Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
OKC lead LAC lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
LAC 2P — 3P —
OKC 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 177 attempts

LAC LAC Shot-making Δ

Leonard 9/17 +0.1
Collins 7/13 +0.4
Bogdanović 6/12 +0.8
Dunn Hard 5/8 +4.9
Zubac Open 3/7 -2.2
Sanders Hard 2/5 +0.4
Batum Hard 2/5 +0.4
Miller 1/5 -4.0
Lopez Hard 2/4 +1.4

OKC OKC Shot-making Δ

Gilgeous-Alexander 13/24 +0.6
Mitchell 7/15 -0.8
Williams Open 8/14 +1.6
Holmgren 8/13 +4.3
Wallace Hard 1/8 -5.4
Joe Hard 5/7 +6.4
Wiggins Open 2/7 -4.4
Dort Hard 0/6 -6.3
Caruso Open 2/4 -1.3
Carlson Open 2/3 -0.2
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
LAC
OKC
37/76 Field Goals 48/101
48.7% Field Goal % 47.5%
10/32 3-Pointers 13/36
31.2% 3-Point % 36.1%
17/22 Free Throws 13/16
77.3% Free Throw % 81.2%
58.9% True Shooting % 56.5%
58 Total Rebounds 43
9 Offensive 9
40 Defensive 29
25 Assists 28
0.86 Assist/TO Ratio 3.11
28 Turnovers 8
6 Steals 18
7 Blocks 4
17 Fouls 19
38 Points in Paint 66
14 Fast Break Pts 24
17 Points off TOs 38
7 Second Chance Pts 13
20 Bench Points 43
11 Largest Lead 25
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander
32 PTS · 7 REB · 6 AST · 28.7 MIN
+30.24
2
Chet Holmgren
22 PTS · 7 REB · 2 AST · 30.5 MIN
+20.06
3
Jalen Williams
20 PTS · 1 REB · 5 AST · 28.7 MIN
+20.0
4
Kawhi Leonard
22 PTS · 8 REB · 6 AST · 32.1 MIN
+19.06
5
Ajay Mitchell
16 PTS · 7 REB · 5 AST · 28.6 MIN
+15.51
6
Isaiah Joe
14 PTS · 4 REB · 2 AST · 22.2 MIN
+14.62
7
Alex Caruso
4 PTS · 2 REB · 3 AST · 15.4 MIN
+13.86
8
John Collins
20 PTS · 4 REB · 2 AST · 28.4 MIN
+13.13
9
Ivica Zubac
11 PTS · 11 REB · 3 AST · 31.7 MIN
+11.71
10
Cason Wallace
5 PTS · 1 REB · 4 AST · 29.2 MIN
+10.83
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:02 OKC shot clock Team TURNOVER 101–122
Q4 0:25 C. Wallace STEAL (5 STL) 101–122
Q4 0:25 K. Sanders lost ball TURNOVER (6 TO) 101–122
Q4 0:41 A. Wiggins running Layup (5 PTS) (C. Wallace 4 AST) 101–122
Q4 0:44 C. Wallace STEAL (4 STL) 101–120
Q4 0:44 K. Sanders bad pass TURNOVER (5 TO) 101–120
Q4 0:57 I. Joe 3PT running (14 PTS) (C. Wallace 3 AST) 101–120
Q4 1:01 I. Joe STEAL (2 STL) 101–117
Q4 1:01 R. Dennis bad pass TURNOVER (1 TO) 101–117
Q4 1:13 A. Wiggins Free Throw 2 of 2 (3 PTS) 101–117
Q4 1:13 TEAM offensive REBOUND 101–116
Q4 1:13 MISS A. Wiggins Free Throw 1 of 2 101–116
Q4 1:13 B. Lopez shooting personal FOUL (1 PF) (Wiggins 2 FT) 101–116
Q4 1:19 I. Joe STEAL (1 STL) 101–116
Q4 1:19 J. Miller bad pass TURNOVER (4 TO) 101–116

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

OKC Oklahoma City Thunder
S Chet Holmgren 30.5m
22
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+15.2

Dominant two-way performance was highlighted by excellent floor-stretching capability and elite shot selection. His rim protection paired perfectly with his perimeter touch to completely dictate the flow of the game.

Shooting
FG 8/13 (61.5%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 76.8%
USG% 21.1%
Net Rtg +10.7
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.5m
Scoring +18.4
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +4.6
Hustle +3.1
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Cason Wallace 29.2m
5
pts
1
reb
4
ast
Impact
+2.9

Elite defensive pressure and relentless hustle plays completely offset a horrific shooting night. He managed to stay in the green by generating extra possessions and locking down the perimeter when it mattered most.

Shooting
FG 1/8 (12.5%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 28.2%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg -6.4
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.2m
Scoring -0.1
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +1.3
Defense +9.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 5
BLK 0
TO 0
S Jalen Williams 28.7m
20
pts
1
reb
5
ast
Impact
+14.1

Slicing through the defense with highly efficient interior scoring drove a massive positive impact. His ability to consistently break down primary defenders created a cascading effect that elevated the entire lineup.

Shooting
FG 8/14 (57.1%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.2%
USG% 23.5%
Net Rtg +6.6
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.7m
Scoring +15.8
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +3.7
Hustle +0.3
Defense +4.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
32
pts
7
reb
6
ast
Impact
+34.4

Masterful offensive orchestration and relentless rim pressure generated an astronomical impact score. His ability to manipulate matchups and dictate the pace made him virtually unguardable throughout the contest.

Shooting
FG 13/24 (54.2%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 60.1%
USG% 36.5%
Net Rtg +13.4
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.7m
Scoring +22.5
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +6.8
Hustle +7.9
Defense +3.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 1
S Luguentz Dort 18.1m
0
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-18.2

Total offensive blackout from the perimeter destroyed his overall value and disrupted the team's spacing. Forcing contested jumpers rendered his usual point-of-attack defense an afterthought, driving a massive negative score.

Shooting
FG 0/6 (0.0%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg -22.5
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.1m
Scoring -4.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
16
pts
7
reb
5
ast
Impact
+14.3

Capitalized on defensive breakdowns with aggressive downhill drives to spark the second unit. His steady decision-making and efficient finishing proved vital during key rotational transition periods.

Shooting
FG 7/15 (46.7%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.8%
USG% 22.5%
Net Rtg +40.3
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.6m
Scoring +10.2
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +4.1
Hustle +7.9
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.2

Broke a streak of highly efficient outings with a clunky offensive performance that stalled momentum. Despite decent defensive positioning, his inability to capitalize on open looks dragged down his overall impact.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 31.7%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg +22.5
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.6m
Scoring +0.3
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +3.1
Defense +0.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Isaiah Joe 22.2m
14
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.2

Lethal spot-up shooting provided crucial spacing that opened up driving lanes for the primary creators. His quick trigger from deep forced defensive rotations that constantly kept the opponent scrambling.

Shooting
FG 5/7 (71.4%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg +29.5
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.2m
Scoring +12.4
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +4.1
Hustle +2.2
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
4
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.7

Executed his defensive assignments without mistakes to provide solid rotational value. A rare burst of efficient finishing at the rim helped him secure a modest positive rating.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 9.1%
Net Rtg +52.5
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.0m
Scoring +2.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.2
Hustle +3.1
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
Alex Caruso 15.4m
4
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
+3.8

Wreaked havoc as an off-ball disruptor, generating massive defensive value in limited minutes. His relentless energy and elite rotational awareness completely stifled the opponent's secondary actions.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 9.5%
Net Rtg +76.3
+/- +26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.4m
Scoring +2.2
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +1.6
Defense +9.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 0
LAC LA Clippers
S Kawhi Leonard 32.1m
22
pts
8
reb
6
ast
Impact
+16.6

Perimeter struggles heavily capped his overall impact despite strong defensive metrics. His steadying presence on the wing helped contain dribble penetration, but the missed outside looks prevented a dominant rating.

Shooting
FG 9/17 (52.9%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.6%
USG% 27.2%
Net Rtg -30.7
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.1m
Scoring +16.0
Creation +2.3
Shot Making +4.0
Hustle +6.3
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -5.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Ivica Zubac 31.7m
11
pts
11
reb
3
ast
Impact
+7.6

Elite rim deterrence drove massive defensive metrics by forcing opponents into tough floaters. While his offensive usage was minimal, his sheer physical presence in the paint defined his minutes.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 0/0
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 14.8%
Net Rtg -17.8
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.7m
Scoring +6.8
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +13.0
Defense +0.7
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 2
S Kris Dunn 31.4m
14
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
-10.9

Hidden negatives like poor transition defense and spacing issues cratered his impact score despite a massive offensive jump from his recent baseline. His inability to orchestrate the half-court offense cleanly resulted in disjointed possessions.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.8%
USG% 19.2%
Net Rtg -0.2
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.4m
Scoring +11.1
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +4.0
Hustle +1.5
Defense -2.9
Turnovers -14.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 6
S John Collins 28.4m
20
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.4

Continued a scorching trend of interior finishing, leveraging aggressive rim-runs to generate a robust positive score. His high-energy defensive rotations paired perfectly with his offensive efficiency to anchor the frontcourt.

Shooting
FG 7/13 (53.8%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 63.9%
USG% 27.3%
Net Rtg +5.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.4m
Scoring +14.5
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +1.2
Defense -0.8
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
14
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-6.8

Severe defensive liabilities completely erased the gains from his sudden scoring surge. Opponents relentlessly targeted him in isolation, turning his minutes into a significant net negative despite the improved shooting.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 58.3%
USG% 23.3%
Net Rtg -2.4
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.4m
Scoring +9.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense -5.0
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 14
Opp FG% 77.8%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Kobe Sanders 29.6m
5
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
-14.5

Offensive stagnation and clunky shot selection destroyed his value, overshadowing surprisingly robust defensive metrics. His failure to initiate sets effectively completely stalled the second unit's momentum during his shifts.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg -19.1
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.6m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +1.2
Defense +4.9
Turnovers -14.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 6
3
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
-13.7

Clanking multiple perimeter looks derailed his offensive flow and dragged his overall rating deep into the red. While he battled valiantly on defense, the lack of scoring punch made him a significant liability on the floor.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.5%
USG% 18.9%
Net Rtg -36.4
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.4m
Scoring -0.7
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +5.7
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 4
6
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.5

Veteran defensive stability kept him relevant, but a low-volume offensive output kept his impact slightly negative. His value was largely tied to executing crisp rotational help defense rather than tangible production.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg -59.6
+/- -28
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.8m
Scoring +3.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +0.6
Defense +3.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 53.8%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
Brook Lopez 15.2m
6
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-2.8

A sharp drop in offensive involvement from his recent averages neutralized his typical impact. He provided adequate drop-coverage defense, but the lack of scoring volume left his overall influence on the game relatively flat.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 61.5%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -15.2
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.2m
Scoring +4.1
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +5.4
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-12.0

Barely saw the floor, functioning purely as an emergency rotation piece during a brief, uneventful stint. Failed to register any meaningful statistics, resulting in a slightly negative footprint.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg -33.3
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.5m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Kobe Brown 3.3m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.9

Logged empty minutes at the end of the rotation after a string of highly efficient games. His brief appearance offered no opportunity to influence the game in either direction, resulting in a negligible impact.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -62.5
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.3m
Scoring +3.9
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +1.2
Hustle +3.2
Defense -1.2
Turnovers -2.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0