Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
NOP lead GSW lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
GSW 2P — 3P —
NOP 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 177 attempts

GSW GSW Shot-making Δ

Moody Hard 10/16 +11.8
Podziemski 8/13 +4.6
Green Open 3/13 -8.5
Curry Hard 2/11 -6.4
Richard 4/9 -1.3
Butler III Open 6/8 +3.7
Hield Hard 4/8 +2.2
Horford Hard 2/5 +1.0
Post Hard 1/4 -1.3
Santos Hard 1/3 -0.1

NOP NOP Shot-making Δ

Fears Open 7/14 -3.2
Murphy III 6/13 -0.6
Alvarado Hard 6/12 +2.5
Bey 4/10 -2.4
Missi Open 4/8 -2.5
Jones 2/7 -3.7
Hawkins Hard 2/6 -1.1
McGowens Open 3/6 -1.7
Queen 2/4 -0.3
Matković Open 2/3 +0.1
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
GSW
NOP
43/94 Field Goals 38/83
45.7% Field Goal % 45.8%
24/56 3-Pointers 8/29
42.9% 3-Point % 27.6%
14/17 Free Throws 22/29
82.4% Free Throw % 75.9%
61.1% True Shooting % 55.3%
57 Total Rebounds 50
16 Offensive 15
31 Defensive 30
34 Assists 22
1.62 Assist/TO Ratio 1.05
21 Turnovers 20
14 Steals 11
4 Blocks 4
23 Fouls 16
36 Points in Paint 56
21 Fast Break Pts 14
27 Points off TOs 20
19 Second Chance Pts 21
48 Bench Points 43
25 Largest Lead 4
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Moses Moody
32 PTS · 4 REB · 0 AST · 33.1 MIN
+32.45
2
Jimmy Butler III
18 PTS · 3 REB · 10 AST · 31.2 MIN
+17.0
3
Brandin Podziemski
19 PTS · 3 REB · 3 AST · 25.8 MIN
+16.37
4
Trey Murphy III
20 PTS · 8 REB · 2 AST · 31.2 MIN
+13.42
5
Buddy Hield
11 PTS · 2 REB · 2 AST · 19.8 MIN
+13.39
6
Yves Missi
8 PTS · 7 REB · 2 AST · 24.8 MIN
+12.25
7
Al Horford
6 PTS · 2 REB · 6 AST · 20.2 MIN
+10.59
8
Saddiq Bey
11 PTS · 7 REB · 1 AST · 28.8 MIN
+10.47
9
Derik Queen
9 PTS · 7 REB · 6 AST · 24.6 MIN
+9.88
10
Karlo Matković
4 PTS · 2 REB · 3 AST · 20.0 MIN
+8.09
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:00 W. Richard REBOUND (Off:5 Def:2) 124–106
Q4 0:03 MISS G. Santos 25' 3PT 124–106
Q4 0:11 Y. Missi driving reverse Layup (8 PTS) 124–106
Q4 0:14 Y. Missi REBOUND (Off:6 Def:1) 124–104
Q4 0:16 MISS J. Fears Free Throw 2 of 2 124–104
Q4 0:16 J. Fears Free Throw 1 of 2 (17 PTS) 124–104
Q4 0:16 T. Jackson-Davis shooting personal FOUL (2 PF) (Fears 2 FT) 124–103
Q4 0:28 T. Jackson-Davis tip DUNK (2 PTS) 124–103
Q4 0:28 T. Jackson-Davis REBOUND (Off:1 Def:0) 122–103
Q4 0:31 MISS G. Santos 26' 3PT 122–103
Q4 0:48 J. Fears driving finger roll Layup (16 PTS) 122–103
Q4 0:48 J. Fears REBOUND (Off:2 Def:3) 122–101
Q4 0:51 MISS Y. Missi alley-oop DUNK 122–101
Q4 0:58 W. Richard 20' Jump Shot (9 PTS) (P. Spencer 2 AST) 122–101
Q4 1:05 W. Richard REBOUND (Off:4 Def:2) 120–101

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

Why this game is worth arguing about

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

NOP New Orleans Pelicans
S Trey Murphy III 31.1m
20
pts
8
reb
2
ast
Impact
+8.2

Posted stellar defensive metrics (+8.0 Def) by utilizing his length to disrupt the perimeter, yet his overall impact slipped into the red. This disconnect points to costly hidden errors on offense, likely poorly timed turnovers or stalled possessions. His defensive brilliance was essentially neutralized by a lack of offensive fluidity.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.9%
USG% 27.6%
Net Rtg -19.0
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.1m
Scoring +14.3
Creation +2.0
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +3.4
Defense +6.8
Turnovers -13.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 5
S Saddiq Bey 28.8m
11
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+8.3

Despite engaging physically on defense (+6.6 Def) and crashing the glass, his overall score suffered from a notable dip in offensive production. He forced several heavily contested shots that led to long rebounds and opponent fast breaks. The effort was there, but the shot selection actively harmed the team's offensive rating.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.6%
USG% 17.6%
Net Rtg -27.5
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.8m
Scoring +5.5
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +8.9
Defense +3.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S Herbert Jones 28.7m
6
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.0

Generated massive value through relentless hustle (+8.4) and elite point-of-attack defense, but his offensive struggles were too severe to overcome. Opponents completely ignored him on the perimeter, which destroyed the team's spacing and bogged down the half-court offense. His defensive masterclass was overshadowed by his offensive limitations in this matchup.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 38.1%
USG% 13.9%
Net Rtg -38.2
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.7m
Scoring +2.2
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.3
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S Jeremiah Fears 25.1m
17
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.1

Racked up counting stats through sheer volume, but underlying inefficiencies dragged his net impact into the negative. He likely surrendered too many straight-line drives on defense, negating his own scoring output. A classic case of empty calories where the offensive production masked poor structural play.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.9%
USG% 29.2%
Net Rtg -28.7
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.1m
Scoring +11.2
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +6.3
Defense -1.4
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 4
S Derik Queen 24.6m
9
pts
7
reb
6
ast
Impact
-0.3

Operated as an excellent offensive hub, using his vision to pick apart the defense from the high post. He paired this playmaking with sturdy interior defense (+5.4 Def), refusing to yield deep post position. A highly effective, balanced performance that kept the offense humming without sacrificing defensive integrity.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 67.8%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -19.1
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.6m
Scoring +7.1
Creation +3.4
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +2.1
Defense -2.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 41.2%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
18
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
-0.5

An explosive scoring surge completely masked a disastrous overall floor game (-6.5 Total). A shocking lack of his trademark hustle (+0.0) suggests he was repeatedly beaten in transition and failed to generate his usual backcourt pressure. He got his points, but gave up significantly more on the other end through poor defensive discipline.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.6%
USG% 27.4%
Net Rtg -1.9
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.2m
Scoring +13.4
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +4.1
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
Yves Missi 24.8m
8
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.2

Dominated the interior with a relentless blend of rim-running and shot-altering defense (+6.3 Def). His constant motor (+4.0 Hustle) created second-chance opportunities and wore down the opposing frontcourt. A breakout performance defined by vertical spacing and sheer physical imposition.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 45.0%
USG% 13.9%
Net Rtg -8.9
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.8m
Scoring +3.5
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +8.9
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
4
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
-2.1

Sacrificed his own offensive touches to anchor the defense, providing elite rim protection (+6.2 Def) during his minutes. He consistently made the right reads as a screener and kept the ball moving. His positive impact was driven entirely by doing the dirty work and securing the paint.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 7.8%
Net Rtg -9.8
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.0m
Scoring +3.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +1.6
Defense +3.2
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-2.7

A cold shooting night severely limited his usefulness, as his primary value relies on perimeter gravity. Without his shot falling, his lack of defensive resistance (+0.2 Def) became a glaring liability. Opponents actively hunted him in switches, turning his minutes into a net negative.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 15.8%
Net Rtg -23.8
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.8m
Scoring +1.8
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +5.1
Defense -3.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
8
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.2

Provided a steadying presence off the bench by taking what the defense gave him and avoiding costly mistakes. His focused on-ball defense (+3.0 Def) prevented dribble penetration and kept the defensive shell intact. A quiet but highly effective stint defined by fundamental execution.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.5%
USG% 26.7%
Net Rtg -20.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.6m
Scoring +3.8
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +0.8
Hustle +0.3
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.8

Looked completely out of sync during a brief rotation, failing to register any meaningful hustle or offensive stats. He was caught ball-watching on several defensive possessions, leading to easy backdoor cuts. His inability to impact the game physically resulted in a quick hook to the bench.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +30.3
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.3m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
GSW Golden State Warriors
S Moses Moody 33.1m
32
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
+34.1

An absolutely dominant two-way showcase where his perimeter shot-making stretched the defense to its breaking point. He paired his offensive explosion with elite hustle (+7.3) and suffocating point-of-attack defense (+10.8 Def). This was a complete performance defined by relentless energy and lethal execution.

Shooting
FG 10/16 (62.5%)
3PT 8/12 (66.7%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 87.9%
USG% 22.4%
Net Rtg +31.8
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.1m
Scoring +27.1
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +8.3
Hustle +3.1
Defense +5.7
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 29.4%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 1
18
pts
3
reb
10
ast
Impact
+6.9

Masterful orchestration fueled a strong positive impact, with his defensive anticipation (+6.0 Def) disrupting passing lanes all night. He manipulated matchups perfectly in the half-court, generating high-quality looks for teammates without forcing his own offense. The total score reflects a highly efficient, two-way floor-general performance.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 88.2%
USG% 19.5%
Net Rtg +29.2
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.2m
Scoring +16.9
Creation +3.0
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +3.8
Defense +4.0
Turnovers -14.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 6
S Stephen Curry 28.1m
9
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
-11.2

Impact plummeted to a massive negative due to uncharacteristically poor shot selection and an inability to find a rhythm. While he contributed marginally in hustle categories, the sheer volume of missed perimeter jumpers fueled opponent fast breaks. The offense completely stagnated during his minutes as he failed to draw his usual defensive gravity.

Shooting
FG 2/11 (18.2%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 34.1%
USG% 22.7%
Net Rtg +31.4
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.1m
Scoring +1.6
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +2.5
Defense -2.2
Turnovers -7.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
S Draymond Green 24.8m
8
pts
10
reb
6
ast
Impact
-3.2

Elite defensive metrics and high-level hustle plays (+6.4) were completely undone by poor shot selection. He forced too many contested looks around the rim, leading to empty possessions that stalled the offense. His impact score ultimately suffered because the defensive stops couldn't compensate for the offensive dead ends.

Shooting
FG 3/13 (23.1%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 30.8%
USG% 26.9%
Net Rtg +42.6
+/- +23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.8m
Scoring +0.1
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +12.7
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -12.6
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 5
S Will Richard 22.2m
9
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.3

A complete lack of hustle metrics suggests he was a step slow in transition defense, bleeding points the other way. The offensive volume couldn't mask the negative defensive rotations, dragging his overall impact deeply into the red. Despite a notable scoring surge well above his recent baseline, hidden floor-game costs ruined his net rating.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +17.3
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.2m
Scoring +4.7
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +8.9
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
19
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+12.5

Carried a heavy offensive load with efficient scoring, but gave a lot of it back on the other end of the floor. A glaring lack of hustle plays (+0.2) and minimal defensive resistance allowed opponents to easily match his production. His scoring volume was essential, yet the overall impact was muted by poor transition tracking.

Shooting
FG 8/13 (61.5%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 73.1%
USG% 21.7%
Net Rtg +14.8
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.8m
Scoring +15.2
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +5.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Al Horford 20.2m
6
pts
2
reb
6
ast
Impact
+0.8

Anchored the frontcourt with textbook positional defense (+5.2 Def) and timely floor-spacing. His impact remained firmly positive because he rarely made mistakes, executing dribble hand-offs flawlessly and contesting shots without fouling. A steadying veteran presence that kept the second unit's execution crisp.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 12.8%
Net Rtg -2.4
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.2m
Scoring +3.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.6
Defense +4.7
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
Buddy Hield 19.9m
11
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.3

Breaking out of a severe shooting slump, his perimeter gravity completely opened up the half-court offense. Surprisingly, it was his off-ball defensive rotations (+7.5 Def) that cemented his high positive impact. He stayed attached to shooters and avoided the lazy fouls that usually plague his defensive possessions.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 68.8%
USG% 18.4%
Net Rtg +4.7
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Scoring +7.8
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +3.2
Hustle +0.6
Defense +5.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.8

A complete offensive disappearing act tanked his overall impact despite solid on-ball defensive pressure (+3.6 Def). He was entirely ignored by the opposing defense, which clogged the paint and stalled the team's spacing. The lack of any scoring threat rendered his defensive contributions moot in the broader flow of the game.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 6.9%
Net Rtg +8.5
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.1m
Scoring -1.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense -0.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 0
Quinten Post 10.2m
4
pts
7
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.1

Struggled to establish deep post position, settling for low-percentage looks that dragged down his offensive efficiency. While he offered some rim deterrence (+2.0 Def), his inability to finish plays inside allowed the defense to leak out early. The negative overall score reflects a stint where he was largely a non-factor.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -14.8
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.2m
Scoring +1.0
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +6.0
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.9

Barely registered an impact during his brief stint, offering zero resistance defensively or energy on the glass. His perfect shooting was offset by a complete lack of off-ball movement. He essentially existed as a placeholder on the court, neither helping nor actively hurting the flow.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg -43.6
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.7m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Gui Santos 4.7m
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.5

A sharp regression from his recent hot streak, marked by tentative decision-making and poor defensive closeouts (-1.1 Def). He was consistently targeted in pick-and-roll actions, bleeding points during his short time on the floor. The lack of hustle metrics highlights a lethargic performance that actively hurt the team's momentum.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -43.6
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.7m
Scoring +1.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -3.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.9

Maximized a very brief appearance by rolling hard to the rim and finishing efficiently. Despite a slight negative grade on defense, his offensive vertical spacing forced the defense to collapse, creating immediate value. A hyper-efficient burst of energy that swung the momentum in just three minutes.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 9.1%
Net Rtg -44.4
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.0m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +0.2
Hustle +1.3
Defense -3.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0