Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

Every shot, every lead change, every rotation — visualized.

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
MIA lead NYK lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
NYK 2P — 3P —
MIA 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 181 attempts

NYK NYK Shot-making Δ

Brunson Hard 14/26 +6.9
Towns Hard 6/14 -0.5
Anunoby Hard 4/13 -1.8
Bridges 7/11 +5.5
Clarkson 2/11 -7.8
Kolek Hard 2/6 -0.6
Yabusele 1/6 -4.9
Hart 2/5 -1.9
Shamet Hard 0/4 -4.4
Hukporti Open 0/2 -2.3

MIA MIA Shot-making Δ

Powell 7/15 +0.5
Adebayo 5/15 -5.3
Jaquez Jr. Open 8/12 +1.7
Wiggins 4/9 -1.6
Fontecchio 5/8 +3.6
Jović Hard 2/7 -2.0
Mitchell 3/6 +0.3
Smith Hard 2/6 +0.2
Ware 2/4 +0.3
Larsson Hard 0/1 -1.1
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
NYK
MIA
38/98 Field Goals 38/83
38.8% Field Goal % 45.8%
15/54 3-Pointers 13/37
27.8% 3-Point % 35.1%
16/21 Free Throws 26/31
76.2% Free Throw % 83.9%
49.9% True Shooting % 59.5%
59 Total Rebounds 58
16 Offensive 9
36 Defensive 41
23 Assists 25
1.44 Assist/TO Ratio 1.56
15 Turnovers 16
9 Steals 7
3 Blocks 1
24 Fouls 16
42 Points in Paint 48
10 Fast Break Pts 31
11 Points off TOs 20
21 Second Chance Pts 17
21 Bench Points 44
6 Largest Lead 18
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Jalen Brunson
37 PTS · 5 REB · 7 AST · 35.1 MIN
+32.78
2
Norman Powell
29 PTS · 7 REB · 3 AST · 31.7 MIN
+29.72
3
Mikal Bridges
20 PTS · 5 REB · 4 AST · 37.3 MIN
+15.95
4
Jaime Jaquez Jr.
17 PTS · 5 REB · 5 AST · 26.7 MIN
+13.23
5
Simone Fontecchio
14 PTS · 4 REB · 1 AST · 18.5 MIN
+11.63
6
OG Anunoby
14 PTS · 6 REB · 1 AST · 36.5 MIN
+10.39
7
Karl-Anthony Towns
15 PTS · 18 REB · 2 AST · 35.9 MIN
+9.05
8
Kel'el Ware
5 PTS · 8 REB · 0 AST · 21.6 MIN
+7.27
9
Bam Adebayo
19 PTS · 13 REB · 3 AST · 38.3 MIN
+7.01
10
Davion Mitchell
9 PTS · 1 REB · 6 AST · 23.9 MIN
+6.26
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:15 K. Towns driving DUNK (15 PTS) (J. Brunson 7 AST) 107–115
Q4 0:19 D. Mitchell personal FOUL (4 PF) 105–115
Q4 0:22 B. Adebayo running alley-oop DUNK (19 PTS) (N. Jović 5 AST) 105–115
Q4 0:25 A. Wiggins REBOUND (Off:1 Def:4) 105–113
Q4 0:26 MISS J. Brunson driving Layup 105–113
Q4 0:31 J. Brunson STEAL (3 STL) 105–113
Q4 0:31 D. Mitchell lost ball TURNOVER (1 TO) 105–113
Q4 0:45 J. Hart offensive foul TURNOVER (3 TO) 105–113
Q4 0:45 J. Hart offensive FOUL (1 PF) 105–113
Q4 0:50 K. Towns REBOUND (Off:1 Def:17) 105–113
Q4 0:52 MISS N. Powell driving Layup 105–113
Q4 1:12 K. Towns offensive foul TURNOVER (3 TO) 105–113
Q4 1:12 K. Towns offensive FOUL (5 PF) 105–113
Q4 1:20 A. Wiggins 26' 3PT (9 PTS) (D. Mitchell 6 AST) 105–113
Q4 1:32 J. Brunson driving Layup (37 PTS) 105–110

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

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

MIA Miami Heat
S Bam Adebayo 38.3m
19
pts
13
reb
3
ast
Impact
+9.8

Elite rim deterrence and flawless switchability anchored the defensive scheme to an exceptional degree. That defensive mastery barely kept his head above water, offsetting a brutal offensive pattern of forced, fading mid-range jumpers.

Shooting
FG 5/15 (33.3%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 8/8 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.3%
USG% 25.8%
Net Rtg +10.4
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.3m
Scoring +11.3
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +15.5
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -13.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 6
S Norman Powell 31.7m
29
pts
7
reb
3
ast
Impact
+29.8

Relentless downhill attacking broke down the opposing defensive shell and generated massive offensive value. A surprising level of point-of-attack defensive intensity elevated this from a mere scoring binge to a dominant two-way performance, defined by his ability to draw contact on hard drives.

Shooting
FG 7/15 (46.7%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 12/12 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 71.5%
USG% 26.9%
Net Rtg -8.3
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.7m
Scoring +23.1
Creation +3.0
Shot Making +4.7
Hustle +7.0
Defense +5.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
S Andrew Wiggins 31.2m
9
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.9

Active hands in the passing lanes and disciplined closeouts generated strong defensive metrics. However, a bizarre hesitance to attack the paint against smaller guards dragged his overall net rating into the red.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg -14.3
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.2m
Scoring +4.9
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +2.0
Hustle +4.4
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -5.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 56.2%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
S Davion Mitchell 23.9m
9
pts
1
reb
6
ast
Impact
-3.3

Orchestrated the second unit flawlessly, prioritizing ball security and high-leverage entry passes. Steady point-of-attack pressure disrupted the opposing backcourt, though his overall impact was naturally capped by a low-usage role.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.0%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg -18.3
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.9m
Scoring +5.8
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.3
Defense -1.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Kel'el Ware 21.6m
5
pts
8
reb
0
ast
Impact
+1.7

Vertical spacing and disciplined drop coverage translated to a highly efficient two-way stint. He maximized his limited touches by strictly taking high-percentage lob opportunities at the rim.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 9.4%
Net Rtg +0.2
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.6m
Scoring +3.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +8.2
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 22
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 31.8%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
17
pts
5
reb
5
ast
Impact
+6.1

Punished mismatches in the mid-post with elite footwork and immense patience. A highly efficient shot profile strictly inside the arc drove a strong positive impact despite a complete lack of perimeter production.

Shooting
FG 8/12 (66.7%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.0%
USG% 22.6%
Net Rtg +34.9
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.8m
Scoring +13.4
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +1.5
Defense -3.1
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
6
pts
5
reb
5
ast
Impact
-10.6

Forcing rushed looks early in the shot clock derailed the offensive flow and tanked his net rating. Poor transition defense compounded the issue, as he repeatedly failed to match up during opponent fast breaks.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.3%
USG% 15.0%
Net Rtg +18.9
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.6m
Scoring +2.1
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +1.5
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
14
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+6.2

Capitalized on defensive breakdowns by burying timely catch-and-shoot looks from the weak-side corners. His floor-spacing gravity forced hard closeouts, which directly opened up driving lanes for the primary ball-handlers.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.8%
USG% 19.1%
Net Rtg +27.5
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.6m
Scoring +11.1
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +3.1
Defense -0.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Dru Smith 18.4m
6
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.8

Scrapping hard for loose balls generated crucial extra possessions that balanced out his streaky perimeter shooting. Ultimately, his high-energy defensive rotations resulted in a dead-even stalemate during his rotation minutes.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg +47.4
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.4m
Scoring +3.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
1
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.6

Made his brief stint count by executing crisp defensive rotations and diving for a key loose ball. Offensive involvement was non-existent, but his raw energy provided a measurable net positive.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 26.6%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg +16.7
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.9m
Scoring -0.3
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
NYK New York Knicks
S Mikal Bridges 37.3m
20
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
+13.0

Ruthless efficiency on spot-up opportunities drove a massive positive rating. Exploiting late closeouts with decisive straight-line drives defined his offensive mastery, allowing his scoring gravity to overshadow a relatively quiet defensive night.

Shooting
FG 7/11 (63.6%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.4%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -7.1
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.3m
Scoring +16.6
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +4.6
Hustle +5.4
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 53.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S OG Anunoby 36.5m
14
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+9.3

Impact dipped into the negative due to a heavy volume of missed perimeter attempts that routinely bailed out the defense. Elite weak-side rim rotations salvaged what could have been a disastrous overall rating, specifically his ability to blow up pick-and-roll lobs.

Shooting
FG 4/13 (30.8%)
3PT 4/12 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.4%
USG% 17.0%
Net Rtg +2.5
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.5m
Scoring +6.8
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +3.9
Hustle +7.6
Defense +5.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 2
15
pts
18
reb
2
ast
Impact
+8.7

A stark drop in offensive aggression and poorly calibrated outside shooting cratered his usual scoring gravity. He managed to anchor the paint effectively against drives, but forcing contested looks from the top of the arc defined his struggles tonight.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.4%
USG% 19.8%
Net Rtg +2.5
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.9m
Scoring +8.3
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +16.1
Defense -1.3
Turnovers -8.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 3
S Jalen Brunson 35.1m
37
pts
5
reb
7
ast
Impact
+30.0

An absolute offensive masterclass fueled by relentless penetration and elite shot-making through contact. He completely dictated the tempo against drop coverage by punishing the big man with pull-up daggers, while uncharacteristically disruptive hands on defense pushed his net impact into the stratosphere.

Shooting
FG 14/26 (53.8%)
3PT 5/11 (45.5%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.6%
USG% 34.8%
Net Rtg +9.0
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.1m
Scoring +28.6
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +9.6
Hustle +3.4
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 3
S Ariel Hukporti 10.4m
0
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-11.3

Empty offensive trips and an inability to secure deep post position rendered his brief rotation minutes a net negative. Failing to capitalize on two point-blank dump-offs completely stalled the second unit's momentum.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 7.4%
Net Rtg -0.2
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.4m
Scoring -1.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +2.5
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Josh Hart 28.6m
6
pts
5
reb
5
ast
Impact
-4.7

Extreme offensive passivity allowed defenders to sag off and clog the driving lanes for his teammates. While his connective passing and transition hustle remained intact, turning down open corner looks actively harmed the half-court spacing.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 44.4%
USG% 13.2%
Net Rtg +4.9
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.6m
Scoring +2.6
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +6.3
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -7.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
2
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.5

Bricking pick-and-pop attempts neutralized his physical advantage on the interior. Strong positional rebounding couldn't mask the damage done by his broken shooting mechanics from outside.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 16.7%
USG% 15.9%
Net Rtg -54.3
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.9m
Scoring -2.1
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +7.6
Defense -2.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-14.8

Complete inability to punish defensive gaps from the perimeter rendered his minutes highly detrimental. Missing a string of wide-open catch-and-shoot looks early in the second quarter completely derailed the offensive rhythm.

Shooting
FG 0/4 (0.0%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 10.5%
Net Rtg -29.0
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.6m
Scoring -3.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
8
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.8

Tunnel vision and a diet of highly contested, off-the-dribble mid-range jumpers torpedoed his net rating. An isolation-heavy stretch in the third quarter actively killed ball movement, compounded by a complete lack of resistance at the point of attack.

Shooting
FG 2/11 (18.2%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 30.3%
USG% 34.1%
Net Rtg -40.1
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.0m
Scoring +0.7
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +0.8
Hustle +3.8
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.8

Getting caught on screens repeatedly compromised the defensive shell and dragged his impact score down. Rushed perimeter attempts early in the shot clock negated the few positive playmaking flashes he showed in transition.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 26.9%
Net Rtg -63.2
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.8m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +1.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1