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

LAC LA Clippers
S J. Harden 37.5m
20
pts
6
reb
13
ast
Impact
+4.6

Careless ball security severely undercut what was otherwise a brilliant playmaking display, bleeding value through live-ball turnovers that ignited opponent fast breaks. Even with surprisingly stout defensive metrics, giving away empty possessions in the half-court kept his net impact in the red. The high-risk, high-reward passing ultimately hurt the team's transition defense.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 6/7 (85.7%)
Advanced
TS% 66.3%
USG% 24.7%
Net Rtg +13.3
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.5m
Scoring +15.1
Creation +4.4
Shot Making +4.1
Hustle +1.8
Defense +4.0
Turnovers -17.3
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 35.3%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 7
S K. Leonard 35.3m
30
pts
10
reb
4
ast
Impact
+26.0

Masterful two-way dominance drove a sky-high net impact, built on surgical midrange isolation and suffocating wing defense. He systematically dismantled individual matchups while rarely forcing a bad look, ensuring maximum efficiency on high volume. The combination of elite shot-making and relentless rebounding completely dictated the game's tempo.

Shooting
FG 11/21 (52.4%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.9%
USG% 29.4%
Net Rtg -3.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.3m
Scoring +23.6
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +7.8
Hustle +3.0
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S I. Zubac 34.6m
21
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
+16.2

Punished mismatches in the deep post and finished through contact to generate a stellar overall rating. His elite screen-setting freed up the guards, while his verticality at the rim forced opponents into tough, contested floaters. Controlling the painted area with brute force established a physical tone that the opposition never matched.

Shooting
FG 9/14 (64.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.5%
USG% 19.5%
Net Rtg +9.2
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.6m
Scoring +16.5
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +9.2
Defense -0.9
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 31.2%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
S B. Bogdanović 23.6m
0
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
-20.9

An absolute disaster class in floor spacing, as his inability to connect on open catch-and-shoot looks allowed the defense to pack the paint. Yielding a catastrophic net rating, his offensive hesitation stalled out multiple possessions and led to late-clock grenades. He was actively hunted on switches, compounding the damage of his shooting slump.

Shooting
FG 0/4 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 15.3%
Net Rtg +11.7
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.6m
Scoring -3.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +4.4
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -10.6
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 5
S D. Jones Jr. 22.4m
4
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.6

Despite flying around for deflections and contested rebounds, his lack of offensive gravity dragged down the lineup's spacing. Defenders aggressively sagged off him on the perimeter, which clogged driving lanes for the primary creators. The defensive energy simply couldn't compensate for being an offensive liability in the half-court.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 9.4%
Net Rtg +4.2
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.4m
Scoring +3.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +2.5
Defense -1.8
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
J. Collins 26.5m
16
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+10.4

Ruthless efficiency as a roll man drove a highly positive stint, punishing late rotations with explosive finishes at the rim. He capitalized on every defensive breakdown, refusing to force bad shots while maintaining a sturdy presence on the glass. This disciplined approach to rim-running perfectly complemented the primary ball-handlers.

Shooting
FG 7/8 (87.5%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 94.8%
USG% 19.7%
Net Rtg +7.1
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.5m
Scoring +15.1
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +7.6
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -8.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 4
K. Dunn 21.6m
9
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-6.9

Despite finding an unexpected offensive rhythm, his overall impact cratered due to poor point-of-attack containment. He repeatedly allowed straight-line drives that compromised the entire defensive shell, negating the value of his made baskets. The defensive breakdowns were too costly for his modest scoring bump to overcome.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +10.5
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.6m
Scoring +7.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense -5.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
N. Batum 14.8m
3
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.6

Provided a massive defensive lift through flawless weak-side rotations and veteran positional awareness. He didn't need to dominate the ball to swing the game, instead acting as the ultimate connective tissue by making the extra pass and blowing up pick-and-rolls. It was a masterclass in low-usage, high-IQ basketball that stabilized the second unit.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 8.1%
Net Rtg +6.4
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.8m
Scoring +1.4
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +7.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 3
BLK 2
TO 0
B. Lopez 12.6m
5
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.4

Completely walled off the paint during his brief shift, utilizing elite drop-coverage positioning to generate a stellar defensive rating. Even as his perimeter shots failed to fall, his massive frame deterred countless drives and forced the opposition into low-percentage floaters. He anchored the interior flawlessly, proving his value goes far beyond stretch-five shooting.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +7.8
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.6m
Scoring +2.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +0.9
Defense -0.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 0
C. Paul 11.1m
6
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-6.9

Targeted relentlessly on the defensive end, his lack of foot speed allowed opposing guards to easily turn the corner. While he hit a couple of timely perimeter looks to keep the offense humming, the structural damage he caused defensively bled points. The veteran savvy couldn't mask the physical mismatch he presented in isolation.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg -27.3
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.1m
Scoring +4.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense -3.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
POR Portland Trail Blazers
S J. Holiday 34.3m
21
pts
6
reb
7
ast
Impact
+13.3

While he orchestrated the offense smoothly, a surprisingly quiet defensive impact kept his overall rating grounded. He traded baskets rather than generating stops, struggling to navigate screens against quicker matchups on the perimeter. The steady offensive execution was nearly canceled out by an uncharacteristically porous point-of-attack presence.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.8%
USG% 22.0%
Net Rtg -2.0
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.3m
Scoring +15.3
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +4.7
Hustle +6.7
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S T. Camara 33.0m
5
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-7.7

An absolute cratering of offensive efficiency ruined what was otherwise a highly active hustle performance. He forced bad looks from deep and completely fell out of his recent scoring rhythm, short-circuiting multiple Portland possessions. The relentless energy on loose balls couldn't salvage the damage done by his perimeter bricklaying.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 28.2%
USG% 11.3%
Net Rtg -11.6
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.0m
Scoring -0.3
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S D. Avdija 32.8m
23
pts
7
reb
5
ast
Impact
+11.8

Despite finding a scoring rhythm from the perimeter, his overall impact slipped into the red due to inefficient finishing inside the arc and likely ball-security issues. The offensive volume masked a tendency to stall out possessions against set defenses. His inability to convert in traffic ultimately gave back the value generated by his outside shooting.

Shooting
FG 7/16 (43.8%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 6/7 (85.7%)
Advanced
TS% 60.3%
USG% 30.0%
Net Rtg -5.2
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.8m
Scoring +16.1
Creation +2.8
Shot Making +4.3
Hustle +8.9
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -11.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 5
S S. Sharpe 32.3m
19
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.9

Shot selection was the primary culprit for a disastrous overall rating, as he repeatedly settled for contested, low-percentage jumpers early in the shot clock. Wasting numerous offensive trips on errant field goals completely negated his surprisingly stout defensive effort. This was a classic case of a high-usage guard shooting his team out of offensive rhythm.

Shooting
FG 7/24 (29.2%)
3PT 1/9 (11.1%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 36.9%
USG% 36.0%
Net Rtg -5.5
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.3m
Scoring +5.0
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +6.3
Defense +4.4
Turnovers -14.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 90.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 6
S D. Clingan 24.0m
9
pts
10
reb
3
ast
Impact
+14.0

Anchored the interior with phenomenal defensive positioning that consistently deterred drives to the rim. His massive impact score was driven by elite rim protection and timely offensive putbacks rather than raw scoring volume. Controlling the painted area so thoroughly in limited minutes completely tilted the floor in Portland's favor.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.4%
USG% 11.9%
Net Rtg -6.1
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.0m
Scoring +6.4
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +12.7
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 35.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
J. Grant 29.0m
17
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.9

Operating almost exclusively as a play-finisher, his complete lack of playmaking capped his overall influence on the game. He drew contact and hit timely spot-up looks, but the tunnel vision offensively prevented the unit from finding a higher gear. Solid defensive rotations ultimately kept his net contribution in the green.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 7/9 (77.8%)
Advanced
TS% 60.9%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -22.0
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.0m
Scoring +11.2
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.7
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
K. Murray 17.7m
0
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.3

A complete offensive zero who failed to bend the defense or capitalize on open weak-side spacing. Even with respectable defensive positioning, playing 4-on-5 on the other end severely handicapped Portland's half-court execution. His inability to pose any scoring threat allowed defenders to freely roam and clog the paint.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 4.0%
Net Rtg -5.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.7m
Scoring -1.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
B. Wesley 17.5m
6
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
-1.0

Frantic energy defined his minutes, resulting in excellent hustle metrics but erratic offensive execution. Missing multiple looks around the paint erased the value of his aggressive point-of-attack defense. He was a chaotic neutral force, disrupting both the opponent's rhythm and his own team's spacing.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 36.1%
USG% 18.0%
Net Rtg -3.1
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.5m
Scoring +2.1
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +3.7
Defense +3.8
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
M. Thybulle 15.1m
5
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.5

Wreaked his usual havoc in the passing lanes, generating a massive hustle spike that fueled transition opportunities. By knocking down a timely perimeter look, he punished the defense for ignoring him while remaining a pure disruptor on the other end. This was a textbook specialized shift where elite defensive instincts heavily outweighed low usage.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 8.9%
Net Rtg +22.4
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.1m
Scoring +3.4
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +0.0
Defense +4.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 0
H. Yang 4.3m
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.3

Made a brief but marginally positive cameo by keeping the ball moving and competing for loose balls. His limited minutes were defined by staying out of the way offensively while offering just enough physical resistance to survive his defensive shifts. A low-mistake stint that quietly kept the rotation afloat.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.2%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -32.2
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.3m
Scoring +1.2
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0