GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

PHX Phoenix Suns
S Devin Booker 34.8m
28
pts
2
reb
13
ast
Impact
+7.4

Surgical playmaking and hyper-efficient shot creation dismantled the opposing defense. By perfectly balancing his own scoring with elite distribution, he kept the defense constantly guessing and out of rotation. This was a quintessential offensive clinic where every decision maximized the possession's value.

Shooting
FG 10/15 (66.7%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 79.4%
USG% 29.3%
Net Rtg +36.6
+/- +26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.8m
Offense +21.3
Hustle +3.3
Defense +2.1
Raw total +26.7
Avg player in 34.8m -19.3
Impact +7.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 5
S Grayson Allen 34.2m
17
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
-9.6

Despite scorching the nets from deep, severe defensive liabilities and likely hidden negative plays cratered his overall impact. Opponents aggressively targeted him on the perimeter, easily bypassing his coverage to collapse the defense. The high-volume shooting simply couldn't outpace the points he surrendered on the other end.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 5/9 (55.6%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 65.4%
USG% 19.7%
Net Rtg +22.5
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.2m
Offense +8.8
Hustle +1.2
Defense -0.6
Raw total +9.4
Avg player in 34.2m -19.0
Impact -9.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Royce O'Neale 29.9m
11
pts
6
reb
4
ast
Impact
+5.2

Off-the-charts hustle metrics (+7.0) and timely perimeter shooting anchored a phenomenal glue-guy performance. He consistently made the extra rotation on defense and tracked down loose balls to extend possessions. This outing perfectly illustrated how high-IQ connective play swings the math in a team's favor.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 91.7%
USG% 10.8%
Net Rtg +32.8
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.9m
Offense +9.3
Hustle +7.0
Defense +5.6
Raw total +21.9
Avg player in 29.9m -16.7
Impact +5.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 38.9%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Ryan Dunn 27.4m
17
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+6.7

Elite shot selection and a massive leap in perimeter efficiency drove a highly impactful performance. Punishing defenders who sagged off him changed the geometry of the court for the primary creators. Combined with his usual defensive versatility (+4.1), this was a perfectly executed 3-and-D masterclass.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 95.7%
USG% 17.9%
Net Rtg +61.5
+/- +32
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.4m
Offense +14.2
Hustle +3.6
Defense +4.1
Raw total +21.9
Avg player in 27.4m -15.2
Impact +6.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Mark Williams 25.2m
7
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.9

A dip in scoring volume was easily masked by dominant interior presence and relentless effort (+5.8 Hustle). Controlling the glass and altering shots in the paint (+5.3 Def) dictated the terms of engagement in the half-court. He anchored the defense beautifully, proving his worth doesn't rely on offensive touches.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/4 (25.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.8%
USG% 13.2%
Net Rtg +46.2
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.2m
Offense +5.9
Hustle +5.8
Defense +5.3
Raw total +17.0
Avg player in 25.2m -14.1
Impact +2.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 26.7%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 0
15
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
+2.7

A massive scoring surge off the bench provided crucial secondary creation when the starters rested. He confidently stepped into transition threes, punishing the defense before they could set up. Solid point-of-attack defense (+3.1) ensured his offensive outburst translated directly to the bottom line.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.9%
USG% 26.0%
Net Rtg +3.0
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.6m
Offense +10.4
Hustle +1.2
Defense +3.1
Raw total +14.7
Avg player in 21.6m -12.0
Impact +2.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
11
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.9

Capitalized on every open look from the perimeter to deliver a highly efficient two-way shift. His physical perimeter defense (+4.3) disrupted the opponent's offensive initiation, while his timely shooting stretched the floor. It was a textbook example of a role player perfectly executing their specific duties.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 93.5%
USG% 14.8%
Net Rtg -20.3
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.3m
Offense +7.6
Hustle +3.4
Defense +4.3
Raw total +15.3
Avg player in 20.3m -11.4
Impact +3.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
Oso Ighodaro 14.2m
4
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-5.9

A sudden drop in finishing efficiency snapped his recent hot streak and derailed the bench unit's offense. Struggling to convert through contact in the paint allowed the defense to ignore his roll gravity. Even with solid defensive positioning, the inability to punish switches severely limited his effectiveness.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 22.9%
Net Rtg -6.2
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.2m
Offense -2.6
Hustle +1.0
Defense +3.6
Raw total +2.0
Avg player in 14.2m -7.9
Impact -5.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
10
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.9

Capitalized on deep post positioning to generate easy, high-percentage looks at the rim. His ability to seal off defenders created reliable dump-off options for penetrating guards. Efficient interior finishing drove his positive impact, even with relatively quiet defensive metrics.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 72.7%
USG% 30.8%
Net Rtg +8.7
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.7m
Offense +8.4
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.3
Raw total +8.9
Avg player in 10.7m -6.0
Impact +2.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.5

Complete offensive invisibility and poor defensive rotations (-1.9) resulted in a disastrous short stint. He routinely lost his man off the ball, forcing teammates into scramble mode and conceding easy looks. Offering zero threat on the other end only magnified his struggles on the defensive side.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 11.5%
Net Rtg -66.1
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.5m
Offense -3.4
Hustle +1.1
Defense -1.9
Raw total -4.2
Avg player in 9.5m -5.3
Impact -9.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 83.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
4
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.8

A quick, mistake-free cameo allowed him to post a slightly positive grade. He converted his only opportunity at the rim and stayed out of the way defensively. Flawless execution in a highly limited role defined this brief stretch of play.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 106.4%
USG% 21.4%
Net Rtg -90.9
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.1m
Offense +2.0
Hustle +1.1
Defense +0.1
Raw total +3.2
Avg player in 4.1m -2.4
Impact +0.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Koby Brea 4.1m
4
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
+2.1

Injected immediate life into the offense by aggressively hunting his shot during a short rotational burst. Drawing contact and converting efficiently gave the second unit a much-needed jolt of energy. His willingness to let it fly without hesitation was the catalyst for his positive rating.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.4%
USG% 23.1%
Net Rtg -100.0
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.1m
Offense +3.6
Hustle +0.4
Defense +0.3
Raw total +4.3
Avg player in 4.1m -2.2
Impact +2.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.9

Managed to keep his head above water during garbage time through sheer activity rather than execution. A sharp decline in offensive output was offset by crashing the glass and keeping the ball moving. He provided just enough energy to avoid being a negative during his brief appearance.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -90.9
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.1m
Offense +2.5
Hustle +1.2
Defense -0.5
Raw total +3.2
Avg player in 4.1m -2.3
Impact +0.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
SAS San Antonio Spurs
9
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
-14.3

Severe offensive struggles completely cratered his net impact despite elite rim protection (+8.2 Def). Forcing contested jumpers and missing wildly from the perimeter derailed the half-court rhythm. The defensive intimidation was present, but it couldn't salvage the damage done by poor shot selection.

Shooting
FG 4/14 (28.6%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 32.1%
USG% 23.8%
Net Rtg -5.6
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.5m
Offense -6.8
Hustle +3.5
Defense +8.2
Raw total +4.9
Avg player in 34.5m -19.2
Impact -14.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 1
BLK 4
TO 6
S Stephon Castle 34.1m
26
pts
7
reb
5
ast
Impact
+19.3

Absolute dominance across all phases of the game drove a spectacular +19.3 impact score. Relentless downhill attacking yielded high-percentage finishes, while his exceptional hustle (+10.2) generated extra possessions that broke the opponent's will. This was a masterclass in two-way aggression and capitalizing on mismatches.

Shooting
FG 10/16 (62.5%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 73.2%
USG% 22.6%
Net Rtg -19.2
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.1m
Offense +22.4
Hustle +10.2
Defense +5.6
Raw total +38.2
Avg player in 34.1m -18.9
Impact +19.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 35.7%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 2
S Devin Vassell 31.9m
4
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-15.1

Brick after brick from beyond the arc utterly destroyed his offensive value. Settling for heavily contested perimeter looks rather than attacking the paint resulted in a massive efficiency drain. While he stayed active on the hustle charts, the sheer volume of wasted possessions sank his overall grade.

Shooting
FG 2/9 (22.2%)
3PT 0/6 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 22.2%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg -34.8
+/- -23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.9m
Offense -2.5
Hustle +4.1
Defense +1.0
Raw total +2.6
Avg player in 31.9m -17.7
Impact -15.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 70.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
9
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.7

Despite solid defensive metrics (+3.0), his overall impact dipped into the negative due to a stark drop in offensive aggression. Passing up open looks led to a low-volume night that stalled the team's spacing. He failed to replicate his recent scoring punch, settling into the background rather than forcing the issue.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.1%
USG% 10.3%
Net Rtg -24.5
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.9m
Offense +8.6
Hustle +1.9
Defense +3.0
Raw total +13.5
Avg player in 28.9m -16.2
Impact -2.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Harrison Barnes 27.4m
13
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.0

A massive spike in perimeter efficiency fueled a highly positive offensive rating. Knocking down timely outside shots forced defensive closeouts, bending the opponent's scheme and opening up the floor. His veteran shot selection was the defining trait of this bounce-back performance.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 83.8%
USG% 14.1%
Net Rtg -44.6
+/- -25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.4m
Offense +12.3
Hustle +2.5
Defense +2.5
Raw total +17.3
Avg player in 27.4m -15.3
Impact +2.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
19
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-2.1

A high scoring output masked underlying inefficiencies that dragged his overall impact into the red. Missed rotations and a lack of secondary playmaking negated his interior finishing. The raw production looked good, but empty-calorie possessions and defensive lapses ultimately hurt the team's momentum.

Shooting
FG 8/14 (57.1%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 2/5 (40.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.6%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg -6.1
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.4m
Offense +9.4
Hustle +1.2
Defense +0.9
Raw total +11.5
Avg player in 24.4m -13.6
Impact -2.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
3
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
+1.2

Abysmal shooting from deep was completely offset by relentless defensive pressure and grit (+4.6 Hustle). He found ways to impact winning without the ball, disrupting passing lanes and organizing the offense. It is a testament to his defensive motor that he stayed in the green despite missing every perimeter look.

Shooting
FG 1/7 (14.3%)
3PT 0/6 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 20.2%
USG% 12.7%
Net Rtg +22.3
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.7m
Offense +2.8
Hustle +4.6
Defense +4.2
Raw total +11.6
Avg player in 18.7m -10.4
Impact +1.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
Dylan Harper 11.0m
12
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+4.0

Surgical precision in the mid-range and at the rim continued his streak of highly efficient scoring nights. He maximized his limited minutes by taking only high-value shots, avoiding the empty possessions that plague young guards. This steady, mistake-free offensive execution provided a reliable spark off the bench.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.6%
USG% 31.0%
Net Rtg -37.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.0m
Offense +9.5
Hustle +0.7
Defense 0.0
Raw total +10.2
Avg player in 11.0m -6.2
Impact +4.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
10
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+9.1

An unexpected scoring explosion paired with lockdown defensive metrics (+4.7) resulted in a massive positive swing. Capitalizing on defensive breakdowns, he found soft spots in the coverage to generate easy looks. This sudden burst of two-way productivity completely shifted the momentum during his short stint.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.2%
USG% 26.7%
Net Rtg +33.3
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.7m
Offense +7.2
Hustle +2.6
Defense +4.7
Raw total +14.5
Avg player in 9.7m -5.4
Impact +9.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.3

A brief, ineffective stint yielded negative returns due to a complete lack of offensive threat. Failing to secure the paint defensively (-0.5) or generate meaningful screens left the second unit playing four-on-five. He was essentially a ghost out there, offering no resistance or rim gravity.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 7.7%
Net Rtg -109.6
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.9m
Offense 0.0
Hustle +0.4
Defense -0.5
Raw total -0.1
Avg player in 5.9m -3.2
Impact -3.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.3

Defensive bleed (-1.5) during a quick cameo kept his overall grade slightly negative. He failed to make any measurable hustle plays, allowing opponents to dictate the tempo while he was on the floor. The minimal offensive touches weren't enough to outweigh the defensive lapses.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg +75.0
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.5m
Offense +3.7
Hustle 0.0
Defense -1.5
Raw total +2.2
Avg player in 4.5m -2.5
Impact -0.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
9
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+10.8

Maximized a tiny window of playing time by converting almost every touch into high-value offense. Crisp off-ball movement and decisive shooting punished a sleeping defense. Generating that much positive impact in under five minutes requires flawless execution, which he delivered.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 35.3%
Net Rtg +75.0
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.5m
Offense +8.5
Hustle +2.4
Defense +2.5
Raw total +13.4
Avg player in 4.5m -2.6
Impact +10.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.3

Slightly negative overall impact stemming from rushed offensive decisions during garbage time. While he showed decent activity levels (+1.2 Hustle), forcing contested looks stalled out the offensive flow. A lack of rhythm was evident in his brief, disjointed rotation minutes.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.8%
USG% 23.5%
Net Rtg +75.0
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.5m
Offense +0.7
Hustle +1.2
Defense +0.3
Raw total +2.2
Avg player in 4.5m -2.5
Impact -0.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0