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

PHI Philadelphia 76ers
S Tyrese Maxey 41.8m
28
pts
6
reb
9
ast
Impact
+14.9

Heavy offensive usage masked a highly inefficient shooting night that stalled the team's momentum. He repeatedly settled for contested floaters rather than moving the ball against set defenses. While his sheer volume produced counting stats, the wasted possessions ultimately zeroed out his overall value.

Shooting
FG 7/20 (35.0%)
3PT 4/9 (44.4%)
FT 10/12 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 55.4%
USG% 25.9%
Net Rtg +0.6
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 41.8m
Scoring +16.1
Creation +3.1
Shot Making +5.2
Hustle +3.7
Defense -0.4
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S VJ Edgecombe 39.6m
15
pts
6
reb
8
ast
Impact
+6.4

Elite defensive metrics and relentless hustle were completely neutralized by a barrage of forced, low-quality shots. He consistently bogged down the half-court offense by driving into crowded paint areas. Despite generating immense value through sheer effort, his poor offensive decision-making resulted in a perfectly flat net impact.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.2%
USG% 18.4%
Net Rtg +9.1
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.6m
Scoring +8.3
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +4.7
Defense +3.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 68.8%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 2
S Kelly Oubre Jr. 37.4m
19
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+12.8

Thrived by relentlessly cutting baseline and finishing through contact at the rim. His highly efficient scoring was complemented by disruptive defensive energy that blew up multiple perimeter handoffs. This two-way aggression drove a massive positive swing whenever he was on the floor.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 83.9%
USG% 11.0%
Net Rtg +20.3
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.4m
Scoring +16.6
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +3.9
Hustle +0.3
Defense +2.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
S Joel Embiid 20.1m
20
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
+6.6

Dominated his minutes with surgical precision in the mid-post, forcing early double-teams that opened up the floor. His sheer physical presence deterred drives to the basket, anchoring a highly effective defensive stint. Even with a reduced scoring load, his gravitational pull dictated the flow of the game.

Shooting
FG 7/11 (63.6%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 75.8%
USG% 35.4%
Net Rtg -7.9
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.1m
Scoring +16.0
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +4.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense +4.7
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 4
S Dominick Barlow 15.8m
2
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.8

Faded into the background offensively, failing to establish deep post position against stronger matchups. While his rim protection metrics remained solid, his inability to command the ball stunted the second unit's spacing. The lack of offensive gravity ultimately dragged his overall rating into the red.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 7.5%
Net Rtg +16.3
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.8m
Scoring +1.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +5.1
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
24
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
+8.9

A blistering catch-and-shoot performance from beyond the arc kept the offense afloat during stagnant stretches. He continued his hot streak by finding soft spots in the zone defense. However, poor closeouts on the other end of the floor allowed opponents to claw back much of the value he generated.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 5/8 (62.5%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 74.1%
USG% 23.4%
Net Rtg -11.0
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.3m
Scoring +18.9
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +5.6
Hustle +1.9
Defense -2.5
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
7
pts
13
reb
2
ast
Impact
+8.8

Completely controlled the glass, generating crucial second-chance opportunities that broke the opponent's back. His massive frame clogged the driving lanes, resulting in an elite defensive rating during his shift. This dominant rebounding display fueled a massive positive swing in a short amount of time.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/3 (33.3%)
Advanced
TS% 47.8%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg +37.1
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.8m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +12.6
Defense +1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-17.8

Completely derailed offensive possessions by bricking open perimeter looks and failing to attack closeouts. His inability to stretch the floor allowed the defense to pack the paint against the primary scorers. Even a solid effort on the defensive glass couldn't salvage his disastrous offensive stint.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg -53.3
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.8m
Scoring -2.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +3.1
Defense -1.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 2
9
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.6

Efficient spot-up shooting was entirely undone by a complete lack of defensive awareness. Opposing wings routinely blew past him due to poor footwork on the perimeter. His failure to register a single hustle play further highlighted a low-motor performance that hurt the team.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 90.0%
USG% 17.9%
Net Rtg -17.2
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.5m
Scoring +7.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.2
Turnovers -2.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Adem Bona 11.9m
1
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.3

Provided sturdy interior defense but was a complete non-factor on the offensive end. His inability to finish or draw fouls on rolls to the rim allowed defenders to completely ignore him. The resulting spacing issues slightly outweighed his positive rim protection.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 26.6%
USG% 7.4%
Net Rtg -26.6
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.9m
Scoring -0.2
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
CHA Charlotte Hornets
S Miles Bridges 34.9m
18
pts
9
reb
7
ast
Impact
+11.6

High-volume inefficiency doomed his overall metric despite solid defensive and hustle indicators. Forcing contested jumpers early in the shot clock dragged down his offensive value and fueled opponent transition chances. The sheer number of empty possessions outweighed his positive weak-side rotations.

Shooting
FG 6/18 (33.3%)
3PT 3/9 (33.3%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.6%
USG% 22.5%
Net Rtg +0.5
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.9m
Scoring +9.0
Creation +3.6
Shot Making +3.7
Hustle +11.4
Defense -3.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S LaMelo Ball 33.6m
27
pts
10
reb
8
ast
Impact
+24.7

A massive two-way performance defined by exceptional defensive anticipation and high-motor hustle plays. He broke out of his recent shooting slump by hunting higher-quality looks in the half-court. The combination of elite rebounding from the guard spot and active hands in the passing lanes drove a stellar total impact.

Shooting
FG 8/18 (44.4%)
3PT 4/11 (36.4%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 62.7%
USG% 29.9%
Net Rtg +15.8
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.6m
Scoring +19.1
Creation +3.6
Shot Making +5.9
Hustle +12.7
Defense +2.3
Turnovers -8.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 4
S Collin Sexton 30.1m
21
pts
2
reb
7
ast
Impact
+9.2

Continued his streak of hyper-efficient shot-making by relentlessly attacking the teeth of the defense. His ability to collapse the paint created high-value opportunities, driving a strong box score metric. Consistent hustle in transition further cemented his positive footprint on the game.

Shooting
FG 7/13 (53.8%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 67.1%
USG% 20.8%
Net Rtg -23.3
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.1m
Scoring +15.5
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +4.5
Hustle +0.6
Defense +1.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
14
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+10.1

Flawless execution around the rim fueled a massive spike in his offensive impact. He exploited interior mismatches all night, doubling his usual scoring output without wasting a single possession. Elite rim-running and disciplined defensive positioning made this a masterclass in role-player efficiency.

Shooting
FG 7/7 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 12.1%
Net Rtg -0.5
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.1m
Scoring +14.0
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +7.9
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
4
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-15.7

A sharp deviation from his recent scoring tear, as his offensive rhythm completely vanished against aggressive perimeter closeouts. Snapping a three-game streak of highly efficient shooting, his inability to generate clean looks cratered his overall impact. The lack of secondary contributions left him as a severe net negative on the floor.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 34.8%
Net Rtg -68.7
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.2m
Scoring +1.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Kon Knueppel 30.2m
14
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.4

Defensive lapses at the point of attack severely undermined his capable offensive output. Opponents consistently targeted him in pick-and-roll actions, bleeding points that erased his scoring contributions. Despite decent hustle metrics, his inability to contain dribble penetration resulted in a disastrous overall rating.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.9%
USG% 19.5%
Net Rtg +3.2
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.2m
Scoring +8.9
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +3.7
Hustle +3.8
Defense -2.5
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
Tre Mann 22.0m
4
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-19.9

Errant shot selection and an inability to finish through contact torpedoed his offensive value. He repeatedly stalled the offense with isolation attempts that led to empty trips. While he showed some effort tracking down loose balls, the sheer volume of wasted possessions made him a massive liability.

Shooting
FG 1/7 (14.3%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.4%
USG% 19.0%
Net Rtg +8.5
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.0m
Scoring -1.0
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +2.5
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -7.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 61.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
Sion James 18.8m
10
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.2

Broke out of a brutal shooting slump by decisively attacking closeouts rather than settling for contested jumpers. His sudden surge in offensive efficiency provided a crucial spark off the bench. Capable weak-side defense ensured his scoring burst translated into a net positive impact.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg +15.3
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.8m
Scoring +9.0
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
6
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.2

Anchored the interior with excellent defensive rotations, but his offensive passivity limited his overall ceiling. He maintained his perfect shooting efficiency by strictly taking dump-offs, yet his low usage rate prevented him from swinging the game. A solid defensive shift that simply lacked the offensive volume to push into positive territory.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/7 (28.6%)
Advanced
TS% 59.1%
USG% 11.9%
Net Rtg -2.4
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.9m
Scoring +3.5
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +0.6
Defense +1.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
3
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.2

Operated strictly on the periphery of the offense during his limited minutes. He executed his defensive assignments adequately but failed to assert himself on the glass or in transition. The result was a neutral performance that neither helped nor harmed the team's momentum.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 6.3%
Net Rtg +14.3
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.2m
Scoring +2.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +6.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-11.2

Barely registered an impact during a brief rotational cameo in the first half. He provided adequate positional defense but failed to generate any meaningful offensive gravity. A purely placeholder shift that left the overall metrics virtually flat.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -8.3
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.0m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0