GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

ORL Orlando Magic
S Franz Wagner 33.7m
37
pts
6
reb
7
ast
Impact
+17.4

An absolute masterclass in shot selection and offensive efficiency drove a towering +17.4 net impact. He systematically dismantled the defense by hunting mismatches in the mid-post and finishing through contact. Avoiding turnovers while maintaining extreme usage made this a flawless offensive clinic.

Shooting
FG 13/19 (68.4%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 83.8%
USG% 28.4%
Net Rtg +12.0
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.7m
Offense +33.7
Hustle +0.4
Defense +0.9
Raw total +35.0
Avg player in 33.7m -17.6
Impact +17.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 47.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Desmond Bane 32.3m
27
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
+8.5

Lethal execution coming off pin-down screens allowed him to punish defensive lapses with immediate triggers. High-level shot-making and disciplined perimeter defense (+2.6) cemented a robust positive impact. Solid rotational awareness on the back end ensured his scoring bursts translated directly to the scoreboard.

Shooting
FG 8/16 (50.0%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 8/8 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.2%
USG% 27.6%
Net Rtg +14.9
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.3m
Offense +20.5
Hustle +2.2
Defense +2.6
Raw total +25.3
Avg player in 32.3m -16.8
Impact +8.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Jalen Suggs 31.8m
26
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+11.4

Off-the-charts hustle metrics (+11.9) defined a chaotic, highly disruptive performance that terrified the opposing backcourt. He generated massive value by diving for loose balls and turning deflections into immediate fast-break points. Paired with aggressive downhill drives, his relentless motor dictated the tempo of the game.

Shooting
FG 8/15 (53.3%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 8/9 (88.9%)
Advanced
TS% 68.6%
USG% 29.9%
Net Rtg +14.7
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.8m
Offense +14.6
Hustle +11.8
Defense +1.5
Raw total +27.9
Avg player in 31.8m -16.5
Impact +11.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
4
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-13.5

A disastrous -13.5 total impact was fueled by bricked open looks and getting constantly blown by on the perimeter (-1.4 defense). While he showed flashes of effort on loose balls (+2.0 hustle), his inability to stay in front of straight-line drives compromised the entire defensive shell. Missing multiple high-value corner threes only compounded the damage.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 13.4%
Net Rtg +3.7
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.3m
Offense +0.6
Hustle +2.0
Defense -1.4
Raw total +1.2
Avg player in 28.3m -14.7
Impact -13.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
11
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.6

Perfect shooting efficiency was entirely undone by severe rim-protection failures (-1.8 defense). Opponents relentlessly targeted his drop coverage, generating uncontested floaters and lobs that erased his offensive contributions. A couple of moving screens further depressed his overall net value.

Shooting
FG 4/4 (100.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 112.7%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +18.5
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.9m
Offense +10.3
Hustle +1.2
Defense -1.8
Raw total +9.7
Avg player in 21.9m -11.3
Impact -1.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
11
pts
1
reb
4
ast
Impact
+1.3

Suffocating on-ball pressure (+5.9 defense) and active hands in the passing lanes defined his highly disruptive shift. He consistently fought over screens to blow up the opponent's primary actions. However, a few careless live-ball turnovers in transition kept his overall total from matching his stellar defensive grades.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.4%
USG% 16.2%
Net Rtg +38.3
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.1m
Offense +6.1
Hustle +4.5
Defense +5.9
Raw total +16.5
Avg player in 29.1m -15.2
Impact +1.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 1
Goga Bitadze 19.1m
6
pts
7
reb
3
ast
Impact
+8.6

Completely shutting off the paint during his minutes, he altered multiple shots at the summit. Elite rim deterrence (+5.4 defense) and phenomenal activity on the glass (+5.2 hustle) resulted in a massive +8.6 impact despite low scoring volume. His ability to secure contested defensive rebounds cleanly ended opponent possessions.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 10.4%
Net Rtg +11.2
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.1m
Offense +7.9
Hustle +5.2
Defense +5.4
Raw total +18.5
Avg player in 19.1m -9.9
Impact +8.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
6
pts
7
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.1

A nearly neutral impact (-0.1) resulted from solid weak-side rim protection being offset by offensive spacing issues. His length disrupted multiple passing lanes (+1.7 defense), but defenders completely ignored him on the perimeter. The resulting clogged driving lanes stalled the second unit's momentum.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg +27.6
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.2m
Offense +5.1
Hustle +1.5
Defense +1.7
Raw total +8.3
Avg player in 16.2m -8.4
Impact -0.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Tyus Jones 16.2m
0
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
-7.0

A total lack of offensive aggression and getting bullied physically at the point of attack led to a steep -7.0 rating. He failed to generate any rim pressure, allowing the defense to stay glued to Orlando's shooters. Without his usual playmaking rhythm, his minutes were a massive net negative.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 2.6%
Net Rtg +9.1
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.2m
Offense +0.6
Hustle 0.0
Defense +0.9
Raw total +1.5
Avg player in 16.2m -8.5
Impact -7.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
5
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.6

Defensive lapses (-0.8) and a failure to register any hustle stats slightly outweighed his perimeter shot-making. He was repeatedly late on closeouts, giving up clean looks from the corners. While he knocked down a crucial deep ball, his inability to stay attached to his man kept his impact in the red.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 13.6%
Net Rtg -44.4
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.6m
Offense +4.1
Hustle 0.0
Defense -0.8
Raw total +3.3
Avg player in 7.6m -3.9
Impact -0.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Noah Penda 1.9m
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.1

Barely registered a pulse during a fleeting two-minute appearance at the end of the rotation. He stayed disciplined in his defensive shell but offered zero threat on the offensive end. A completely forgettable, low-leverage stint that resulted in a flat -0.1 impact.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -45.0
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.9m
Offense +0.4
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.3
Raw total +0.9
Avg player in 1.9m -1.0
Impact -0.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.6

A rushed, ill-advised shot attempt and poor defensive positioning (-0.8) marred a very brief stint on the floor. He looked out of sync with the offensive sets, clogging the spacing for the primary ball-handlers. Getting beat back-door on his only defensive possession sealed a negative rating.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -45.0
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.9m
Offense -0.9
Hustle 0.0
Defense -0.8
Raw total -1.7
Avg player in 1.9m -0.9
Impact -2.6
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
NYK New York Knicks
S Mikal Bridges 38.4m
18
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+11.8

Relentless point-of-attack pressure disrupted Orlando's initiation, generating crucial deflections that fueled transition opportunities. High hustle (+9.8) and defensive (+7.2) metrics ultimately drove his elite +11.8 total impact. A highly efficient shot profile further stabilized his overall footprint.

Shooting
FG 7/11 (63.6%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 75.8%
USG% 15.1%
Net Rtg -0.4
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.4m
Offense +14.8
Hustle +9.8
Defense +7.2
Raw total +31.8
Avg player in 38.4m -20.0
Impact +11.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
24
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
-0.5

Despite strong scoring volume, his overall impact plunged into the negative (-0.5) due to costly live-ball turnovers and poor pick-and-roll positioning. Getting targeted in drop coverage allowed opposing guards to walk into rhythm jumpers. The offensive production simply masked how much value he bled on the other end.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 10/11 (90.9%)
Advanced
TS% 63.7%
USG% 26.7%
Net Rtg -17.9
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.2m
Offense +13.5
Hustle +3.1
Defense +2.2
Raw total +18.8
Avg player in 37.2m -19.3
Impact -0.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
S Jalen Brunson 36.8m
33
pts
3
reb
11
ast
Impact
+10.1

Masterful offensive orchestration drove a massive box score rating, but defensive bleed (-0.6) and high-leverage turnovers kept his total impact grounded at +10.1. He consistently manipulated the defense in the pick-and-roll to create high-quality looks for teammates. Still, getting hunted on switches late in the shot clock offset a chunk of his offensive brilliance.

Shooting
FG 12/21 (57.1%)
3PT 3/9 (33.3%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.8%
USG% 29.8%
Net Rtg -13.6
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.8m
Offense +27.0
Hustle +2.9
Defense -0.6
Raw total +29.3
Avg player in 36.8m -19.2
Impact +10.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
6
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.7

Anchored his minutes with flawless shot selection around the rim, though his overall footprint remained muted (+0.7). His value was primarily sustained by offensive rebounding tap-outs (+3.1 hustle) that extended crucial possessions. However, struggles to navigate screens on the perimeter limited his defensive ceiling.

Shooting
FG 3/3 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 11.4%
Net Rtg +4.6
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.7m
Offense +5.9
Hustle +3.1
Defense +0.5
Raw total +9.5
Avg player in 16.7m -8.8
Impact +0.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 13
Opp FG% 76.5%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
S Landry Shamet 2.7m
0
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-1.2

A brief, cardio-only stint where he failed to register any meaningful hustle metrics. Getting caught on multiple off-ball screens dragged his defensive impact into the red (-0.8). He was essentially a ghost during his limited rotation minutes.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +100.0
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.7m
Offense +1.0
Hustle 0.0
Defense -0.8
Raw total +0.2
Avg player in 2.7m -1.4
Impact -1.2
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
15
pts
2
reb
5
ast
Impact
-3.7

The scoring surge was entirely offset by a string of momentum-killing turnovers and poor foul discipline (-3.7 total). He brought excellent energy to 50/50 balls (+4.0 hustle), but his tunnel vision in isolation sets stalled the offense. Giving away free points at the charity stripe ultimately dragged his net impact into the negative.

Shooting
FG 6/10 (60.0%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 16.5%
Net Rtg -13.3
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.7m
Offense +9.8
Hustle +4.0
Defense +0.1
Raw total +13.9
Avg player in 33.7m -17.6
Impact -3.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
Josh Hart 28.8m
12
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.5

Impact cratered to a dismal -7.5 due to erratic decision-making in transition and costly defensive gambles. While he found some success attacking closeouts, his tendency to over-help left shooters wide open in the corners. A lack of his usual loose-ball recovery (+0.6 hustle) removed the buffer that normally saves his advanced metrics.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.6%
USG% 17.2%
Net Rtg -29.8
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.8m
Offense +7.5
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.5
Raw total +7.6
Avg player in 28.8m -15.1
Impact -7.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 64.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Tyler Kolek 16.5m
8
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.7

Navigating ball screens beautifully, he blew up multiple dribble hand-offs to stifle the opponent's secondary actions. Excellent point-of-attack defense (+3.4) kept his overall impact afloat despite a low-usage offensive role. A couple of ill-advised fouls were the only thing preventing his total score from climbing higher.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 3/6 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 70.9%
USG% 15.0%
Net Rtg -14.9
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.5m
Offense +4.6
Hustle +1.3
Defense +3.4
Raw total +9.3
Avg player in 16.5m -8.6
Impact +0.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.1

Heavy defensive liabilities (-1.6) and a lack of physical presence inside resulted in a steep negative impact (-7.1). He was consistently late on closeouts, allowing uncontested perimeter looks during a pivotal second-quarter stretch. Without his usual offensive efficiency to lean on, his floor time was highly detrimental.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 11.4%
Net Rtg -4.1
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.5m
Offense +1.2
Hustle +0.4
Defense -1.6
Raw total 0.0
Avg player in 13.5m -7.1
Impact -7.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.1

Brutal shot selection and empty offensive possessions tanked his overall rating (-7.1). He managed to salvage some value through active weak-side rotations (+1.7 defense) and crashing the glass. However, forcing contested jumpers early in the clock completely derailed the second unit's rhythm.

Shooting
FG 0/4 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 24.1%
Net Rtg -28.0
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.4m
Offense -5.4
Hustle +2.0
Defense +1.7
Raw total -1.7
Avg player in 10.4m -5.4
Impact -7.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
1
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.6

Provided a brief but stable frontcourt presence, executing his drop coverage assignments without fouling. He didn't force the issue offensively, simply setting hard screens and rolling to the rim. A perfectly neutral, mistake-free shift in garbage time.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.8%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +14.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.7m
Offense +1.6
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.3
Raw total +2.1
Avg player in 2.7m -1.5
Impact +0.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.2

A rushed, out-of-rhythm perimeter attempt highlighted a disjointed two-minute stint. He failed to register any defensive or hustle stats, floating on the perimeter rather than engaging in the play. The lack of physical engagement dragged his brief appearance into the red.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg +16.7
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.6m
Offense -0.9
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total -0.9
Avg player in 2.6m -1.3
Impact -2.2
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0