG% 25.9%
Net Rtg -1.6
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.2m
Scoring +18.6
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +6.0
Hustle +1.8
Defense -2.2
Turnovers -4.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 31.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Derrick White 35.4m
25
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
+18.4

Elite defensive instincts and relentless hustle metrics completely overshadowed a wildly inefficient shooting night. He generated massive value by blowing up passing lanes and securing 50/50 balls, dictating the game's momentum without needing his jumper to fall.

Shooting
FG 7/20 (35.0%)
3PT 4/13 (30.8%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.2%
USG% 27.1%
Net Rtg -5.5
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.4m
Scoring +15.3
Creation +2.9
Shot Making +5.6
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
S Neemias Queta 25.1m
17
pts
8
reb
0
ast
Impact
+4.8

Dominant interior finishing sustained his streak of highly efficient performances and anchored his positive impact. He consistently sealed his man deep in the paint, though sluggish pick-and-roll defense prevented his overall rating from soaring higher.

Shooting
FG 7/8 (87.5%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 87.1%
USG% 21.8%
Net Rtg +8.9
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.1m
Scoring +15.5
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +9.2
Defense -7.8
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Sam Hauser 22.4m
8
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-11.6

Cold perimeter shooting severely damaged his value, as he failed to punish defenders for helping off him. Without his typical floor-spacing gravity, the offensive spacing collapsed, leading to a heavily negative net rating during his shifts.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.1%
USG% 18.9%
Net Rtg +17.0
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.4m
Scoring +4.7
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -8.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
13
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+7.5

Measured shot selection and surprising defensive engagement resulted in a steady, positive shift. He effectively navigated screens to contest shooters, ensuring his efficient offensive output translated directly into winning margins.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.3%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg -5.6
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.3m
Scoring +9.4
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +3.3
Hustle +3.1
Defense +1.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
6
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.4

Active rim protection and disciplined verticality highlighted a highly effective bench appearance. By deterring drives and altering shots in the paint, he generated enough defensive value to easily offset a quiet offensive night.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 61.5%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -11.1
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.8m
Scoring +4.4
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +1.2
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.7

Stifling switch defense and physical screen-setting drove a highly productive rotational stint. Even with a clunky offensive showing and missed perimeter looks, his ability to blow up opponent pick-and-rolls secured a strong positive rating.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 21.6%
Net Rtg +7.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.7m
Scoring -1.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +7.0
Defense -1.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
Josh Minott 14.2m
2
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-6.2

A drastic drop in offensive involvement rendered him a non-factor on that end of the floor. Compounding the passivity, poor closeouts on the perimeter resulted in a negative defensive rating that dictated his overall subpar score.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 2.6%
Net Rtg -12.7
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.2m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +0.2
Hustle +2.5
Defense -1.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Luka Garza 5.7m
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-16.1

Forced perimeter shots during a brief appearance quickly derailed his offensive rhythm and snapped his recent efficiency streak. Despite decent defensive positioning, those empty possessions created transition mismatches that tanked his overall rating.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -14.3
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.7m
Scoring -1.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
PHI Philadelphia 76ers
S VJ Edgecombe 42.2m
34
pts
7
reb
3
ast
Impact
+27.2

Relentless two-way energy defined this breakout performance, highlighted by elite hustle metrics that kept possessions alive. He confidently shouldered a massive jump in offensive volume, using aggressive perimeter shot creation to break the opponent's defensive shell.

Shooting
FG 13/26 (50.0%)
3PT 5/13 (38.5%)
FT 3/6 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.4%
USG% 30.1%
Net Rtg -5.0
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 42.2m
Scoring +23.1
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +8.0
Hustle +7.0
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Tyrese Maxey 41.4m
40
pts
2
reb
6
ast
Impact
+34.5

Lethal perimeter shot-making drove a staggering net rating, as defenders were repeatedly punished for going under screens. His ability to blend high-volume execution with careful ball security dictated the tempo for the entire contest.

Shooting
FG 13/24 (54.2%)
3PT 7/9 (77.8%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 72.7%
USG% 30.2%
Net Rtg +4.9
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 41.4m
Scoring +32.3
Creation +2.3
Shot Making +9.5
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
S Dominick Barlow 34.4m
13
pts
8
reb
5
ast
Impact
+5.7

An aggressive interior approach fueled a massive scoring spike compared to his recent baseline. While his streak of highly efficient finishing continued around the basket, empty possessions from beyond the arc kept his net impact from climbing higher.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 61.1%
USG% 14.8%
Net Rtg +1.4
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.4m
Scoring +9.2
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +10.2
Defense -2.9
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 41.2%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S Kelly Oubre Jr. 33.5m
10
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.6

Despite generating excellent defensive pressure and loose-ball recoveries, his overall impact slipped into the red due to offensive passivity. Settling exclusively for perimeter jumpers prevented him from pressuring the rim, neutralizing his typical slashing value.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.4%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -8.1
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.5m
Scoring +6.8
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.2
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S Joel Embiid 20.3m
4
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
-9.8

A disastrous shooting performance completely cratered his overall value, as he failed to establish any rhythm against early double-teams. The massive drop-off from his usual offensive dominance overshadowed a respectable effort anchoring the paint defensively.

Shooting
FG 1/9 (11.1%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 20.2%
USG% 22.7%
Net Rtg -35.8
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.3m
Scoring -1.7
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +2.8
Defense -1.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
10
pts
5
reb
5
ast
Impact
-15.5

Active hands in the passing lanes couldn't salvage a deeply negative overall rating. He struggled to stay in front of his primary assignments defensively, while a lack of decisive rim pressure resulted in stalled offensive sets.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.2%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg +24.8
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.6m
Scoring +5.2
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +1.5
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -12.6
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 53.8%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 5
6
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.4

Opportunistic finishing around the basket provided a brief offensive spark. However, a complete lack of measurable hustle plays and poor defensive positioning allowed opponents to exploit his side of the floor, dragging his net score down.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg +7.7
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.9m
Scoring +5.2
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +5.1
Defense -3.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Adem Bona 14.8m
0
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-14.0

Complete offensive invisibility severely handicapped his lineup during his minutes on the floor. Without taking a single shot to keep the defense honest, his adequate rotational rim protection wasn't enough to prevent a steep negative impact.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 5.4%
Net Rtg +9.2
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.8m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -4.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-12.2

Defensive lapses during a very short rotation stint quickly put his unit at a disadvantage. Opponents immediately attacked his drop coverage, forcing an early exit before he could establish any rebounding presence.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +47.6
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.7m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.1

A brief cameo at the end of a quarter offered no opportunity to influence the game. His net rating reflects a purely neutral placeholder stint.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 0.1m
Scoring +4.0
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +1.3
Defense -1.3
Turnovers -1.2
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0