Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

Every shot, every lead change, every rotation — visualized.

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
TOR lead CHA lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
CHA 2P — 3P —
TOR 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 166 attempts

CHA CHA Shot-making Δ

Miller Hard 5/14 -2.3
Knueppel Hard 7/12 +7.5
Bridges Hard 5/11 +0.3
Ball Hard 4/9 -1.2
Salaün Hard 6/8 +8.4
Kalkbrenner Open 5/6 +2.1
Simpson 2/6 -2.0
McNeeley Hard 1/3 -0.2
Reeves 1/3 -1.3
Diabaté Open 1/2 -0.8

TOR TOR Shot-making Δ

Quickley Hard 11/22 +4.4
Barnes Hard 6/15 -1.8
Ingram 3/13 -5.1
Shead 4/12 -3.5
Dick 2/7 -3.5
Walter 0/7 -7.8
Poeltl 2/5 -1.3
Murray-Boyles 3/4 +3.0
Mamukelashvili 1/4 -2.2
Battle Hard 1/1 +1.9
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
CHA
TOR
37/74 Field Goals 34/92
50.0% Field Goal % 37.0%
13/36 3-Pointers 9/29
36.1% 3-Point % 31.0%
24/33 Free Throws 9/13
72.7% Free Throw % 69.2%
62.7% True Shooting % 44.0%
60 Total Rebounds 48
6 Offensive 12
41 Defensive 29
26 Assists 19
1.08 Assist/TO Ratio 0.95
24 Turnovers 19
14 Steals 12
6 Blocks 4
20 Fouls 25
46 Points in Paint 50
16 Fast Break Pts 20
29 Points off TOs 23
13 Second Chance Pts 6
40 Bench Points 28
29 Largest Lead 11
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Immanuel Quickley
31 PTS · 3 REB · 4 AST · 30.8 MIN
+23.59
2
Tidjane Salaün
21 PTS · 3 REB · 1 AST · 22.0 MIN
+21.69
3
Ryan Kalkbrenner
12 PTS · 6 REB · 1 AST · 25.9 MIN
+15.04
4
Kon Knueppel
21 PTS · 3 REB · 7 AST · 32.0 MIN
+15.02
5
Miles Bridges
15 PTS · 9 REB · 5 AST · 32.1 MIN
+11.7
6
Jamal Shead
9 PTS · 5 REB · 1 AST · 21.4 MIN
+8.05
7
LaMelo Ball
11 PTS · 2 REB · 3 AST · 11.9 MIN
+7.22
8
Jamison Battle
3 PTS · 3 REB · 1 AST · 14.2 MIN
+4.83
9
Sion James
3 PTS · 3 REB · 1 AST · 14.4 MIN
+4.7
10
Jakob Poeltl
5 PTS · 7 REB · 1 AST · 22.6 MIN
+4.54
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:04 M. Plumlee REBOUND (Off:1 Def:3) 111–86
Q4 0:06 MISS J. Walter 24' step back 3PT 111–86
Q4 0:11 TEAM offensive REBOUND 111–86
Q4 0:12 MISS C. Murray-Boyles 16' driving floating Shot 111–86
Q4 0:35 A. Reeves driving finger roll Layup (2 PTS) (K. Simpson 4 AST) 111–86
Q4 0:50 L. McNeeley REBOUND (Off:1 Def:5) 109–86
Q4 0:51 MISS A. Reeves 25' 3PT 109–86
Q4 1:13 J. Mogbo running alley-oop DUNK (2 PTS) (J. Walter 2 AST) 109–86
Q4 1:16 G. Temple STEAL (2 STL) 109–84
Q4 1:16 L. McNeeley lost ball TURNOVER (2 TO) 109–84
Q4 1:25 G. Dick driving DUNK (4 PTS) (C. Murray-Boyles 1 AST) 109–84
Q4 1:31 G. Temple STEAL (1 STL) 109–82
Q4 1:31 K. Simpson bad pass TURNOVER (7 TO) 109–82
Q4 1:40 C. Murray-Boyles turnaround Hook (7 PTS) 109–82
Q4 1:41 C. Murray-Boyles REBOUND (Off:1 Def:1) 109–80

GAME ANALYSIS

KEEP READING

Create a free account and follow your team to get the full analysis every morning.

Create Free Account

Already have an account? Log in

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

TOR Toronto Raptors
S Scottie Barnes 31.4m
13
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
-3.2

Kept his team alive with relentless hustle and second-chance generation, but erratic perimeter shooting capped his offensive ceiling. Too many disjointed drives into traffic resulted in wasted possessions. Despite excellent defensive versatility, the offensive inefficiency ultimately dragged his net score into the red.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 43.3%
USG% 24.1%
Net Rtg -22.7
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.4m
Scoring +6.3
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +0.9
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 4
31
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
+26.2

Orchestrated a masterclass in pick-and-roll shot creation, punishing every under-screen with lethal pull-up jumpers. This massive scoring surge broke his recent slump and single-handedly drove the offense. Maintained excellent defensive discipline on the perimeter to round out a dominant, high-leverage performance.

Shooting
FG 11/22 (50.0%)
3PT 4/10 (40.0%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.0%
USG% 30.5%
Net Rtg -18.4
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.8m
Scoring +22.8
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +7.3
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Brandon Ingram 28.6m
7
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
-11.7

A disastrous offensive performance defined by forced mid-range isolations against set defenses. His inability to separate from primary defenders led to a cascade of empty possessions that tanked his overall rating. Compounded the poor shooting with uninspired transition defense, resulting in the team's worst net impact.

Shooting
FG 3/13 (23.1%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 26.9%
USG% 22.4%
Net Rtg -24.3
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.6m
Scoring +0.1
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +4.6
Defense -2.5
Turnovers -10.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 85.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
S Ja'Kobe Walter 24.8m
2
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-6.8

Completely lost his shooting mechanics, putting up a goose egg from the floor that devastated his offensive impact. To his credit, he didn't let the slump dictate his effort, turning in a stellar point-of-attack defensive performance. The defensive tenacity was admirable, but surviving a zero-make night on that volume is nearly impossible.

Shooting
FG 0/7 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 11.4%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg -46.6
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.8m
Scoring -4.2
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.2
Defense +3.4
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jakob Poeltl 22.6m
5
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.3

Offensive touches dried up completely as opponents aggressively fronted him in the post. He pivoted to a blue-collar role, anchoring the defense and generating extra possessions through sheer physicality on the glass. A prime example of salvaging a quiet scoring night with elite rim protection and screen-setting.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 42.5%
USG% 15.8%
Net Rtg -9.8
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.6m
Scoring +2.6
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +7.9
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -5.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 3
Jamal Shead 21.4m
9
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.0

Overcame a shaky shooting night by becoming an absolute terror in the passing lanes and on loose balls. His ability to disrupt opposing ball-handlers fueled transition opportunities that offset his half-court misses. A gritty, high-energy performance where defensive playmaking drove the positive net impact.

Shooting
FG 4/12 (33.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +6.4
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.4m
Scoring +2.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +6.3
Defense +4.7
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
Gradey Dick 20.6m
4
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.9

Continued to battle a brutal shooting slump, repeatedly missing clean catch-and-shoot opportunities that the offense relies on. The lack of floor spacing allowed the defense to pack the paint against drivers. While his defensive rotations were fundamentally sound, the missing perimeter gravity was too costly.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 28.6%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg -50.0
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.6m
Scoring +0.4
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +1.3
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
7
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.7

Saw a significant drop in offensive usage but maximized his limited touches with pristine shot selection. The real story was his relentless motor, generating massive hustle metrics through deflections and contested rebounds. A highly efficient, low-maintenance shift that kept the rotation perfectly balanced.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 87.5%
USG% 16.3%
Net Rtg -25.6
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.2m
Scoring +6.4
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.6
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -8.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
3
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.2

Struggled to replicate his recent scoring surge, finding himself out of position against quicker perimeter defenders. The lack of clean looks stalled his offensive rhythm and led to a negative overall impact. Provided adequate weak-side help, but it wasn't enough to mask the offensive drop-off.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 30.7%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -48.6
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.8m
Scoring -0.1
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +2.8
Defense -1.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
3
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.3

Played a highly specialized role, taking only what the defense gave him without forcing the issue. His complete lack of hustle stats or defensive resistance made him a liability when the ball wasn't in his hands. A passive stint where he simply existed on the floor rather than impacting it.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 3.1%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.2m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +2.8
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.4

Brought immediate veteran stability to the defensive end, communicating switches and blowing up off-ball screens. He didn't need to score to be effective, using his high basketball IQ to generate stops. A perfect situational deployment that yielded a strong positive impact in minimal minutes.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 6.7%
Net Rtg -36.8
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.8m
Scoring -0.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +4.4
Turnovers +0.0
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.4

Made his lone interior touch count during a brief cameo appearance. Kept the ball moving and executed his defensive assignments without making any glaring mistakes. Solid garbage-time execution that kept his metrics comfortably in the positive.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg -14.3
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.9m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
CHA Charlotte Hornets
S Miles Bridges 32.0m
15
pts
9
reb
5
ast
Impact
+8.1

Perimeter shot selection dragged down his overall efficiency, as he settled too often for contested looks late in the clock. Despite the offensive friction, he salvaged his net impact through physical point-of-attack defense against opposing wings. A solid but unspectacular outing defined by defensive grit rather than scoring punch.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.8%
USG% 19.2%
Net Rtg +25.5
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.0m
Scoring +10.0
Creation +2.0
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +2.7
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Kon Knueppel 32.0m
21
pts
3
reb
7
ast
Impact
+13.2

Elite floor spacing and decisive shot-making drove a massive offensive rating. His ability to punish drop coverage from deep opened up driving lanes for the guards. Active hands in the passing lanes fueled a strong defensive score to round out a highly impactful two-way shift.

Shooting
FG 7/12 (58.3%)
3PT 5/9 (55.6%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.5%
USG% 23.3%
Net Rtg +18.7
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.0m
Scoring +17.1
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +6.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.6
Turnovers -10.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 35.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 4
S Brandon Miller 29.6m
12
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.6

A stark regression to the mean offensively, as forced isolation jumpers and poor perimeter efficiency tanked his box score impact. The inability to find a rhythm from deep stalled out several half-court possessions. While his weak-side defensive rotations remained sharp, it wasn't enough to offset the heavy offensive drag.

Shooting
FG 5/14 (35.7%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.3%
USG% 27.1%
Net Rtg +13.1
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.6m
Scoring +4.9
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.0
Turnovers -8.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 4
12
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+12.7

Absolute dominance as a roll man and rim protector spiked his overall impact to team-high levels. He capitalized on every interior touch, punishing defensive rotations with elite finishing around the basket. His massive defensive score reflects total control of the paint, deterring drives and altering shots at the rim.

Shooting
FG 5/6 (83.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/5 (40.0%)
Advanced
TS% 73.2%
USG% 12.7%
Net Rtg +15.1
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.9m
Scoring +9.8
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +1.2
Hustle +6.7
Defense +0.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 0
S LaMelo Ball 11.9m
11
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
+3.2

Short-circuited his own offensive rhythm by forcing deep perimeter looks early in the shot clock. However, his ability to collapse the defense on drives kept his box score impact positive during his brief stint. Showing surprising discipline in pick-and-roll defense buoyed his overall net rating.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.3%
USG% 41.4%
Net Rtg +7.4
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.9m
Scoring +7.4
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
KJ Simpson 28.0m
8
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-6.8

Offensive passivity and empty possessions severely hampered his box score metrics. He completely flipped the script on the other end, generating massive value through relentless ball pressure and loose-ball recoveries. That elite hustle and point-of-attack defense nearly erased the offensive deficit.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.5%
USG% 21.4%
Net Rtg +22.6
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.0m
Scoring +4.2
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +0.9
Defense +10.3
Turnovers -18.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 53.3%
STL 5
BLK 0
TO 7
21
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+20.9

An absolute flamethrower from the perimeter, generating a monstrous box score impact through hyper-efficient shot-making. His decisive catch-and-shoot execution punished every late closeout the defense offered. This scoring explosion completely tilted the game's momentum during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 5/6 (83.3%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 107.6%
USG% 18.9%
Net Rtg +39.1
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.0m
Scoring +19.6
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +5.2
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
2
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.3

Failed to generate any offensive gravity, as missed perimeter looks allowed defenders to sag off and clog the paint. The lack of scoring punch cratered his overall impact despite adequate effort on the glass. Needs to find ways to impact the game when the outside shot isn't falling.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +52.0
+/- +23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.1m
Scoring +0.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +2.8
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
3
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.0

Struggled to find his usual interior positioning, leading to a sharp drop in offensive volume and overall impact. Opponents successfully pushed him out of his preferred rebounding zones, neutralizing his typical hustle metrics. A quiet night where he was largely schemed out of the half-court flow.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.1%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg +24.9
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.9m
Scoring +1.1
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +4.1
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Sion James 14.4m
3
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.4

Operated strictly as an offensive connector, refusing to force shots while keeping the ball moving. The real value came on the defensive end, where his switchability neutralized multiple pick-and-roll actions. A textbook low-usage, high-utility shift that quietly stabilized the second unit.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 85.2%
USG% 8.8%
Net Rtg +10.3
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.4m
Scoring +2.5
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
1
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.6

Provided a brief but sturdy defensive anchor during his stint, executing drop coverage flawlessly to deter rim attempts. Did not factor into the offensive game plan at all, serving purely as a screener and spacer. His veteran positioning on the block kept his net impact slightly in the green.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.8%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg +53.8
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.2m
Scoring +0.5
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +4.1
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.3

Rushed his offensive reads during a very short run, resulting in inefficient attempts early in the clock. Offered virtually zero resistance or hustle plays to swing the momentum. A forgettable bridge stint that left a slightly negative footprint on the floor.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 30.0%
Net Rtg +14.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.9m
Scoring +0.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0