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

DET Detroit Pistons
S Cade Cunningham 37.7m
25
pts
3
reb
8
ast
Impact
+3.0

Heavy offensive usage masked the underlying damage caused by sloppy ball security. The primary ball-handling burden resulted in a barrage of live-ball turnovers that directly fueled opponent scoring runs, completely tanking his overall net rating despite the scoring volume.

Shooting
FG 8/18 (44.4%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.3%
USG% 26.2%
Net Rtg +1.4
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.7m
Scoring +18.4
Creation +2.4
Shot Making +5.2
Hustle +0.9
Defense -2.0
Turnovers -14.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 43.8%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 6
S Ausar Thompson 36.1m
21
pts
12
reb
3
ast
Impact
+23.8

Elite functional athleticism translated into game-changing hustle and relentless slashes to the rim. By weaponizing his length in passing lanes and crashing the glass, he completely overwhelmed his individual matchups despite lacking a reliable jump shot.

Shooting
FG 7/16 (43.8%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 53.8%
USG% 20.8%
Net Rtg +20.3
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.1m
Scoring +14.2
Creation +3.1
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +13.3
Defense +2.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Tobias Harris 35.1m
18
pts
8
reb
4
ast
Impact
+13.0

Methodical mismatch hunting in the mid-post drove a highly productive offensive showing. He compounded this value with sturdy, disciplined defensive rotations, though likely turnover costs kept his total impact from reaching elite tiers.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 60.5%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +10.9
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.1m
Scoring +13.0
Creation +2.1
Shot Making +4.5
Hustle +9.2
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 22.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Duncan Robinson 29.9m
8
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.2

Cold perimeter shooting completely derailed his offensive value, as he repeatedly failed to punish defensive closeouts. The sheer volume of clanked triples and potential defensive fouls stalled out half-court sets, dragging his overall impact deep into the negative despite solid positional defense.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 48.1%
USG% 9.8%
Net Rtg -12.9
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.9m
Scoring +3.5
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.0
Hustle +1.2
Defense -0.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Jalen Duren 28.2m
24
pts
18
reb
1
ast
Impact
+26.6

Absolute dominance in the painted area generated a massive offensive rating, fueled by constant rim pressure and second-chance generation. His physical interior presence dictated the terms of engagement on both ends of the floor.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 12/13 (92.3%)
Advanced
TS% 67.7%
USG% 28.2%
Net Rtg +5.3
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.2m
Scoring +18.9
Creation +3.5
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +22.9
Defense -1.2
Turnovers -10.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 56.2%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 4
9
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+2.9

Timely floor spacing and rugged interior defense provided excellent connective tissue for the frontcourt. His willingness to do the dirty work on screens and closeouts anchored a highly effective rotational stint.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.4%
USG% 13.5%
Net Rtg +9.1
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.3m
Scoring +6.3
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +3.7
Defense +1.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
7
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-11.6

Disastrous shot selection from beyond the arc crippled offensive flow and led to long rebounds for the opposition. While his point-of-attack defense was genuinely disruptive, it couldn't salvage the structural damage caused by his forced jumpers.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 37.1%
USG% 25.5%
Net Rtg +7.7
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.2m
Scoring +2.4
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.8
Hustle +0.3
Defense +3.4
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 3
7
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.6

Relentless energy and off-ball cutting salvaged a night where his perimeter jumper completely abandoned him. He manufactured value through sheer effort, generating extra possessions that offset his poor shooting splits.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 38.9%
USG% 19.6%
Net Rtg +7.5
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.8m
Scoring +1.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +3.8
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-12.2

A massive drop-off from his recent scoring tear left the offense stagnant and predictable while he was on the floor. Despite decent effort metrics, his sudden passivity allowed the defense to completely ignore him and overload strong-side actions.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 4.3%
Net Rtg +10.5
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.2m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-12.0

Rushed perimeter looks and a complete lack of offensive rhythm made him a distinct liability during his short stint. The inability to bend the defense or contribute on the margins left his overall impact firmly in the red.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +25.5
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.3m
Scoring -1.6
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
BOS Boston Celtics
S Derrick White 36.9m
15
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+9.8

A masterclass in off-ball disruption and perimeter containment completely overshadowed a brutal shooting night from beyond the arc. His relentless ball-pressure and high-motor rotations dictated the flow of the game far more than his missed jumpers.

Shooting
FG 6/18 (33.3%)
3PT 3/11 (27.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 20.9%
Net Rtg +15.9
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.9m
Scoring +5.8
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +4.0
Hustle +2.2
Defense +8.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 27
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 37.0%
STL 4
BLK 3
TO 1
S Jaylen Brown 35.5m
41
pts
6
reb
4
ast
Impact
+26.1

Elite shot-making from the perimeter stretched the defense to its breaking point, driving a massive positive box score impact. Yet, an accumulation of costly turnovers and defensive lapses in transition allowed opponents to capitalize on the break, severely dampening his total value.

Shooting
FG 12/25 (48.0%)
3PT 5/9 (55.6%)
FT 12/15 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.9%
USG% 42.4%
Net Rtg -1.4
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.5m
Scoring +30.9
Creation +2.8
Shot Making +8.3
Hustle +4.7
Defense -2.2
Turnovers -8.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
21
pts
10
reb
4
ast
Impact
+16.5

A massive volume-scoring output was completely undone by hidden costs, likely a string of live-ball turnovers or costly fouls that tanked his overall net rating. His inefficient shot selection from deep further compounded the damage, turning what looked like a productive night into a slight negative.

Shooting
FG 8/16 (50.0%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 57.7%
USG% 22.1%
Net Rtg -7.3
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.0m
Scoring +14.0
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +5.0
Hustle +8.8
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Neemias Queta 26.5m
4
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
-5.4

Traded offensive usage for high-leverage defensive stops, anchoring the paint with exceptional rim protection. His relentless motor on the offensive glass generated crucial second-chance opportunities, though foul trouble likely capped his overall ceiling.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 8.8%
Net Rtg +19.5
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.5m
Scoring +2.6
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +6.7
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 3
TO 2
S Hugo González 18.4m
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.9

His complete inability to generate rim pressure or convert open looks stalled the second-unit offense, while likely foul costs dragged his total impact down. However, aggressive point-of-attack defense and active hands in the passing lanes prevented his rating from cratering even further.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 4.7%
Net Rtg -17.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.4m
Scoring -2.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +3.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
Sam Hauser 23.7m
8
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.7

Despite decent floor spacing and active rotational defense, his overall value plummeted due to low-impact stretches where he failed to alter the game's momentum. The lack of secondary playmaking and missed perimeter looks allowed the opposition to easily recover during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 12.9%
Net Rtg +5.3
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.7m
Scoring +5.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +3.1
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
12
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.2

Inefficient shot selection and a porous defensive presence resulted in a disastrous overall rating. His tendency to settle for contested perimeter looks, combined with likely live-ball turnovers, actively fueled opponent transition opportunities and bled away value.

Shooting
FG 5/13 (38.5%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 46.2%
USG% 26.8%
Net Rtg -24.6
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.9m
Scoring +6.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +0.3
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Josh Minott 14.3m
10
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+6.4

Exceptional two-way energy defined his stint, blending highly efficient finishing with disruptive defensive playmaking. He consistently blew up passing lanes and generated extra possessions to maximize his limited court time.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 79.1%
USG% 15.8%
Net Rtg -33.4
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.3m
Scoring +8.3
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +0.3
Defense +5.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 0
Luka Garza 13.4m
2
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-13.9

A steep drop-off in offensive involvement left his glaring defensive liabilities completely exposed in space. Without his usual scoring punch to balance the scales, opponents relentlessly targeted him in pick-and-roll coverage to bleed points.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.0%
USG% 9.7%
Net Rtg -42.9
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.4m
Scoring +0.7
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +1.6
Defense -2.2
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-14.2

Completely neutralized on the offensive end, his inability to convert or draw fouls rendered him a liability during his brief run. While he provided a slight bump in hustle stats, it wasn't enough to compensate for the empty offensive trips and likely defensive mistakes.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg -25.5
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.2m
Scoring -1.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense -2.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.9

A purely cardio performance where he failed to register a single shot attempt, rendering him a non-factor in the half-court offense. His marginal positive contributions in positioning and hustle barely kept his impact near neutral.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -25.8
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.3m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +2.5
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0