GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

LAL Los Angeles Lakers
S Austin Reaves 33.4m
16
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
-12.8

Despite decent shooting splits, his minutes were plagued by defensive breakdowns that fueled massive opponent runs. The scoring output was entirely negated by how much he gave back in transition, resulting in a brutal overall impact score.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 21.3%
Net Rtg -18.0
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.4m
Offense +2.7
Hustle +1.4
Defense +0.8
Raw total +4.9
Avg player in 33.4m -17.7
Impact -12.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 5
S Luka Dončić 31.6m
38
pts
11
reb
5
ast
Impact
-0.1

An offensive masterclass in isolation scoring was completely undone by the team bleeding points during his minutes. His heavy usage rate yielded spectacular individual numbers, but a lack of off-ball hustle and defensive connectivity resulted in a perfectly neutral net impact.

Shooting
FG 15/26 (57.7%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.4%
USG% 48.7%
Net Rtg -33.4
+/- -25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.6m
Offense +13.9
Hustle +0.4
Defense +2.4
Raw total +16.7
Avg player in 31.6m -16.8
Impact -0.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 9
S LeBron James 31.2m
10
pts
0
reb
3
ast
Impact
-17.9

A disastrous overall impact driven by poor shot selection and a noticeable lack of defensive engagement. The offense completely stalled during his minutes as he settled for contested perimeter jumpers rather than pressuring the rim, bleeding value on both ends.

Shooting
FG 3/10 (30.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 42.5%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -10.3
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.2m
Offense -1.1
Hustle +0.8
Defense -1.1
Raw total -1.4
Avg player in 31.2m -16.5
Impact -17.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Deandre Ayton 27.9m
12
pts
9
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.6

Continued his streak of hyper-efficient interior finishing, punishing mismatches in the paint to stabilize the half-court offense. His reliable presence as a roll man and solid defensive positioning anchored a highly productive shift.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg -16.4
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.9m
Offense +15.6
Hustle +1.0
Defense +3.8
Raw total +20.4
Avg player in 27.9m -14.8
Impact +5.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Rui Hachimura 23.0m
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.8

Completely vanished from the offensive game plan, failing to generate any pressure on the defense. While his hustle metrics were solid, playing essentially 4-on-5 offensively severely handicapped the unit's spacing and dragged his net score into the red.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 1.7%
Net Rtg -24.6
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.0m
Offense -0.5
Hustle +3.1
Defense +1.7
Raw total +4.3
Avg player in 23.0m -12.1
Impact -7.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Gabe Vincent 20.7m
3
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.4

Elite hustle metrics couldn't mask a dreadful shooting performance that routinely killed offensive momentum. His bricked perimeter shots acted as empty possessions, completely offsetting his gritty point-of-attack defense and dragging down his net impact.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg -11.4
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.7m
Offense -1.9
Hustle +5.4
Defense +2.1
Raw total +5.6
Avg player in 20.7m -11.0
Impact -5.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 77.8%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Jake LaRavia 15.9m
2
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-6.8

Struggled to find a rhythm offensively, passing up open looks and stalling the ball movement. Even with decent hustle plays, his inability to stretch the floor allowed defenders to pack the paint against the primary scorers.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 10.8%
Net Rtg -52.8
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.9m
Offense -1.1
Hustle +2.4
Defense +0.4
Raw total +1.7
Avg player in 15.9m -8.5
Impact -6.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
13
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.7

Broke out of a recent scoring drought by hunting his shot aggressively and knocking down crucial perimeter looks. His floor-spacing gravity opened up driving lanes for teammates, making him a highly effective offensive catalyst in limited minutes.

Shooting
FG 5/7 (71.4%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 92.9%
USG% 21.2%
Net Rtg -3.3
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.6m
Offense +11.8
Hustle +1.1
Defense +0.1
Raw total +13.0
Avg player in 15.6m -8.3
Impact +4.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Jaxson Hayes 14.4m
6
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+4.8

Maximized a short stint with explosive rim runs and high-level hustle plays. He didn't demand the ball but capitalized on every opportunity, using his vertical spacing to bend the defense and generate a strong positive rating.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 93.8%
USG% 9.1%
Net Rtg -40.6
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.4m
Offense +6.9
Hustle +3.9
Defense +1.6
Raw total +12.4
Avg player in 14.4m -7.6
Impact +4.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Maxi Kleber 10.2m
5
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.5

Provided a steadying veteran presence, hitting timely shots to punish defensive rotations and break a recent slump. His fundamental positional defense and smart decision-making ensured the second unit maintained its structural integrity.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 21.1%
Net Rtg +32.7
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.2m
Offense +5.9
Hustle +0.4
Defense +1.6
Raw total +7.9
Avg player in 10.2m -5.4
Impact +2.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.2

Flashed briefly in a short stint with a quick perimeter make but struggled to impact the broader game flow. His defensive rotations were a step slow, keeping his overall contribution effectively flat.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +65.6
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.7m
Offense +2.6
Hustle +0.2
Defense 0.0
Raw total +2.8
Avg player in 5.7m -3.0
Impact -0.2
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
1
ast
Impact
-3.1

Looked hesitant during his brief time on the floor, failing to attempt a single shot or initiate offensive actions. This lack of assertiveness allowed the defense to ignore him entirely, bogging down the half-court spacing.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +65.6
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.7m
Offense -1.1
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.9
Raw total -0.0
Avg player in 5.7m -3.1
Impact -3.1
How is this calculated?
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
-3.2

Ran the floor hard but was entirely bypassed by the offensive sets during his short run. Without any touches to establish a rhythm, his minutes were defined by cardio rather than tangible impact.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg +44.6
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.6m
Offense -1.9
Hustle +0.8
Defense +0.3
Raw total -0.8
Avg player in 4.6m -2.4
Impact -3.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
PHX Phoenix Suns
28
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
+13.6

An absolute flamethrower from beyond the arc, his perimeter explosion completely warped the opponent's defensive scheme. Combining that elite spacing with strong hustle and defensive metrics resulted in a team-best overall impact that shattered his recent offensive averages.

Shooting
FG 10/19 (52.6%)
3PT 8/14 (57.1%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 73.7%
USG% 26.9%
Net Rtg +13.5
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.8m
Offense +20.8
Hustle +4.5
Defense +6.3
Raw total +31.6
Avg player in 33.8m -18.0
Impact +13.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 23.1%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S Royce O'Neale 33.0m
6
pts
7
reb
11
ast
Impact
-3.2

Elite defensive metrics and strong hustle numbers couldn't save his overall net impact from dipping into the red. His reluctance to score and poor perimeter efficiency allowed defenders to sag off, stagnating the half-court flow despite his playmaking efforts.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 42.9%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +24.1
+/- +20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.0m
Offense +5.5
Hustle +3.1
Defense +5.6
Raw total +14.2
Avg player in 33.0m -17.4
Impact -3.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Dillon Brooks 32.9m
33
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.9

A massive scoring surge carried his box metrics, but the overall net impact remained surprisingly muted. His aggressive interior shot selection drove the offense and broke him out of a recent slump, though the heavy usage likely came with defensive trade-offs that allowed the opponent to keep pace.

Shooting
FG 15/26 (57.7%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 1/3 (33.3%)
Advanced
TS% 60.4%
USG% 38.8%
Net Rtg +29.7
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.9m
Offense +15.4
Hustle +1.4
Defense +1.5
Raw total +18.3
Avg player in 32.9m -17.4
Impact +0.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
S Mark Williams 24.9m
13
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+12.1

Dominated the interior with highly efficient finishing and elite defensive anchoring to generate a massive positive impact. His ability to consistently generate high-percentage looks around the rim perfectly complemented a massive defensive footprint that deterred opponents from the paint.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/3 (33.3%)
Advanced
TS% 69.7%
USG% 14.8%
Net Rtg +22.7
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.9m
Offense +12.7
Hustle +3.9
Defense +8.7
Raw total +25.3
Avg player in 24.9m -13.2
Impact +12.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 47.4%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
S Devin Booker 9.9m
11
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
+2.9

Provided a quick, highly efficient scoring punch before exiting early, maximizing his brief time on the floor. While his offensive gravity was evident in the short stint, a lack of defensive resistance kept his overall impact relatively modest.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.8%
USG% 34.6%
Net Rtg -9.7
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.9m
Offense +8.1
Hustle +0.2
Defense -0.1
Raw total +8.2
Avg player in 9.9m -5.3
Impact +2.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
13
pts
1
reb
5
ast
Impact
+11.2

Exceptional hustle and defensive disruption fueled a massive two-way performance. He capitalized on transition opportunities created by his own defensive pressure, pairing timely perimeter shooting with elite off-ball activity to swing the game.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 65.0%
USG% 21.2%
Net Rtg -6.4
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.4m
Offense +9.3
Hustle +7.0
Defense +7.9
Raw total +24.2
Avg player in 24.4m -13.0
Impact +11.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
7
pts
1
reb
5
ast
Impact
+4.8

Perfect shooting execution and stout point-of-attack defense highlighted a highly effective reserve shift. He didn't waste a single possession, leveraging smart shot selection to break out of a recent slump and drive a solid positive impact.

Shooting
FG 3/3 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 116.7%
USG% 8.5%
Net Rtg +42.6
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.5m
Offense +7.8
Hustle +2.3
Defense +6.6
Raw total +16.7
Avg player in 22.5m -11.9
Impact +4.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
Ryan Dunn 20.6m
6
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.8

Made his mark entirely through high-energy plays and defensive versatility rather than scoring volume. His willingness to do the dirty work and clean up the glass created extra possessions that drove a highly positive net rating.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +10.2
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.6m
Offense +7.3
Hustle +3.1
Defense +6.3
Raw total +16.7
Avg player in 20.6m -10.9
Impact +5.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
Oso Ighodaro 20.6m
4
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.0

A stark drop in offensive aggression rendered him nearly invisible on that end of the floor, snapping a streak of highly efficient outings. Despite decent defensive positioning, his inability to command defensive attention bogged down the offensive flow and cratered his overall impact.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 10.6%
Net Rtg +8.2
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.6m
Offense +2.5
Hustle +1.4
Defense +3.0
Raw total +6.9
Avg player in 20.6m -10.9
Impact -4.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
4
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.9

Logged a quiet but steady shift, keeping the ball moving without forcing bad shots. His positive hustle metrics indicate he was active in the margins, providing just enough energy to keep his overall impact in the green.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 11.5%
Net Rtg -19.5
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.3m
Offense +3.7
Hustle +2.1
Defense +1.6
Raw total +7.4
Avg player in 12.3m -6.5
Impact +0.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.1

Barely saw the floor in a brief cameo appearance that offered no offensive production. He registered a handful of hustle actions but didn't have enough runway to influence the game in either direction.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -75.0
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.5m
Offense 0.0
Hustle +0.7
Defense +0.6
Raw total +1.3
Avg player in 2.5m -1.4
Impact -0.1
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.1

Inserted only for a momentary defensive assignment at the end of a rotation. He managed to stay fundamentally sound in his limited seconds, avoiding any negative plays to finish effectively neutral.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -75.0
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.5m
Offense +0.3
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.9
Raw total +1.4
Avg player in 2.5m -1.3
Impact +0.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0