GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

ORL Orlando Magic
S Desmond Bane 37.6m
14
pts
3
reb
6
ast
Impact
-2.7

Settling for contested, off-balance jumpers dragged down an otherwise active performance. Despite generating positive hustle metrics and staying engaged defensively, his shot selection short-circuited several crucial offensive sets.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 46.7%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -4.8
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.6m
Offense +9.5
Hustle +3.5
Defense +4.6
Raw total +17.6
Avg player in 37.6m -20.3
Impact -2.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Franz Wagner 35.9m
25
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
+17.3

Completely dominated the game through elite defensive anticipation and relentless hustle plays. His ability to turn deflections into transition scoring opportunities broke the opponent's back during a pivotal third-quarter run.

Shooting
FG 9/17 (52.9%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 6/7 (85.7%)
Advanced
TS% 62.3%
USG% 21.7%
Net Rtg +8.5
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.9m
Offense +21.0
Hustle +5.0
Defense +10.6
Raw total +36.6
Avg player in 35.9m -19.3
Impact +17.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
5
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
-6.6

A disastrous offensive outing defined by missed bunnies around the rim absolutely gutted his overall rating. He still managed to anchor the paint defensively, but blowing multiple point-blank layups killed the team's half-court rhythm.

Shooting
FG 2/9 (22.2%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.3%
USG% 14.5%
Net Rtg -20.1
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.6m
Offense -0.3
Hustle +2.6
Defense +6.5
Raw total +8.8
Avg player in 28.6m -15.4
Impact -6.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 72.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
S Jalen Suggs 27.4m
24
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
+8.9

Aggressive downhill attacks and superb finishing at the rim fueled a highly impactful showing. He consistently beat his primary defender off the dribble, collapsing the defense and setting a physical tone for the backcourt.

Shooting
FG 10/20 (50.0%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 57.5%
USG% 32.4%
Net Rtg -3.5
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.4m
Offense +16.0
Hustle +3.1
Defense +4.6
Raw total +23.7
Avg player in 27.4m -14.8
Impact +8.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 31.2%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
12
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
+1.1

High-IQ defensive rotations and timely help-side contests drove a very solid two-way performance. He let the offense come to him, taking smart, in-rhythm jumpers that kept the floor spaced beautifully.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 16.2%
Net Rtg -14.2
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.6m
Offense +5.8
Hustle +2.1
Defense +7.0
Raw total +14.9
Avg player in 25.6m -13.8
Impact +1.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
7
pts
7
reb
5
ast
Impact
-8.6

Offensive ineptitude completely overshadowed his fantastic effort on 50/50 balls. He repeatedly bricked open looks and forced wild drives into traffic, bleeding away possessions despite his high-energy defensive tracking.

Shooting
FG 2/10 (20.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 29.8%
USG% 19.2%
Net Rtg -4.9
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.6m
Offense -0.3
Hustle +4.2
Defense +2.3
Raw total +6.2
Avg player in 27.6m -14.8
Impact -8.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Goga Bitadze 19.4m
8
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+9.1

Flawless shot selection and suffocating rim protection resulted in a massive net-positive shift. He maximized every second of his floor time by sealing hard in the paint and contesting every shot in his vicinity without fouling.

Shooting
FG 4/4 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 12.2%
Net Rtg +22.7
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.4m
Offense +8.5
Hustle +2.7
Defense +8.4
Raw total +19.6
Avg player in 19.4m -10.5
Impact +9.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
8
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.0

Capitalized on defensive breakdowns by cutting hard to the basket for high-percentage finishes. His opportunistic scoring punch provided a massive lift off the bench, perfectly complementing his steady on-ball defense.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.0%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg +26.5
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.9m
Offense +10.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.7
Raw total +13.6
Avg player in 15.9m -8.6
Impact +5.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.1

Struggled to find the rhythm of the game, yielding a negative impact due to defensive miscommunications. While he knocked down a couple of looks, he was uncharacteristically late on weak-side rotations that usually define his value.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.0%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg -44.4
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.2m
Offense -0.3
Hustle +1.0
Defense +1.8
Raw total +2.5
Avg player in 12.2m -6.6
Impact -4.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Tyus Jones 6.8m
5
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
+3.5

Provided an instant stabilizing presence with smart, efficient offensive execution. He punished defensive lapses with timely shot-making, instantly boosting the second unit's spacing and flow.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -12.5
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.8m
Offense +4.1
Hustle +0.7
Defense +2.3
Raw total +7.1
Avg player in 6.8m -3.6
Impact +3.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Noah Penda 3.0m
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.3

Looked completely overwhelmed during a brief stint, missing rushed shots and failing to register any hustle stats. Opponents immediately targeted him on defense, exposing his slow lateral rotations.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 30.0%
Net Rtg -12.5
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.0m
Offense -2.2
Hustle 0.0
Defense -0.5
Raw total -2.7
Avg player in 3.0m -1.6
Impact -4.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
SAS San Antonio Spurs
S Harrison Barnes 32.5m
11
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.6

A heavy volume of forced, clanked jumpers from deep torpedoed his overall value despite an uptick in scoring volume. The veteran settled for heavily contested looks early in the shot clock, negating his otherwise passable defensive positioning.

Shooting
FG 4/12 (33.3%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 42.7%
USG% 16.5%
Net Rtg +1.9
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.5m
Offense +4.9
Hustle +1.9
Defense +3.2
Raw total +10.0
Avg player in 32.5m -17.6
Impact -7.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Devin Vassell 31.5m
15
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.7

Wasted possessions on contested mid-range pull-ups dragged his net impact firmly into the red. While he found some rhythm from beyond the arc, his lack of off-ball hustle and inability to pressure the rim limited his overall effectiveness.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 53.6%
USG% 19.2%
Net Rtg +0.4
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.5m
Offense +7.2
Hustle +0.6
Defense +3.5
Raw total +11.3
Avg player in 31.5m -17.0
Impact -5.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S De'Aaron Fox 29.4m
31
pts
5
reb
5
ast
Impact
-2.1

A massive scoring explosion was completely undone by defensive apathy at the point of attack. Opposing guards blew past him with ease all night, entirely erasing the value of his elite downhill finishing and transition bursts.

Shooting
FG 11/20 (55.0%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 6/9 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 64.7%
USG% 41.7%
Net Rtg +19.4
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.4m
Offense +11.2
Hustle +2.5
Defense 0.0
Raw total +13.7
Avg player in 29.4m -15.8
Impact -2.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 7
S Luke Kornet 28.4m
5
pts
7
reb
4
ast
Impact
+7.7

Anchored the interior beautifully with verticality and disciplined rim protection, generating a massive defensive impact score. He didn't demand touches but finished the high-percentage dump-offs he received, perfectly executing his role as a low-usage screen-setter.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.4%
USG% 5.8%
Net Rtg +29.9
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.4m
Offense +12.0
Hustle +2.9
Defense +8.2
Raw total +23.1
Avg player in 28.4m -15.4
Impact +7.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 47.1%
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 0
14
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
+1.4

Elite perimeter shot selection drove a highly efficient offensive showing that kept his overall impact positive. His ability to stretch the floor opened up driving lanes, though defensive rotations occasionally lagged behind his solid hustle metrics.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 4/7 (57.1%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 87.5%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg +8.0
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.0m
Offense +9.7
Hustle +2.5
Defense +4.2
Raw total +16.4
Avg player in 28.0m -15.0
Impact +1.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
13
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.9

Perimeter shooting struggles and defensive lapses on the wing resulted in a negative overall showing. He succeeded when attacking the basket with force, but failing to close out on shooters gave those points right back.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.6%
USG% 16.9%
Net Rtg -8.9
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.8m
Offense +7.9
Hustle +1.6
Defense -0.1
Raw total +9.4
Avg player in 24.8m -13.3
Impact -3.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Dylan Harper 22.1m
16
pts
5
reb
5
ast
Impact
+1.1

Relentless activity on loose balls and active hands in passing lanes kept his head above water despite a rough shooting night. His shot selection was questionable on drives, but his defensive motor never wavered.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.3%
USG% 34.5%
Net Rtg -8.4
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.1m
Offense +5.6
Hustle +3.4
Defense +4.0
Raw total +13.0
Avg player in 22.1m -11.9
Impact +1.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 5
4
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.6

Clunky offensive execution and forced attempts in the paint cratered his impact during a short stint on the floor. He brought his usual defensive physicality, but the spacing issues he created on the other end stalled the team's momentum.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.4%
USG% 17.6%
Net Rtg -32.1
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.6m
Offense +2.6
Hustle +1.2
Defense +3.2
Raw total +7.0
Avg player in 19.6m -10.6
Impact -3.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
3
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.4

Played a quiet, mistake-free brand of basketball that yielded a slightly positive return in limited minutes. His disciplined closeouts on the perimeter showcased defensive maturity, even if he was largely invisible on offense.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 6.1%
Net Rtg +19.1
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.1m
Offense +3.4
Hustle +0.6
Defense +3.4
Raw total +7.4
Avg player in 13.1m -7.0
Impact +0.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
2
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.9

Bricklaying from beyond the arc quickly tanked his value during a short rotation cameo. Failing to connect on open catch-and-shoot looks rendered him unplayable, especially since he offered zero resistance defensively.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 26.7%
Net Rtg +12.4
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.0m
Offense +0.9
Hustle +0.2
Defense -0.8
Raw total +0.3
Avg player in 6.0m -3.2
Impact -2.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.5

A brief, chaotic stint was defined by empty offensive trips and poor spacing. He managed to stay attached to his man defensively, but his inability to contribute to the offensive flow made him a net negative.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 23.1%
Net Rtg +25.0
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.7m
Offense -4.2
Hustle +0.7
Defense +2.6
Raw total -0.9
Avg player in 4.7m -2.6
Impact -3.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2