GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

BKN Brooklyn Nets
S Noah Clowney 39.1m
31
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+5.6

Stretched the floor to its absolute breaking point with lethal pick-and-pop execution. His unexpected perimeter barrage completely neutralized the opponent's drop coverage scheme.

Shooting
FG 9/17 (52.9%)
3PT 7/13 (53.8%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.9%
USG% 25.6%
Net Rtg +1.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.1m
Offense +21.8
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.8
Raw total +25.5
Avg player in 39.1m -19.9
Impact +5.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 25
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Egor Dëmin 27.9m
9
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
-5.1

Fantastic defensive activity and passing lane disruption were entirely undone by a frigid shooting night. Opponents sagged off him completely, ruining the team's half-court spacing.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 1/8 (12.5%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 39.3%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.9m
Offense +1.2
Hustle +3.8
Defense +4.0
Raw total +9.0
Avg player in 27.9m -14.1
Impact -5.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
16
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.5

Shot selection was highly questionable, repeatedly forcing contested jumpers early in the clock. The sheer volume of perimeter misses fueled opponent fast breaks and cratered his overall impact.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 1/9 (11.1%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.5%
USG% 30.6%
Net Rtg -40.4
+/- -21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.5m
Offense +5.4
Hustle +1.0
Defense +1.1
Raw total +7.5
Avg player in 27.5m -14.0
Impact -6.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Nic Claxton 26.3m
8
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.1

Defensive anchoring and rim deterrence were solid, but he was an offensive liability in the paint. Missed multiple point-blank bunnies that stalled out half-court possessions.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 37.6%
USG% 18.3%
Net Rtg -34.0
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.3m
Offense +5.2
Hustle +2.5
Defense +3.5
Raw total +11.2
Avg player in 26.3m -13.3
Impact -2.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 53.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
S Terance Mann 18.9m
6
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.3

Provided steady point-of-attack defense that disrupted the opposing backcourt's rhythm. A lack of offensive aggression kept his overall impact hovering right around neutral.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 55.1%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -55.6
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.9m
Offense +5.2
Hustle +1.7
Defense +2.4
Raw total +9.3
Avg player in 18.9m -9.6
Impact -0.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
4
pts
7
reb
5
ast
Impact
-3.5

Brought great energy to the glass and fought hard over screens defensively. However, his inability to convert highly catchable passes into points severely limited his usefulness.

Shooting
FG 1/8 (12.5%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 22.5%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +6.2
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.8m
Offense +4.1
Hustle +2.5
Defense +3.6
Raw total +10.2
Avg player in 26.8m -13.7
Impact -3.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Drake Powell 23.9m
15
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
+4.6

Capitalized on defensive breakdowns with sharp off-ball cutting. His timely weak-side gravity and decisive drives punished closeouts effectively.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.8%
USG% 23.2%
Net Rtg -37.1
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.9m
Offense +11.3
Hustle +2.7
Defense +2.8
Raw total +16.8
Avg player in 23.9m -12.2
Impact +4.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 87.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Jalen Wilson 22.8m
6
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-10.8

Settled for heavily contested looks late in the shot clock, killing offensive momentum. Struggled to stay in front of quicker wings, compounding his negative value on both ends.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.3%
USG% 16.1%
Net Rtg -5.4
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.8m
Offense -1.4
Hustle +0.2
Defense +1.9
Raw total +0.7
Avg player in 22.8m -11.5
Impact -10.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
5
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.6

Controlled the painted area defensively with physical box-outs and verticality. Unfortunately, his heavy feet in pick-and-roll coverage allowed guards to turn the corner too easily.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.2%
USG% 11.5%
Net Rtg +14.3
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.7m
Offense +3.7
Hustle +2.3
Defense +3.5
Raw total +9.5
Avg player in 21.7m -11.1
Impact -1.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.2

Maintained structural integrity on defense during a very brief stint. Made one crucial closeout that prevented a clean corner look.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +83.3
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.5m
Offense +1.3
Hustle +0.2
Defense 0.0
Raw total +1.5
Avg player in 2.5m -1.3
Impact +0.2
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.3

Flew around the court to generate deflections and disrupt the opponent's offensive flow. His hyper-aggressive ball pressure created a slight positive swing despite no offensive production.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg +83.3
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.5m
Offense -1.7
Hustle +2.7
Defense +0.6
Raw total +1.6
Avg player in 2.5m -1.3
Impact +0.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
NYK New York Knicks
S Josh Hart 37.7m
7
pts
12
reb
7
ast
Impact
+9.9

Absolute menace on the margins, generating immense value through loose ball recoveries and weak-side rotations. His relentless motor and transition push completely overshadowed a quiet scoring night.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.5%
USG% 10.7%
Net Rtg +21.9
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.7m
Offense +6.0
Hustle +11.8
Defense +11.3
Raw total +29.1
Avg player in 37.7m -19.2
Impact +9.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 1
S Mikal Bridges 33.5m
16
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
+4.8

Elite perimeter containment against opposing guards drove his positive defensive impact. Capitalized on defensive breakdowns by attacking closeouts decisively, leading to highly efficient scoring.

Shooting
FG 6/11 (54.5%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.3%
USG% 17.8%
Net Rtg +30.8
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.5m
Offense +13.4
Hustle +4.0
Defense +4.5
Raw total +21.9
Avg player in 33.5m -17.1
Impact +4.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
37
pts
12
reb
3
ast
Impact
+32.5

Utterly dominated the interior matchup, leveraging incredible offensive efficiency to warp the opposing defense. His rim protection was surprisingly stout, deterring drives and anchoring a massive positive swing.

Shooting
FG 14/20 (70.0%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.7%
USG% 31.9%
Net Rtg +38.5
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.0m
Offense +36.1
Hustle +3.1
Defense +9.9
Raw total +49.1
Avg player in 33.0m -16.6
Impact +32.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
S Jalen Brunson 32.7m
27
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+12.8

Dictated the offensive tempo with surgical pick-and-roll navigation. Kept the defense off-balance with timely paint touches, maximizing his on-court value through pure shot creation.

Shooting
FG 10/19 (52.6%)
3PT 4/9 (44.4%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.4%
USG% 27.0%
Net Rtg +12.3
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.7m
Offense +22.5
Hustle +3.1
Defense +3.8
Raw total +29.4
Avg player in 32.7m -16.6
Impact +12.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Miles McBride 29.6m
9
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
-5.3

Perimeter shot selection dragged down his overall effectiveness despite a scoring bump. Struggled to navigate screens defensively, allowing too much dribble penetration during his rotation minutes.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 45.0%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg -10.3
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.6m
Offense +5.7
Hustle +1.0
Defense +3.1
Raw total +9.8
Avg player in 29.6m -15.1
Impact -5.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
12
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-11.0

Brutal perimeter efficiency completely tanked his offensive value. Compounded the bricked threes with lazy transition defense, bleeding points on the other end.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 0/6 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 37.2%
Net Rtg +25.6
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.1m
Offense -0.5
Hustle +1.9
Defense -2.1
Raw total -0.7
Avg player in 20.1m -10.3
Impact -11.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
Tyler Kolek 17.0m
2
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
-0.8

Generated solid hustle metrics by diving for loose balls and disrupting passing lanes. Unfortunately, his inability to finish at the rim negated those extra possessions.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 10.8%
Net Rtg +14.0
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.0m
Offense +2.1
Hustle +3.5
Defense +2.3
Raw total +7.9
Avg player in 17.0m -8.7
Impact -0.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.4

Offered virtually zero offensive gravity, allowing the defense to completely ignore him in the half-court. A few decent rim contests couldn't salvage his negative offensive footprint.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 3.4%
Net Rtg -33.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.5m
Offense +1.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense +1.2
Raw total +2.9
Avg player in 12.5m -6.3
Impact -3.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-2.0

Failed to establish a physical presence inside during his brief stint. Defensive rotations were a step slow, bleeding value on the interior.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg +27.4
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.6m
Offense +3.2
Hustle +0.4
Defense +0.3
Raw total +3.9
Avg player in 11.6m -5.9
Impact -2.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.7

Looked lost on defensive switches during a brief cameo. Gave up too much space to shooters, resulting in a quick negative impact.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +31.8
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.8m
Offense 0.0
Hustle +0.2
Defense -0.5
Raw total -0.3
Avg player in 4.8m -2.4
Impact -2.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.2

Barely registered an impact in garbage time minutes. A missed rotation on the baseline highlighted a forgettable stint.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -83.3
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.5m
Offense -0.8
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.7
Raw total +0.1
Avg player in 2.5m -1.3
Impact -1.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.4

Burned repeatedly in drop coverage during his short run. Failed to secure defensive positioning, leading to easy second-chance opportunities for the opponent.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -83.3
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.5m
Offense -1.9
Hustle 0.0
Defense -1.2
Raw total -3.1
Avg player in 2.5m -1.3
Impact -4.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.8

Rushed his perimeter looks instead of letting the offense flow. Lack of defensive awareness on back-cuts further dragged down his brief appearance.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -83.3
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.5m
Offense -0.9
Hustle 0.0
Defense +0.3
Raw total -0.6
Avg player in 2.5m -1.2
Impact -1.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0