GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

ORL Orlando Magic
S Desmond Bane 39.2m
23
pts
6
reb
5
ast
Impact
+6.7

Played a suffocating brand of point-of-attack defense (+11.0 Def) that completely disrupted the opponent's initiation sets. Supplemented his scoring with relentless off-ball tracking and physical closeouts that defined Orlando's defensive intensity.

Shooting
FG 7/16 (43.8%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 60.3%
USG% 22.9%
Net Rtg -8.7
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.2m
Offense +13.8
Hustle +4.5
Defense +11.0
Raw total +29.3
Avg player in 39.2m -22.6
Impact +6.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 61.5%
STL 5
BLK 0
TO 3
S Franz Wagner 36.4m
18
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
+0.4

Paced the offense with methodical, probing drives that consistently compromised the defense's weak side. His stellar positional awareness (+7.4 Def) blew up several dribble hand-offs, though missed perimeter shots slightly capped his ceiling.

Shooting
FG 7/17 (41.2%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 48.0%
USG% 22.0%
Net Rtg +4.8
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.4m
Offense +11.2
Hustle +2.7
Defense +7.4
Raw total +21.3
Avg player in 36.4m -20.9
Impact +0.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
17
pts
12
reb
2
ast
Impact
+7.9

Bullied his way to prime real estate in the paint, converting high-percentage looks to continue his streak of elite efficiency. Controlled the glass with authority and deterred rim challengers (+5.9 Def) to anchor a dominant frontcourt performance.

Shooting
FG 5/7 (71.4%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 88.2%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -4.1
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.1m
Offense +20.3
Hustle +1.9
Defense +5.9
Raw total +28.1
Avg player in 35.1m -20.2
Impact +7.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jalen Suggs 31.9m
13
pts
5
reb
8
ast
Impact
-3.6

A disastrous shooting night from beyond the arc heavily penalized his offensive impact, allowing defenders to pack the paint. Salvaged some value through sheer defensive tenacity (+6.0 Def) and active playmaking, but the spacing issues were too costly.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 0/7 (0.0%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 49.2%
USG% 19.5%
Net Rtg +9.5
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.9m
Offense +5.3
Hustle +3.4
Defense +6.0
Raw total +14.7
Avg player in 31.9m -18.3
Impact -3.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 43.8%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 3
15
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.7

Generated massive value through high-motor transition play and timely cuts to the basket (+5.0 Hustle). Maintained excellent defensive discipline against Golden State's motion offense, staying attached to shooters through multiple screens.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 57.7%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +7.4
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.9m
Offense +9.1
Hustle +5.0
Defense +4.2
Raw total +18.3
Avg player in 28.9m -16.6
Impact +1.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
21
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.4

Sliced through the defense with aggressive, downhill drives that yielded highly efficient interior scoring. Navigated ball screens beautifully on the defensive end, consistently applying rear-view pressure to force rushed decisions.

Shooting
FG 8/13 (61.5%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 5/7 (71.4%)
Advanced
TS% 65.3%
USG% 21.3%
Net Rtg +22.9
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.8m
Offense +13.9
Hustle +3.8
Defense +4.5
Raw total +22.2
Avg player in 32.8m -18.8
Impact +3.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
Tyus Jones 14.9m
8
pts
0
reb
3
ast
Impact
+1.9

Brought immediate stability to the second unit with flawless perimeter shooting and careful ball stewardship. Kept the offense humming without forcing the issue, while providing surprisingly stout resistance against bigger guards.

Shooting
FG 3/3 (100.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 133.3%
USG% 12.1%
Net Rtg -4.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.9m
Offense +7.5
Hustle +0.7
Defense +2.3
Raw total +10.5
Avg player in 14.9m -8.6
Impact +1.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Goga Bitadze 13.9m
6
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
+4.1

Maximized a brief stint by setting bone-crushing screens and finishing flawlessly around the basket. Provided a sturdy interior wall (+3.5 Def) that completely shut off the restricted area during the second-quarter rotation.

Shooting
FG 3/3 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 12.1%
Net Rtg +26.7
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.9m
Offense +7.4
Hustle +1.2
Defense +3.5
Raw total +12.1
Avg player in 13.9m -8.0
Impact +4.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.7

Failed to find an offensive rhythm during a disjointed cameo appearance. Was uncharacteristically late on weak-side rotations, allowing easy dump-off passes that tanked his overall plus-minus.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +21.4
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.8m
Offense -2.3
Hustle +1.1
Defense +0.5
Raw total -0.7
Avg player in 6.8m -4.0
Impact -4.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Jamal Cain 0.1m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.1

Made a fleeting appearance at the end of a quarter, leaving no time to impact the game. His recent streak of hyper-efficient scoring was put on ice for this matchup.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -300.0
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 0.1m
Offense 0.0
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total 0.0
Avg player in 0.1m -0.1
Impact -0.1
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
GSW Golden State Warriors
33
pts
7
reb
4
ast
Impact
+14.7

Dominated the physical matchups on the perimeter, using his size to bully defenders and generate high-value looks at the rim. His exceptional defensive anticipation (+9.0 Def) completely derailed the opponent's offensive flow during a pivotal third-quarter surge.

Shooting
FG 10/16 (62.5%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 13/15 (86.7%)
Advanced
TS% 73.0%
USG% 30.2%
Net Rtg +2.9
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.2m
Offense +25.0
Hustle +2.6
Defense +9.0
Raw total +36.6
Avg player in 38.2m -21.9
Impact +14.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 3
S Stephen Curry 34.2m
34
pts
3
reb
9
ast
Impact
+11.8

Relentless off-ball movement completely warped Orlando's defensive shell, creating wide-open driving lanes for teammates. Paired his elite perimeter shot-making with surprisingly disruptive hands on defense (+7.3 Def) to control the game's tempo from the opening tip.

Shooting
FG 12/23 (52.2%)
3PT 7/15 (46.7%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.5%
USG% 37.0%
Net Rtg -3.8
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.2m
Offense +18.2
Hustle +5.8
Defense +7.3
Raw total +31.3
Avg player in 34.2m -19.5
Impact +11.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 5
S Draymond Green 31.4m
12
pts
6
reb
6
ast
Impact
-3.9

Found success as a scorer with an unusually aggressive offensive approach, but uncharacteristic breakdowns in help defense tanked his overall rating. The high hustle metrics (+4.3) couldn't fully offset the damage from late closeouts and missed rotations during key second-half stretches.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg +14.8
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.4m
Offense +7.3
Hustle +4.3
Defense +2.5
Raw total +14.1
Avg player in 31.4m -18.0
Impact -3.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 23.1%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 3
S Moses Moody 29.6m
6
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-12.6

A massive drop-off in scoring aggression left the offense stagnant during his shifts, resulting in a brutal negative impact. While he remained engaged on the defensive end (+3.6 Def), hesitant shot selection and an inability to stretch the floor severely cramped Golden State's spacing.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 43.6%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -2.8
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.6m
Offense -2.0
Hustle +2.8
Defense +3.6
Raw total +4.4
Avg player in 29.6m -17.0
Impact -12.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
S Will Richard 15.3m
6
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-3.5

Flawless shot execution was completely overshadowed by poor defensive positioning against Orlando's wings, dragging his overall impact into the red. A lack of rebounding presence and minimal disruption in the passing lanes severely limited his two-way effectiveness.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 104.2%
USG% 10.8%
Net Rtg -14.6
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.3m
Offense +4.3
Hustle +0.8
Defense +0.1
Raw total +5.2
Avg player in 15.3m -8.7
Impact -3.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Al Horford 27.2m
9
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.9

Anchored the paint admirably with strong drop-coverage positioning (+6.8 Def), forcing tough contested floaters. However, clunky offensive execution and missed perimeter looks allowed the defense to sag off him, stalling out multiple possessions.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.0%
USG% 16.1%
Net Rtg -14.8
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.2m
Offense +3.3
Hustle +1.6
Defense +6.8
Raw total +11.7
Avg player in 27.2m -15.6
Impact -3.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 2
5
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.9

Hesitant decision-making in the half-court stalled the offensive rhythm and contributed to a steep decline in scoring volume. Despite solid rebounding effort and active hands on defense, his inability to capitalize on open catch-and-shoot opportunities crippled his overall value.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 35.7%
USG% 11.7%
Net Rtg -10.9
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.5m
Offense +2.2
Hustle +3.3
Defense +2.7
Raw total +8.2
Avg player in 26.5m -15.1
Impact -6.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Buddy Hield 15.2m
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.1

Provided virtually zero resistance on the perimeter, allowing straight-line drives that consistently collapsed the defensive scheme. Blanked across all hustle categories (+0.0), making him a severe liability when his outside shot failed to connect.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 11.4%
Net Rtg -18.4
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.2m
Offense -1.4
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total -1.4
Avg player in 15.2m -8.7
Impact -10.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Quinten Post 12.2m
2
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.8

Rushed his offensive touches, settling for low-percentage perimeter looks instead of utilizing his size inside. Showed flashes of competent rim protection, but ultimately failed to establish a physical presence on either end of the floor during his second-quarter run.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 14.8%
Net Rtg -11.6
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.2m
Offense +2.7
Hustle +1.6
Defense +0.9
Raw total +5.2
Avg player in 12.2m -7.0
Impact -1.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.4

Struggled to make his usual disruptive impact at the point of attack, allowing opposing guards too much comfort in the pick-and-roll. A lack of offensive volume further muted his effectiveness during a brief, quiet stint on the floor.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 11.5%
Net Rtg -57.3
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.2m
Offense +5.0
Hustle +0.2
Defense -0.8
Raw total +4.4
Avg player in 10.2m -5.8
Impact -1.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0