Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
SAS lead SAC lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
SAC 2P — 3P —
SAS 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 174 attempts

SAC SAC Shot-making Δ

Monk 5/17 -5.9
DeRozan 12/15 +10.2
Sabonis Open 7/14 -3.1
Schröder Hard 8/13 +7.1
Westbrook 4/11 -1.6
LaVine 3/7 -1.3
Ellis Hard 1/3 -0.6
Clifford Hard 0/3 -2.8
Eubanks Open 1/2 -0.3
Achiuwa Hard 0/2 -2.2

SAS SAS Shot-making Δ

Fox 11/20 +5.6
Vassell Hard 6/14 -1.4
Barnes 7/11 +4.4
Johnson Open 7/11 +0.4
Champagnie Hard 4/9 +1.3
Sochan 4/5 +4.3
Kornet Open 5/5 +3.2
Olynyk Open 2/5 -1.4
Castle Hard 1/4 -0.8
Bryant Hard 0/3 -3.3
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
SAC
SAS
41/87 Field Goals 47/87
47.1% Field Goal % 54.0%
12/33 3-Pointers 14/38
36.4% 3-Point % 36.8%
16/22 Free Throws 15/18
72.7% Free Throw % 83.3%
56.9% True Shooting % 64.8%
45 Total Rebounds 52
5 Offensive 9
32 Defensive 37
25 Assists 38
2.08 Assist/TO Ratio 2.53
12 Turnovers 14
10 Steals 7
3 Blocks 4
17 Fouls 17
44 Points in Paint 58
9 Fast Break Pts 15
16 Points off TOs 15
6 Second Chance Pts 11
42 Bench Points 42
2 Largest Lead 19
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
DeMar DeRozan
27 PTS · 2 REB · 4 AST · 39.1 MIN
+27.86
2
De'Aaron Fox
28 PTS · 2 REB · 11 AST · 34.6 MIN
+24.33
3
Harrison Barnes
20 PTS · 2 REB · 3 AST · 30.2 MIN
+22.29
4
Dennis Schröder
22 PTS · 6 REB · 5 AST · 35.2 MIN
+22.16
5
Domantas Sabonis
17 PTS · 13 REB · 5 AST · 36.2 MIN
+18.51
6
Luke Kornet
13 PTS · 11 REB · 1 AST · 27.6 MIN
+16.96
7
Devin Vassell
16 PTS · 3 REB · 7 AST · 33.9 MIN
+15.67
8
Keldon Johnson
14 PTS · 12 REB · 1 AST · 22.8 MIN
+14.28
9
Julian Champagnie
12 PTS · 2 REB · 0 AST · 26.1 MIN
+7.92
10
Malik Monk
16 PTS · 2 REB · 1 AST · 28.1 MIN
+6.84
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:02 SAS shot clock Team TURNOVER 110–123
Q4 0:28 K. Johnson REBOUND (Off:2 Def:10) 110–123
Q4 0:30 MISS R. Westbrook Free Throw 2 of 2 110–123
Q4 0:30 TEAM offensive REBOUND 110–123
Q4 0:30 MISS R. Westbrook Free Throw 1 of 2 110–123
Q4 0:30 K. Johnson shooting personal FOUL (3 PF) (Westbrook 2 FT) 110–123
Q4 0:33 R. Westbrook REBOUND (Off:1 Def:8) 110–123
Q4 0:36 L. Kornet BLOCK (3 BLK) 110–123
Q4 0:36 MISS D. Schröder 26' pullup 3PT - blocked 110–123
Q4 0:44 D. Fox 25' 3PT step back (28 PTS) 110–123
Q4 1:01 TEAM defensive REBOUND 110–120
Q4 1:01 MISS M. Monk 29' running 3PT 110–120
Q4 1:06 D. Sabonis REBOUND (Off:3 Def:10) 110–120
Q4 1:09 MISS H. Barnes 3PT 110–120
Q4 1:25 D. Schröder 26' 3PT (22 PTS) (D. DeRozan 4 AST) 110–120

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

SAS San Antonio Spurs
S De'Aaron Fox 34.6m
28
pts
2
reb
11
ast
Impact
+20.0

Slicing through point-of-attack defenders at will allowed him to generate high-value looks for both himself and his teammates. This masterful orchestration of the pick-and-roll resulted in a highly efficient offensive clinic that overwhelmed the opposing backcourt.

Shooting
FG 11/20 (55.0%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.0%
USG% 27.7%
Net Rtg +28.1
+/- +20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.6m
Scoring +21.9
Creation +2.0
Shot Making +7.4
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
S Devin Vassell 33.9m
16
pts
3
reb
7
ast
Impact
+6.2

Errant perimeter marksmanship prevented a good performance from becoming a great one. He salvaged a slightly positive rating by utilizing his length to disrupt passing lanes and generate crucial stops on the defensive end.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.8%
USG% 21.5%
Net Rtg +14.8
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.9m
Scoring +10.2
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +0.9
Defense +3.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Harrison Barnes 30.2m
20
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
+16.2

A sudden offensive resurgence paired perfectly with relentless two-way energy to drive a massive positive rating. Capitalizing on defensive breakdowns to hit timely spot-up jumpers completely shifted the momentum in his team's favor.

Shooting
FG 7/11 (63.6%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.4%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg +23.4
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.2m
Scoring +16.1
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +4.7
Hustle +0.6
Defense +4.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 56.2%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
S Luke Kornet 27.6m
13
pts
11
reb
1
ast
Impact
+13.0

Absolute perfection around the rim and elite rim-protection metrics yielded a dominant analytical profile. By converting every interior look and deterring drivers with verticality, he controlled the paint on both ends of the floor.

Shooting
FG 5/5 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 96.2%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +22.0
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.6m
Scoring +12.5
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +14.0
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 31.6%
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 2
S Stephon Castle 15.6m
4
pts
0
reb
5
ast
Impact
-13.6

Struggling to navigate ball screens effectively led to stagnant offensive possessions and a sharp decline from his usual scoring output. Even a handful of high-effort loose ball recoveries couldn't offset the damage caused by his inability to penetrate the defense.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.0%
USG% 21.1%
Net Rtg -12.1
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.6m
Scoring +1.5
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.8
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
12
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.1

Defensive lapses off the ball negated the value of his floor-spacing on the other end. Getting caught ball-watching allowed backdoor cutters to score easily, sinking his overall metric despite a respectable shooting clip.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.6%
USG% 15.9%
Net Rtg +12.0
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.1m
Scoring +7.9
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
14
pts
12
reb
1
ast
Impact
+15.5

Bully-ball drives into the paint salvaged an otherwise dreadful perimeter shooting night. Crashing the glass with physicality ensured his team maintained possession advantages, keeping his overall impact firmly in the green.

Shooting
FG 7/11 (63.6%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 63.6%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +12.3
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.8m
Scoring +10.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +15.2
Defense -2.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
11
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.8

Hyper-efficient shot selection was undermined by costly mistakes in transition that gave the ball right back to the opponent. While he capitalized on nearly every open look, hidden negative plays kept him just below the break-even mark.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 101.1%
USG% 12.1%
Net Rtg -12.3
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.2m
Scoring +10.2
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +6.3
Defense -5.0
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Kelly Olynyk 18.4m
5
pts
6
reb
8
ast
Impact
-8.0

Operating as a high-post hub generated quality looks for cutters, but his lack of scoring gravity allowed defenders to cheat off him. A few sluggish closeouts on the perimeter ultimately tipped his overall rating into the negative.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg -6.2
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.4m
Scoring +2.3
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +6.7
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-16.8

Forcing three heavily contested perimeter shots in a short span completely stalled the second unit's momentum. This lack of offensive discipline turned a brief rotational stint into a significant analytical sinkhole.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -58.2
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.6m
Scoring -2.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.0

Made a fleeting cameo appearance that was just long enough to register a positive defensive blip. His brief stint was defined by a single solid rotation that deterred a drive before heading back to the bench.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -23.3
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.9m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.5
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
SAC Sacramento Kings
S DeMar DeRozan 39.1m
27
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
+23.3

Masterful shot selection defined this outing, as he surgically dismantled defensive coverages from the midrange to generate elite scoring efficiency. His massive offensive output was further amplified by active off-ball movement that consistently kept the opponent scrambling.

Shooting
FG 12/15 (80.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 85.0%
USG% 18.4%
Net Rtg -28.8
+/- -23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.1m
Scoring +25.1
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +6.1
Hustle +1.6
Defense +1.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
17
pts
13
reb
5
ast
Impact
+17.7

Defensive rebounding and interior positioning anchored his highly positive rating. By consistently securing contested boards and initiating transition play, he neutralized the opponent's second-chance opportunities while keeping the offense flowing.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.9%
USG% 22.1%
Net Rtg -7.4
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.2m
Scoring +11.1
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +15.5
Defense +7.1
Turnovers -9.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 3
14
pts
9
reb
7
ast
Impact
-5.2

High-energy defensive rotations and relentless rebounding could not salvage a heavily penalized offensive showing. Errant finishing at the rim and likely ball-security issues torpedoed his overall metric despite his undeniable motor on the other end.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 3/6 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.3%
USG% 23.2%
Net Rtg -4.0
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.7m
Scoring +7.0
Creation +2.1
Shot Making +3.2
Hustle +3.7
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -11.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 31.2%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 5
S Zach LaVine 24.6m
8
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
-8.7

Perimeter inefficiency severely capped his offensive value, as he struggled to find a rhythm from deep. Despite engaging well defensively and making a few key hustle rotations, his inability to bend the defense as a scoring threat dragged down his overall impact.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.8%
USG% 15.3%
Net Rtg -12.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.6m
Scoring +4.9
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.8
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 72.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Keon Ellis 14.8m
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.9

A stark regression from his recent scoring form left a noticeable void in the second-unit offense. Hesitant perimeter shooting and a lack of defensive disruption made it difficult to justify extended minutes during crucial stretches.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 9.1%
Net Rtg -45.2
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.8m
Scoring +0.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
22
pts
6
reb
5
ast
Impact
+15.5

Catching fire from beyond the arc completely transformed the offensive spacing. This unexpected perimeter explosion punished drop coverages and provided a massive analytical boost that far exceeded his usual production.

Shooting
FG 8/13 (61.5%)
3PT 5/8 (62.5%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.8%
USG% 16.5%
Net Rtg -0.7
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.2m
Scoring +17.8
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +6.3
Hustle +1.8
Defense +0.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 12
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Malik Monk 28.1m
16
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.6

Shot selection proved to be a major detriment, as forced attempts early in the shot clock resulted in empty possessions. While he showed flashes of defensive engagement, the sheer volume of missed jumpers allowed the opposition to dictate the game's tempo.

Shooting
FG 5/17 (29.4%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 42.6%
USG% 31.3%
Net Rtg +8.5
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.1m
Scoring +7.2
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Drew Eubanks 11.8m
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.9

Provided a sturdy, if unspectacular, interior presence during his rotation minutes. His ability to hold ground in the post and execute fundamental defensive assignments kept the team afloat without requiring offensive touches.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 8.7%
Net Rtg -11.5
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.8m
Scoring +1.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +0.3
Defense +1.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
1
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-14.3

Completely vanished from the offensive gameplan after a string of solid performances. Failing to connect on any field goal attempts and generating zero gravity on the perimeter made him a distinct liability during his brief stint.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 12.9%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg -17.0
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.9m
Scoring -1.7
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -1.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
1
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.3

An abrupt halt to his recent hot streak occurred during a highly disjointed rotational stint. Rushing a pair of ill-advised perimeter looks derailed his offensive rhythm before he could establish any interior presence.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 17.4%
USG% 30.0%
Net Rtg +33.3
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.6m
Scoring -1.1
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0