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

DAL Dallas Mavericks
S P.J. Washington 39.3m
18
pts
9
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.0

A high volume of live-ball turnovers and defensive miscommunications in transition severely undercut an otherwise solid shooting night. Repeatedly forcing passes into tight windows defined his struggles, sparking opponent fast breaks that erased his offensive contributions. Despite strong on-ball defense, the sloppy decision-making as a playmaker proved too costly.

Shooting
FG 8/14 (57.1%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.3%
USG% 22.4%
Net Rtg -9.0
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.3m
Scoring +12.8
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +4.0
Hustle +6.6
Defense +4.6
Turnovers -19.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 26.7%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 8
S Anthony Davis 37.6m
27
pts
13
reb
4
ast
Impact
+19.1

Absolute dominance on the defensive glass and elite rim deterrence fueled a massive positive impact. Anchoring the paint with flawless drop coverage defined his night, forcing opponents into low-percentage mid-range attempts. The volume scoring was just a bonus compared to how completely he dictated the terms of engagement on the defensive end.

Shooting
FG 9/19 (47.4%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 9/12 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 55.6%
USG% 30.9%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.6m
Scoring +17.1
Creation +2.8
Shot Making +3.6
Hustle +16.5
Defense +0.7
Turnovers -11.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 5
S Cooper Flagg 34.6m
18
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
+5.1

A significant drop in scoring efficiency was salvaged by relentless hustle and secondary playmaking. Keeping possessions alive with crucial offensive rebounds and consistently making the extra pass defined his positive contributions. While the jumper wasn't falling at his usual rate, his high motor ensured he remained a net positive.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 23.6%
Net Rtg -7.3
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.6m
Scoring +11.9
Creation +2.9
Shot Making +3.3
Hustle +6.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -11.3
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 5
8
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+7.7

Elite screen-setting and precise timing on rolls to the basket created immense gravitational pull on the offense. Generating multiple wide-open looks for perimeter shooters simply by diving hard to the rim defined his impact. Defensively, his ability to switch onto smaller guards late in the clock prevented critical breakdowns.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 80.0%
USG% 13.2%
Net Rtg +0.1
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.3m
Scoring +7.1
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +7.6
Defense +4.9
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 2
S Klay Thompson 17.3m
8
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.2

Bricklaying from beyond the arc neutralized his solid positional defense and off-ball movement. Failing to punish defenders for going under screens defined his offensive woes, resulting in stalled half-court possessions. The inability to stretch the floor allowed the defense to pack the paint against the primary ball-handlers.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 48.1%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg -33.3
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.3m
Scoring +4.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +1.2
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Max Christie 29.5m
9
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-3.2

Poor defensive awareness and an inability to navigate off-ball screens led to a highly negative impact. Being repeatedly targeted in isolation defined his struggles, bleeding points that completely erased his perimeter shot-making. The lack of physical resistance at the point of attack forced the defense into constant rotation.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 9.6%
Net Rtg -11.0
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.5m
Scoring +5.8
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +0.3
Defense -3.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
7
pts
6
reb
4
ast
Impact
+4.4

A sharp decline in offensive aggression and poorly timed fouls dragged his rating into the red. Passing up several open looks to drive into traffic defined his outing, resulting in wasted possessions and disrupted spacing. The defensive metrics were solid, but giving up cheap points at the free-throw line negated that effort.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.8%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -1.7
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.3m
Scoring +3.7
Creation +2.1
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +7.6
Defense +2.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 83.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
Jaden Hardy 11.3m
9
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.4

Selfish decision-making and forced shots early in the clock prevented him from making a positive impact. Ignoring open teammates in transition to take contested pull-ups defined his stint, killing offensive momentum. The scoring output was hollow, as it came at the expense of overall team rhythm.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 29.6%
Net Rtg -2.6
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.3m
Scoring +5.2
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.3

Over-dribbling and a failure to initiate offensive sets on time resulted in a negative score. Struggling to deal with full-court pressure defined his appearance, burning valuable shot-clock seconds before getting into the offense. Defensive blow-bys at the point of attack further compounded his struggles.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 14.8%
Net Rtg -65.2
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.8m
Scoring -0.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +1.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
1
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
-9.5

Complete offensive invisibility and lethargic transition defense defined a rough stint on the floor. Failing to organize the second unit led to stagnant isolation plays and late-clock heaves. The inability to break down his primary defender severely handicapped the offense during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 12.9%
USG% 17.4%
Net Rtg +4.5
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.5m
Scoring -1.7
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.7

A total lack of scoring punch and sloppy ball-handling doomed his brief appearance. Looking hesitant when attacking the paint defined his struggles, making him unable to replicate his recent offensive surges. Hustle plays on loose balls prevented the score from cratering further, but the offensive zeroes were glaring.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg +14.2
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.9m
Scoring -1.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.7

Stepping onto the floor for only a handful of seconds resulted in a nearly neutral score. There was no time to register any meaningful statistics or defensive events before the buzzer sounded.

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 0.3m
Scoring +2.9
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +6.0
Defense -2.1
Turnovers -1.9
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.9

Checking in for a brief cameo at the end of a quarter provided no opportunity to impact the game. Serving essentially as a placeholder for a single possession resulted in a neutral score.

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 0.3m
Scoring +2.6
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +4.2
Defense -2.4
Turnovers -1.6
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
WAS Washington Wizards
S Kyshawn George 35.3m
34
pts
11
reb
4
ast
Impact
+34.9

An absolute masterclass in shot selection and perimeter gravity fueled a massive positive impact. He punished defensive rotations by burying catch-and-shoot looks from deep, while his active hands in the passing lanes generated crucial transition opportunities. Relentless off-ball movement defined this performance, constantly breaking the opponent's defensive shell.

Shooting
FG 11/15 (73.3%)
3PT 7/9 (77.8%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 98.8%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +17.5
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.3m
Scoring +31.1
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +8.2
Hustle +14.0
Defense +1.2
Turnovers -11.3
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 21
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 3
TO 5
S CJ McCollum 33.5m
6
pts
2
reb
5
ast
Impact
-7.4

A severe drop-off in scoring aggression and an inability to navigate pick-and-roll coverages tanked his overall rating. Settling for heavily contested floaters instead of attacking the paint defined his struggles, leading to stalled offensive possessions. The lack of dribble penetration allowed the defense to stay home on shooters, neutralizing his playmaking threat.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 33.8%
USG% 13.1%
Net Rtg +12.1
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.5m
Scoring +1.1
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +1.6
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Khris Middleton 29.8m
9
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.2

Despite a slight scoring bump over recent struggles, poor perimeter efficiency and forced mid-range jumpers dragged down his overall value. His defensive positioning remained a bright spot, but it wasn't enough to overcome the empty possessions created by clanking multiple deep attempts. The inability to separate from younger defenders in isolation sets defined this outing and severely limited his offensive ceiling.

Shooting
FG 4/13 (30.8%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 32.4%
USG% 17.8%
Net Rtg +4.5
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.8m
Scoring +0.9
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +1.2
Defense +6.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 0
S Bub Carrington 26.2m
7
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
-8.3

Frigid shooting from the floor completely overshadowed a surprisingly gritty defensive effort. Struggling to finish through contact on drives defined his night, resulting in empty trips and transition chances going the other way. While his point-of-attack defense was commendable, the offensive dead weight made it difficult to keep him on the floor.

Shooting
FG 1/7 (14.3%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 36.3%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg -10.4
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.2m
Scoring +1.7
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.3
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S Alex Sarr 25.7m
14
pts
9
reb
5
ast
Impact
+5.9

Rim protection and vertical spacing were the primary drivers of this highly effective outing. He altered numerous shots at the basket, anchoring a defense that stifled interior drives. Timely rim-runs and putbacks defined his offensive bump, capitalizing perfectly on the defensive attention drawn by the guards.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.5%
USG% 25.4%
Net Rtg +8.9
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.7m
Scoring +10.2
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +10.5
Defense +2.0
Turnovers -10.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 21
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 52.4%
STL 1
BLK 3
TO 4
Tre Johnson 26.3m
17
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+9.0

Decisive downhill attacking and improved finishing through traffic drove a strong positive rating. He consistently beat closeouts to collapse the defense, creating high-value looks for himself and secondary actions for others. Abandoning low-percentage pull-ups in favor of aggressive rim pressure defined this scoring surge.

Shooting
FG 7/13 (53.8%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 65.4%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg +13.1
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.3m
Scoring +12.9
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +5.0
Hustle +3.8
Defense -1.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 14.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
7
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
-6.3

A complete lack of secondary stats and hustle plays resulted in a negative score despite efficient shooting. He was largely invisible on the glass and failed to generate any disruptive events on defense. Passive off-ball floating defined this performance, as he rarely actively hunted shots or created space for teammates.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 8.6%
Net Rtg +13.5
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.3m
Scoring +4.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.2
Defense -3.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Cam Whitmore 16.2m
8
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.5

Tunnel vision on drives and forced attempts at the rim resulted in a nearly neutral impact despite solid defensive metrics. Repeatedly driving into multiple defenders defined his struggles, leading to blocked shots and disrupted offensive flow. A few timely weak-side rotations on defense salvaged his overall score, but the offensive decision-making remains a work in progress.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.5%
USG% 25.6%
Net Rtg +10.7
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.2m
Scoring +3.7
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +3.8
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
10
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.5

Efficient interior finishing buoyed his rating, though defensive lapses in drop coverage kept his impact modest. He capitalized on dump-off passes and offensive glass opportunities to generate high-percentage looks. However, slow lateral rotations when pulled away from the basket defined his defensive issues, allowing opponents to generate easy perimeter looks.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 72.7%
USG% 18.4%
Net Rtg -13.4
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.9m
Scoring +8.0
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +4.1
Defense -5.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.2

Activity level and defensive positioning drove a positive impact in limited minutes, completely offsetting a rough shooting night. Consistently boxing out larger opponents and deterring drives with verticality at the rim defined his stint. The stark drop in scoring volume was mitigated by his willingness to do the dirty work in the paint.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 22.5%
USG% 23.8%
Net Rtg +55.0
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.1m
Scoring -0.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
Will Riley 3.7m
3
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.1

A brief but highly disruptive defensive stint was the sole driver of his positive rating. Blowing up two pick-and-roll actions with aggressive hedging defined his minutes, forcing the offense into late-clock situations. Drawing fouls to get to the line provided just enough offensive value to complement the defensive energy.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 85.2%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +30.0
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.7m
Scoring +2.5
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0