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

SAC Sacramento Kings
S Zach LaVine 37.0m
31
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
+19.5

Scorched the nets with premium shot selection, punishing drop coverages and converting highly contested perimeter looks. His offensive explosion was the primary catalyst for the team's success, completely overwhelming his primary defenders. Kept his defensive lapses to a minimum, allowing his scoring gravity to dictate a massive positive net rating.

Shooting
FG 10/18 (55.6%)
3PT 4/9 (44.4%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 73.5%
USG% 29.3%
Net Rtg +7.4
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.0m
Scoring +25.1
Creation +2.0
Shot Making +7.3
Hustle +0.6
Defense -2.6
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
12
pts
12
reb
1
ast
Impact
+7.1

Operated as an efficient hub when engaged, but his bizarrely low usage rate capped his overall influence on the game. He was strong defensively and cleaned the glass, yet his reluctance to assert himself as a scorer allowed the defense to stay home on shooters. A surprisingly muted overall impact for a player of his caliber.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.6%
USG% 14.1%
Net Rtg -17.1
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.6m
Scoring +9.3
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +12.3
Defense -2.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S DeMar DeRozan 36.5m
7
pts
3
reb
6
ast
Impact
+0.4

Compensated for a shockingly quiet scoring night by turning into an absolute menace in the passing lanes and diving for loose balls. When his midrange game abandoned him, he pivoted to elite defensive rotations to keep his impact afloat. It was a gritty, uncharacteristic performance that proved his veteran adaptability.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 37.1%
USG% 12.8%
Net Rtg -18.6
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.5m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +0.9
Defense +3.2
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
17
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+2.8

Despite finding his scoring rhythm again, his ball-stopping tendencies and ill-timed turnovers derailed the offensive flow. He provided excellent point-of-attack defense, but his erratic decision-making in transition gave away too many easy points. The negative overall grade highlights how empty his scoring surge actually was in the grand scheme.

Shooting
FG 8/16 (50.0%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 53.1%
USG% 29.9%
Net Rtg -6.0
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.5m
Scoring +11.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +4.8
Hustle +1.5
Defense +4.4
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 4
S Isaac Jones 14.0m
2
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.2

Bled points on the defensive end, consistently losing his man on cuts and failing to offer rim resistance. His minimal offensive involvement couldn't mask the fact that he was a glaring target in pick-and-roll coverage. The negative net rating is a direct result of being hunted by opposing guards.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 6.7%
Net Rtg -44.4
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.0m
Scoring +1.2
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +2.5
Defense -3.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Malik Monk 20.8m
20
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
+14.5

Completely flipped the momentum of the game with a nuclear shooting display from beyond the arc. Beyond just the perimeter barrage, his surprisingly disruptive perimeter defense created multiple transition opportunities. This was a masterclass in microwave scoring, maximizing every single second he spent on the hardwood.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 6/9 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 71.4%
USG% 30.0%
Net Rtg +20.8
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.8m
Scoring +14.7
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +6.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense +5.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 1
7
pts
1
reb
4
ast
Impact
-5.9

Played with his trademark chaotic energy, but his wild drives into traffic frequently resulted in empty possessions. Even when he converted efficiently, his erratic pacing disrupted the half-court sets of the second unit. The slight negative rating stems from a lack of control that allowed opponents to capitalize on broken plays.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 70.0%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg +12.5
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.4m
Scoring +5.5
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +0.3
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
Keon Ellis 17.0m
4
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.4

Locked down his perimeter assignments with elite lateral quickness, generating a stellar defensive rating in limited time. However, his complete hesitance to look for his own shot bogged down the offense and allowed defenders to sag off him. The neutral impact reflects a brilliant defensive shift entirely offset by offensive passivity.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.5%
USG% 15.0%
Net Rtg +17.7
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.0m
Scoring +1.4
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +6.2
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
5
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-3.6

Provided a stabilizing, albeit quiet, presence during his rotation minutes by simply making the right reads. He didn't force any offense, instead relying on quick ball reversals and solid positional defense to keep the second unit humming. A perfectly adequate shift that kept the team in the green.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 86.8%
USG% 9.4%
Net Rtg +50.4
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.7m
Scoring +4.2
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Drew Eubanks 11.4m
0
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-13.2

Brutalized the offense by missing a handful of point-blank looks around the rim, instantly killing possessions. While he offered some decent rim deterrence on the other end, his stone hands and inability to finish through contact made him a massive liability. The negative impact score is a direct reflection of blown layups and clogged spacing.

Shooting
FG 0/5 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 24.0%
Net Rtg +69.0
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.4m
Scoring -4.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
UTA Utah Jazz
S Lauri Markkanen 36.4m
33
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+24.6

Elite shot creation volume fueled a massive positive box metric, serving as the primary engine for the offense. While his perimeter stroke was slightly off, his constant rim pressure and offensive gravity kept the defense scrambling. The sheer scoring load easily outweighed modest defensive contributions.

Shooting
FG 12/23 (52.2%)
3PT 4/13 (30.8%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 64.4%
USG% 30.0%
Net Rtg +2.3
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.4m
Scoring +23.6
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +6.5
Hustle +5.1
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Keyonte George 33.6m
18
pts
2
reb
10
ast
Impact
+0.5

Poor shot selection and bricked perimeter looks completely erased the value of his high-level playmaking. Even with excellent hustle metrics, his insistence on forcing contested jumpers killed offensive momentum. The negative overall grade stems directly from wasting possessions as a high-usage initiator.

Shooting
FG 5/15 (33.3%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 49.8%
USG% 28.2%
Net Rtg +4.5
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.6m
Scoring +11.4
Creation +3.8
Shot Making +3.3
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -8.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 4
S Walker Kessler 29.7m
3
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.1

Complete offensive invisibility cratered his overall impact despite elite rim protection metrics. By refusing to look at the rim in nearly 30 minutes of action, he allowed his defender to freely roam and clog the paint. His strong defensive rotations and hustle simply couldn't offset playing four-on-five on the other end.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 79.8%
USG% 12.3%
Net Rtg +8.4
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.7m
Scoring +2.5
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +9.5
Defense +5.0
Turnovers -14.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 6
S Kyle Filipowski 25.2m
10
pts
6
reb
4
ast
Impact
-3.4

A stark drop-off in offensive volume from his recent dominant stretch limited his overall ceiling tonight. Despite converting efficiently when he did attack, his passive approach allowed the defense to key in elsewhere. Solid hustle plays couldn't completely rescue a slightly negative net impact.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 71.4%
USG% 13.6%
Net Rtg +38.0
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.2m
Scoring +7.9
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +3.7
Defense -5.0
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Svi Mykhailiuk 24.4m
9
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.8

Failed to replicate his recent hyper-efficient shooting, settling for contested looks that dragged down his overall value. While he offered decent rotational defense, his inability to stretch the floor consistently bogged down half-court sets. The negative net score reflects empty possessions where his off-ball movement stagnated.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 60.5%
USG% 15.3%
Net Rtg +28.6
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.4m
Scoring +5.7
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +5.1
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
15
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.3

Capitalized on his minutes with decisive, efficient scoring bursts that kept the second unit afloat. His surprisingly stout point-of-attack defense perfectly complemented his offensive output. This was a highly productive two-way shift that maximized every touch.

Shooting
FG 6/11 (54.5%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 68.2%
USG% 23.2%
Net Rtg -22.3
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.1m
Scoring +11.2
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +4.5
Hustle +1.2
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
10
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+2.3

Delivered a massive two-way spark off the bench, combining hyper-efficient shot-making with suffocating perimeter defense. He broke out of a recent shooting slump by attacking closeouts decisively rather than settling. His relentless energy on both ends was a major driver of positive lineup configurations.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.2%
USG% 17.0%
Net Rtg -20.0
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.3m
Scoring +7.8
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +6.3
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
4
pts
11
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.6

Anchored the paint with heavy physicality, using his massive frame to deter drives and generate a stellar defensive rating. His touch around the basket was completely absent, but his screen-setting and rebounding secured extra possessions. A classic case of doing the dirty work to salvage a poor shooting night.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 28.6%
USG% 15.7%
Net Rtg -21.7
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.2m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.8
Hustle +12.0
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.8

Floated around the perimeter without making any real dent in the defense, continuing a trend of passive offensive outings. He provided adequate weak-side help defense, but it wasn't enough to push his overall impact into the green. Needs to find ways to influence the game when his shot isn't falling.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 7.1%
Net Rtg -45.2
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.6m
Scoring +0.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +2.8
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Ace Bailey 13.5m
0
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-13.8

An absolute offensive zero tonight, missing every look and completely stalling out the team's momentum when on the floor. His inability to find any rhythm was a massive departure from his recent steady scoring. The defense sagged off him entirely, which wrecked the team's spacing and drove his abysmal net rating.

Shooting
FG 0/5 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 14.7%
Net Rtg -61.7
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.5m
Scoring -3.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +2.5
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0