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 Anthony Davis 34.5m
25
pts
10
reb
3
ast
Impact
+26.5

Anchored the entire scheme by obliterating single coverage in the post and forcing hard double-teams. His sheer vertical gravity as a lob threat completely collapsed the opponent's defensive shell. An elite two-way performance defined by suffocating drop coverage that erased everything at the rim.

Shooting
FG 11/14 (78.6%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 3/8 (37.5%)
Advanced
TS% 71.3%
USG% 23.6%
Net Rtg +2.9
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.5m
Scoring +20.3
Creation +2.1
Shot Making +3.7
Hustle +11.7
Defense +6.5
Turnovers -7.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 3
BLK 2
TO 3
S P.J. Washington 31.9m
17
pts
7
reb
5
ast
Impact
+9.9

Offensive value was dragged into the negative by a string of ill-advised, contested floaters in the middle of the lane. His inability to finish through contact allowed the defense to leak out in transition. Despite solid weak-side rim contests, the poor shot selection dictated his overall negative score.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.5%
USG% 21.3%
Net Rtg +11.7
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.9m
Scoring +11.2
Creation +3.4
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +7.0
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Cooper Flagg 28.9m
22
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
+11.7

Generated massive rim pressure by attacking closeouts with decisive, straight-line drives. His ability to absorb contact and finish in traffic stabilized the offense during a crucial second-half stretch. Kept his impact highly positive by limiting turnovers and making simple, effective reads.

Shooting
FG 8/14 (57.1%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.8%
USG% 22.1%
Net Rtg +14.9
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.9m
Scoring +17.9
Creation +3.7
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +1.2
Defense -6.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 36.8%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
4
pts
7
reb
4
ast
Impact
-6.7

Found himself constantly out of position in pick-and-roll coverage, giving up deep post position to stronger bigs. His reluctance to challenge vertically resulted in several easy layups and foul calls. While his individual defense metrics looked okay, his poor spatial awareness wrecked the team's defensive rebounding rate.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.4%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +36.2
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.0m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.2
Hustle +6.0
Defense -0.4
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 2
S Klay Thompson 20.0m
10
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
-5.2

Bleeding value defensively by consistently getting beat off the dribble by quicker guards. His lack of lateral burst forced the defense into emergency rotations, leading to open corner threes. Even a highly efficient shooting night couldn't compensate for being a primary target on the other end.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 71.4%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -4.1
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.0m
Scoring +7.9
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +1.2
Defense -2.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 22.2%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
24
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
+20.4

Masterfully manipulated the pace in the half-court, using hostage dribbles to keep drop defenders in no-man's land. His proactive passing created high-value corner looks that broke the opponent's zone scheme. Active hands and disruptive digs on defense rounded out a highly productive two-way shift.

Shooting
FG 8/18 (44.4%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 6/8 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 55.8%
USG% 33.8%
Net Rtg +41.3
+/- +26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.2m
Scoring +15.3
Creation +2.8
Shot Making +5.3
Hustle +5.4
Defense +6.5
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 22.2%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
Max Christie 26.6m
17
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.5

Knocking down trailing threes in secondary transition provided a crucial offensive spark. However, his overall impact was dampened by a few costly blow-bys on the perimeter that compromised the defensive shell. A solid rotational piece whose scoring punch slightly outweighed his defensive miscues.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 87.1%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg +24.8
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.6m
Scoring +14.7
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
12
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
+9.2

Punished defensive lapses with perfectly timed baseline cuts that resulted in easy finishes at the rim. His relentless ball pressure frustrated opposing ball-handlers and disrupted their set plays. A highly efficient, low-mistake outing that perfectly complemented the primary creators.

Shooting
FG 4/4 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 104.2%
USG% 12.1%
Net Rtg +16.8
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.9m
Scoring +12.0
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +3.7
Defense +3.2
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
Caleb Martin 11.8m
4
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.9

Fell victim to over-helping on drives, which surrendered crucial offensive rebounds to his man. His offensive contributions were minimal, as he mostly drifted out of the play rather than actively screening or cutting. The lack of physical engagement on the glass drove his negative net impact.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 10.8%
Net Rtg +3.2
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.8m
Scoring +3.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +0.3
Defense -0.2
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.1

Stagnant offensive possessions plagued his short stint due to a failure to process defensive coverages. His inability to create separation off the bounce led to a stalled offense and late-clock grenades. Was quickly subbed out after failing to contain dribble penetration.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.2%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg -60.0
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.7m
Scoring +1.5
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
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
0
ast
Impact
-13.2

Instantly tanked his rating by getting lost on back-door cuts and failing to communicate switches. His lack of physical resistance allowed the opponent to march right into the paint. A completely ineffective stint characterized by defensive confusion.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg -66.7
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.2m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -3.1
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-16.1

Immediate positional errors exposed his inability to adjust to the speed of the game. His failure to initiate the offense cleanly caused consecutive broken plays during garbage time. A highly detrimental brief appearance defined by a lack of spatial awareness.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -66.7
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.2m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
2
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.6

Executed his role perfectly in limited action by setting bone-crushing screens that freed up the guards. His disciplined rim-runs dragged the weak-side tagger away, opening up skip passes to the corner. Generated positive value entirely through structural dirty work rather than box-score production.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 113.6%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -66.7
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.2m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
TOR Toronto Raptors
S Scottie Barnes 33.7m
33
pts
11
reb
6
ast
Impact
+24.4

Dominated his individual matchups as a downhill scorer, but his overall impact was muted by forced shots late in the shot clock. A high volume of usage led to empty possessions that stalled the offense's rhythm. His physical rebounding kept his baseline value positive despite the offensive friction.

Shooting
FG 13/24 (54.2%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.0%
USG% 33.7%
Net Rtg +1.6
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.7m
Scoring +24.7
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +7.3
Hustle +12.0
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -13.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 53.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 5
S Brandon Ingram 31.9m
22
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
+8.2

Efficient scoring output was heavily offset by careless ball security in the half-court. His tendency to force passes into tight windows fueled transition opportunities for the opponent. Despite solid on-ball defense, those live-ball giveaways dragged his overall net impact down.

Shooting
FG 10/16 (62.5%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 68.8%
USG% 23.8%
Net Rtg -21.4
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.9m
Scoring +17.5
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +6.1
Hustle +1.8
Defense -1.5
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
14
pts
5
reb
5
ast
Impact
+9.6

Shot selection was the primary culprit for a deeply negative overall score, as he repeatedly settled for contested early-clock jumpers. Those long misses acted as live-ball turnovers, jumpstarting the opponent's fast break. Active hands in the passing lanes provided a minor boost, but the offensive inefficiency was too costly.

Shooting
FG 5/16 (31.2%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.4%
USG% 23.1%
Net Rtg -19.9
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.7m
Scoring +6.4
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +6.3
Defense +2.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S RJ Barrett 27.9m
16
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
-0.8

Suffered a severely negative impact score due to getting repeatedly targeted in pick-and-roll coverage. His inability to navigate screens forced the defense into rotation, yielding wide-open corner looks. Even a decent shooting night couldn't mask the defensive bleeding he caused on the perimeter.

Shooting
FG 7/13 (53.8%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 57.6%
USG% 20.3%
Net Rtg +17.7
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.9m
Scoring +10.7
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +3.9
Hustle +1.2
Defense -5.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jakob Poeltl 19.0m
4
pts
8
reb
4
ast
Impact
-4.0

Completely neutralized as a roll man due to the opponent switching guards onto him and fronting the post. His lack of offensive aggression allowed the defense to pack the paint against drivers. He salvaged a slightly positive rating through positional rebounding and screen assists.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.5%
USG% 10.2%
Net Rtg -37.5
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.0m
Scoring +2.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +9.2
Defense -4.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Ochai Agbaji 22.0m
5
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.7

Struggled to find any rhythm offensively, frequently passing up open catch-and-shoot opportunities which stalled the possession. His hesitation allowed the defense to recover and load up on the strong side. Excellent closeouts and hustle plays on the other end prevented his rating from completely bottoming out.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 42.5%
USG% 9.2%
Net Rtg -20.9
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.0m
Scoring +1.8
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.9
Defense +1.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
16
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
+6.6

Capitalized on scrambled defensive matchups by making decisive cuts to the rim. His quick decision-making as a connective passer kept the offensive flow humming during his stint. A few missed box-outs kept his impact from soaring higher, but his offensive efficiency was undeniable.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 85.8%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg -9.3
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.7m
Scoring +14.4
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Jamal Shead 16.3m
6
pts
0
reb
8
ast
Impact
-5.2

Relentless point-of-attack pressure and loose-ball recoveries completely changed the tenor of the game. His ability to consistently break the paint and spray out to shooters generated high-quality looks for the second unit. This was a masterclass in driving winning basketball without needing a high scoring volume.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 77.3%
USG% 9.4%
Net Rtg +5.8
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.3m
Scoring +4.7
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-15.3

Looked completely out of sync offensively, rushing his reads and forcing heavily contested looks in the paint. His hesitation to attack closeouts bogged down the spacing for the second unit. The resulting empty trips and poor floor balance led to a massive negative net impact.

Shooting
FG 0/4 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 13.9%
Net Rtg -35.5
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.4m
Scoring -3.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +2.5
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Gradey Dick 13.4m
10
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.3

Provided crucial floor-spacing gravity that opened up driving lanes, even on limited touches. His quick-trigger release on kickouts punished the defense for over-helping on drives. Maintained a positive impact by executing defensive rotations cleanly without fouling.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 61.0%
USG% 19.0%
Net Rtg -9.3
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.4m
Scoring +6.7
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.6
Defense +2.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-12.1

Failed to make a tangible imprint during his brief stint, largely floating on the perimeter without drawing defensive attention. His lack of off-ball movement made it easy for defenders to sag off and clog the driving lanes. Was repeatedly caught ball-watching on the defensive glass, leading to second-chance points.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -19.0
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.8m
Scoring +2.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.5

Maximized his limited minutes by providing stellar weak-side rim protection and timely rotations. His physical presence deterred drives and forced the opponent into late-clock mid-range pull-ups. Proved that high-level defensive awareness can yield a strong positive impact without a single offensive touch.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +66.7
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.2m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0