GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

OKC Oklahoma City Thunder
33
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
+18.3

An absolute masterclass in offensive efficiency and surgical shot creation drove a monstrous impact rating. Slicing through the defense at will, he generated premium looks and converted them at an unsustainable, near-perfect clip. His ability to dictate the pace and draw defensive attention elevated the entire unit.

Shooting
FG 10/12 (83.3%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 11/12 (91.7%)
Advanced
TS% 95.5%
USG% 30.8%
Net Rtg +37.1
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.6m
Offense +29.5
Hustle +4.0
Defense +0.7
Raw total +34.2
Avg player in 28.6m -15.9
Impact +18.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S Jalen Williams 24.1m
15
pts
8
reb
5
ast
Impact
+1.9

Steady two-way execution provided a reliable stabilizing force, even if the overall efficiency was slightly pedestrian. He consistently made the right reads in the half-court, balancing his own scoring with timely defensive rotations. Keeping the offense flowing without forcing bad looks cemented a modest but positive net rating.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.8%
USG% 26.9%
Net Rtg +31.3
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.1m
Offense +11.9
Hustle +1.7
Defense +1.7
Raw total +15.3
Avg player in 24.1m -13.4
Impact +1.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Chet Holmgren 23.3m
15
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+8.6

Suffocating paint defense and elite shot alteration formed the backbone of a dominant two-way showing. He consistently punished switches in the mid-range while erasing opponent drives at the rim. This combination of vertical spacing and defensive anchoring dictated the terms of engagement whenever he was on the floor.

Shooting
FG 6/11 (54.5%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.1%
USG% 24.0%
Net Rtg +37.0
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.3m
Offense +14.4
Hustle +2.0
Defense +5.1
Raw total +21.5
Avg player in 23.3m -12.9
Impact +8.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 77.8%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
S Cason Wallace 22.9m
11
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.8

Tenacious point-of-attack defense disrupted the opponent's offensive rhythm and fueled his high impact score. Paired with opportunistic, highly efficient perimeter shooting, he maximized his touches without demanding the ball. This is the archetype of a perfect 3-and-D performance that quietly swings games.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 78.6%
USG% 14.6%
Net Rtg +45.5
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.9m
Offense +11.6
Hustle +2.7
Defense +4.2
Raw total +18.5
Avg player in 22.9m -12.7
Impact +5.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Jaylin Williams 18.9m
4
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+1.0

Elite hustle metrics and defensive positioning entirely salvaged a dreadful shooting performance. Drawing charges and securing contested loose balls generated crucial extra possessions that compensated for his perimeter bricks. He proved that high-IQ defensive rotations can keep a player in the green even when the jumper abandons them.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.0%
USG% 12.8%
Net Rtg +59.2
+/- +20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.9m
Offense +1.9
Hustle +5.0
Defense +4.6
Raw total +11.5
Avg player in 18.9m -10.5
Impact +1.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
9
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-9.9

A severe drop in offensive production compared to his recent standard completely cratered his net impact. Struggling to separate from his primary defender led to stagnant possessions and forced late-clock attempts. Without his usual downhill pressure, the second unit's spacing collapsed entirely.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 20.8%
Net Rtg +8.3
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.9m
Offense +0.9
Hustle +1.4
Defense +0.4
Raw total +2.7
Avg player in 22.9m -12.6
Impact -9.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
9
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
+1.0

A shocking offensive outburst from the fringe of the rotation provided unexpected value. Knocking down pick-and-pop jumpers forced the opposing bigs out of the paint, altering the geometry of the floor. Surviving defensively while delivering this surprise scoring punch resulted in a solid positive return.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 12.0%
Net Rtg -2.7
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.8m
Offense +10.7
Hustle +1.4
Defense +1.1
Raw total +13.2
Avg player in 21.8m -12.2
Impact +1.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 78.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
7
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.9

Passive offensive involvement and a sharp decline in scoring volume severely limited his effectiveness. Failing to leverage his size advantage on the wing allowed the defense to comfortably switch and recover. Despite decent activity on the glass, his inability to bend the defense left the offense stuck in the mud.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.5%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg -2.4
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.5m
Offense +5.4
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.2
Raw total +8.1
Avg player in 21.5m -12.0
Impact -3.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
10
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
+4.7

Gritty interior finishing and versatile defensive switching keyed a massive bounce-back performance. He abandoned the struggling perimeter shot to attack the basket, punishing mismatches in the paint. This aggressive mindset, combined with his usual glue-guy hustle, provided a massive lift off the bench.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.5%
USG% 17.8%
Net Rtg -7.5
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Offense +11.1
Hustle +1.9
Defense +2.7
Raw total +15.7
Avg player in 19.9m -11.0
Impact +4.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
11
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
+4.0

Continuing a streak of hyper-efficient scoring, his timely cutting and transition finishing provided a massive spark. He capitalized on defensive lapses to find easy buckets at the rim, maximizing his low usage rate. Consistent hustle on the margins ensured his offensive surge translated directly to winning basketball.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 68.8%
USG% 17.0%
Net Rtg +38.6
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.7m
Offense +11.9
Hustle +2.1
Defense +1.0
Raw total +15.0
Avg player in 19.7m -11.0
Impact +4.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.0

Bleeding points on the defensive end quickly erased any minor contributions he made offensively. Opponents actively targeted him in isolation, exposing his lateral quickness and generating high-value looks. A lack of secondary hustle plays meant he offered zero resistance to the negative momentum.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 61.5%
USG% 10.5%
Net Rtg -17.3
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.7m
Offense +2.4
Hustle +0.2
Defense -1.8
Raw total +0.8
Avg player in 8.7m -4.8
Impact -4.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
5
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.3

Immediate defensive energy and timely off-ball movement injected life into a brief rotation stint. Breaking a scoreless streak with decisive cuts to the basket caught the defense sleeping. His ability to string together stops and capitalize on broken plays maximized his limited run.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.3%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -27.1
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.7m
Offense +4.3
Hustle +0.7
Defense +2.6
Raw total +7.6
Avg player in 7.7m -4.3
Impact +3.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
DAL Dallas Mavericks
S Cooper Flagg 29.5m
16
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-6.7

A sharp drop-off in scoring volume heavily depressed his overall impact metrics. Struggling to find rhythm from the perimeter, he missed all his deep attempts and failed to replicate his recent offensive dominance. Despite solid hustle metrics, the lack of primary scoring punch left a massive void in the offense.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.7%
USG% 25.4%
Net Rtg -19.1
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.5m
Offense +6.0
Hustle +2.8
Defense +0.9
Raw total +9.7
Avg player in 29.5m -16.4
Impact -6.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
S Naji Marshall 26.7m
18
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.8

Highly efficient interior finishing drove a strong box score contribution, though his overall impact remained relatively flat. His inability to stretch the floor from deep limited spacing, capping his ceiling for the night. Still, finding high-percentage looks inside kept the offensive engine humming during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 8/11 (72.7%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 70.5%
USG% 21.0%
Net Rtg -40.2
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.7m
Offense +14.5
Hustle +0.8
Defense +0.3
Raw total +15.6
Avg player in 26.7m -14.8
Impact +0.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 61.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Anthony Davis 24.3m
2
pts
8
reb
6
ast
Impact
-6.5

Elite defensive positioning and rim deterrence were completely overshadowed by a disastrous offensive showing. Clanking nearly every look from the floor cratered his net impact, turning him into a liability despite anchoring the paint. The sheer volume of empty possessions negated his typically dominant interior presence.

Shooting
FG 1/9 (11.1%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 10.1%
USG% 20.7%
Net Rtg -41.7
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.3m
Offense -0.9
Hustle +3.8
Defense +4.2
Raw total +7.1
Avg player in 24.3m -13.6
Impact -6.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S Ryan Nembhard 24.3m
10
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-5.5

Defensive lapses at the point of attack severely undercut a breakout offensive performance. While his aggressive perimeter shooting provided a much-needed spark, he gave it all back by allowing straight-line drives on the other end. The stark contrast between his scoring surge and defensive bleed ultimately dragged his net score into the red.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg -41.7
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.3m
Offense +8.1
Hustle +0.8
Defense -0.9
Raw total +8.0
Avg player in 24.3m -13.5
Impact -5.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Max Christie 22.5m
12
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+3.2

Capitalizing on a massive spike in shooting efficiency delivered a highly positive two-way performance. Excellent shot selection yielded near-perfect execution, while his perimeter containment added a noticeable defensive boost. This type of low-usage, high-yield production is exactly what drives winning rotational minutes.

Shooting
FG 5/6 (83.3%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg -53.1
+/- -23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.5m
Offense +11.4
Hustle +1.9
Defense +2.5
Raw total +15.8
Avg player in 22.5m -12.6
Impact +3.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
9
pts
3
reb
7
ast
Impact
-3.1

Playmaking execution couldn't salvage a highly inefficient shooting night that stalled out multiple offensive sets. Settling for contested perimeter jumpers dragged down his scoring output compared to recent outings. The resulting transition opportunities for the opponent ultimately outweighed his positive defensive hustle.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 45.5%
USG% 20.4%
Net Rtg -3.5
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.7m
Offense +7.1
Hustle +1.4
Defense +1.5
Raw total +10.0
Avg player in 23.7m -13.1
Impact -3.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Jaden Hardy 20.4m
23
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+9.2

A blistering perimeter shooting display single-handedly broke the opponent's defensive shell and drove a massive positive impact. Hunting his shot with confidence, he punished drop coverages and late closeouts alike. This offensive explosion masked any minor defensive deficiencies and swung the momentum entirely.

Shooting
FG 8/13 (61.5%)
3PT 5/9 (55.6%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 82.9%
USG% 31.3%
Net Rtg +7.1
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.4m
Offense +17.8
Hustle +1.2
Defense +1.6
Raw total +20.6
Avg player in 20.4m -11.4
Impact +9.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
3
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.6

Brutal perimeter shooting derailed his impact, as forced looks from deep resulted in empty trips down the floor. Failing to bend the defense with his usual gravity allowed opponents to sag off and clog the paint. Even with passable defensive metrics, his inability to knock down open jumpers made him a net negative.

Shooting
FG 1/7 (14.3%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 21.4%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg -10.1
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.8m
Offense -0.5
Hustle +1.0
Defense +0.9
Raw total +1.4
Avg player in 17.8m -10.0
Impact -8.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
3
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-6.3

Invisible offensive involvement and poor pick-and-roll coverage led to a steep negative impact score. Passing up looks to the point of near invisibility highlighted a severe lack of assertiveness around the rim. Without his usual rim-running pressure, the secondary unit struggled to generate easy looks.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/4 (25.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.3%
USG% 10.3%
Net Rtg -16.7
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.0m
Offense +2.4
Hustle +0.8
Defense -0.6
Raw total +2.6
Avg player in 16.0m -8.9
Impact -6.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
12
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
0.0

Lethal spot-up shooting from beyond the arc was completely neutralized by a lack of defensive resistance and zero hustle plays. He operated purely as a stationary floor spacer, offering no secondary playmaking or rebounding support. The result was a perfectly neutral impact, trading perimeter bombs for defensive concessions.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 85.7%
USG% 25.8%
Net Rtg -5.7
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.6m
Offense +9.3
Hustle 0.0
Defense -0.6
Raw total +8.7
Avg player in 15.6m -8.7
Impact 0.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 85.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Caleb Martin 11.6m
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.2

Floating on the perimeter without forcing the issue led to a highly unimpactful stint. Defensive breakdowns on the wing compounded his lack of offensive aggression, bleeding points during his rotation. A failure to generate secondary actions or secure loose balls left him as a passenger in this matchup.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg -8.3
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.6m
Offense +1.3
Hustle +0.7
Defense -0.8
Raw total +1.2
Avg player in 11.6m -6.4
Impact -5.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.1

Solid rim protection and vertical deterrence couldn't offset being a complete non-factor on the offensive end. Failing to register a single point allowed the opposing defense to play five-on-four, clogging driving lanes for teammates. His defensive anchoring was notable, but the offensive limitations ultimately dragged his score down.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 6.7%
Net Rtg +27.1
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.7m
Offense -0.8
Hustle +0.8
Defense +2.1
Raw total +2.1
Avg player in 7.7m -4.2
Impact -2.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0