GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

PHX Phoenix Suns
16
pts
6
reb
5
ast
Impact
+4.9

Relentless defensive pressure and timely offensive execution drove a massive two-way performance. He broke out of a shooting slump by attacking closeouts and making quick decisions with the ball. His ability to generate deflections and secure loose balls provided a significant boost to the overall impact.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.3%
USG% 20.2%
Net Rtg +16.4
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.7m
Offense +9.1
Hustle +4.4
Defense +8.8
Raw total +22.3
Avg player in 33.7m -17.4
Impact +4.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 35.3%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 3
S Dillon Brooks 33.0m
24
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.4

Aggressive shot creation and relentless defensive intensity fueled a highly impactful performance. He consistently hunted favorable matchups and converted tough looks, breaking out of a recent offensive slump. His physical point-of-attack defense disrupted the opponent's primary actions all night.

Shooting
FG 10/23 (43.5%)
3PT 4/9 (44.4%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.2%
USG% 32.9%
Net Rtg -17.0
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.0m
Offense +11.3
Hustle +6.3
Defense +5.8
Raw total +23.4
Avg player in 33.0m -17.0
Impact +6.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Devin Booker 33.0m
25
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-2.9

High-volume scoring was completely overshadowed by defensive lapses and a lack of hustle plays. He settled for contested jumpers rather than attacking the paint, leading to inefficient offensive possessions. The overall negative rating reflects how much he gave back on the defensive end.

Shooting
FG 9/19 (47.4%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 57.8%
USG% 31.6%
Net Rtg -11.4
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.0m
Offense +10.9
Hustle +1.1
Defense +2.1
Raw total +14.1
Avg player in 33.0m -17.0
Impact -2.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Royce O'Neale 31.3m
9
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
-2.3

Strong rotational awareness and excellent defensive metrics were completely undone by poor offensive execution. He struggled to connect consistently from deep, which allowed defenders to cheat off him and clog the driving lanes. The defensive value simply couldn't overcome the spacing issues he created on the other end.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 45.5%
USG% 14.7%
Net Rtg +8.8
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.3m
Offense +4.4
Hustle +2.1
Defense +7.3
Raw total +13.8
Avg player in 31.3m -16.1
Impact -2.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
S Mark Williams 19.0m
6
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.8

Dominating the interior with excellent rim protection and high-level hustle plays anchored his positive impact. He didn't force any offense, instead relying on putbacks and high-percentage looks around the basket. A highly efficient, defensive-minded shift that anchored the second unit.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 77.3%
USG% 11.6%
Net Rtg +29.3
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.0m
Offense +5.3
Hustle +4.7
Defense +5.7
Raw total +15.7
Avg player in 19.0m -9.9
Impact +5.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 43.8%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
9
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
+5.3

Elite hustle metrics and disruptive defense drove a highly impactful performance despite a brutal shooting night. He created extra possessions by relentlessly crashing the glass and diving for loose balls, generating chaos in the best way possible. The sheer volume of effort plays completely offset his struggles to find the bottom of the net.

Shooting
FG 3/12 (25.0%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 32.7%
USG% 19.7%
Net Rtg -9.9
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.1m
Offense +4.7
Hustle +9.9
Defense +6.2
Raw total +20.8
Avg player in 30.1m -15.5
Impact +5.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
Oso Ighodaro 28.4m
2
pts
13
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.5

An absolute defensive masterclass anchored his highly positive impact score, completely shutting down the paint. He altered shots and dominated the glass to end opponent possessions, showcasing elite spatial awareness. While his scoring vanished compared to recent games, his rim protection was the defining factor of his night.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 7.4%
Net Rtg -18.9
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.4m
Offense +1.5
Hustle +3.4
Defense +15.4
Raw total +20.3
Avg player in 28.4m -14.8
Impact +5.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 5
BLK 1
TO 2
Ryan Dunn 17.2m
4
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-6.6

Passing up open looks and struggling to stay attached to his assignments defensively led to a steep negative impact. He failed to assert himself on either end of the floor during a remarkably quiet night. The lack of aggression and minimal hustle contributions made him a liability during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg +36.1
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.2m
Offense +0.2
Hustle +1.5
Defense +0.6
Raw total +2.3
Avg player in 17.2m -8.9
Impact -6.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
4
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.2

Solid defensive positioning and mistake-free basketball kept his impact slightly positive despite poor shooting. He didn't force any offense, instead focusing on keeping the ball moving and staying in front of his man. A reliable, low-usage stint that provided stability for the second unit.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.0%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg +9.5
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.2m
Offense +2.3
Hustle +0.6
Defense +5.7
Raw total +8.6
Avg player in 14.2m -7.4
Impact +1.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 12.5%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
GSW Golden State Warriors
31
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+13.6

Elite shot selection and flawless execution inside the arc fueled a massive positive rating. He systematically dismantled mismatches in the half-court, generating high-value looks without forcing the issue. Steady defensive positioning ensured he didn't give back any of his offensive gains.

Shooting
FG 11/17 (64.7%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 8/9 (88.9%)
Advanced
TS% 74.0%
USG% 25.9%
Net Rtg -4.2
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.9m
Offense +24.4
Hustle +3.1
Defense +3.6
Raw total +31.1
Avg player in 33.9m -17.5
Impact +13.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Stephen Curry 33.2m
15
pts
9
reb
7
ast
Impact
-0.2

An unusually cold night from beyond the arc neutralized his typically massive offensive gravity, keeping his overall impact near neutral. He forced several contested deep looks that failed to connect, preventing him from dictating the game's tempo. However, solid defensive positioning and positive hustle events prevented his rating from slipping into the negative.

Shooting
FG 3/13 (23.1%)
3PT 2/9 (22.2%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.6%
USG% 19.5%
Net Rtg -17.7
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.2m
Offense +7.4
Hustle +4.0
Defense +5.5
Raw total +16.9
Avg player in 33.2m -17.1
Impact -0.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 53.8%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Moses Moody 30.4m
5
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
-9.0

A massive drop-off from his recent offensive tear, as poor shot quality and bricked jumpers severely damaged his impact score. He struggled to find rhythm against tight perimeter coverage, forcing low-percentage looks that stalled the offense. While his defensive rotations were solid, the sheer volume of wasted offensive possessions dragged his rating into the red.

Shooting
FG 2/10 (20.0%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 13.8%
Net Rtg -4.6
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.4m
Offense +0.4
Hustle +3.0
Defense +3.4
Raw total +6.8
Avg player in 30.4m -15.8
Impact -9.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
S Draymond Green 30.1m
7
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
-5.5

While he anchored the defense with elite rotational awareness and high-level hustle, his overall impact sank due to offensive inefficiency. Clanking multiple perimeter attempts allowed the defense to sag and completely stalled the half-court flow. His inability to punish the defense from deep turned him into an offensive liability.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 38.9%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg -16.0
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.1m
Offense -3.9
Hustle +5.0
Defense +9.0
Raw total +10.1
Avg player in 30.1m -15.6
Impact -5.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 23.1%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 5
S Quinten Post 26.6m
9
pts
11
reb
1
ast
Impact
-6.2

Settling for contested perimeter jumpers rather than leveraging his size inside severely damaged his offensive value. The sheer volume of missed deep shots resulted in empty possessions that fueled opponent transition opportunities. While his defensive rebounding was solid, the poor shot selection was too costly to overcome.

Shooting
FG 3/14 (21.4%)
3PT 2/10 (20.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 30.2%
USG% 22.9%
Net Rtg -5.4
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.6m
Offense +2.8
Hustle +2.2
Defense +2.5
Raw total +7.5
Avg player in 26.6m -13.7
Impact -6.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
18
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.1

Capitalizing on excellent shot selection, he attacked closeouts and finished efficiently to drive a strong positive impact. His constant motion off the ball created defensive breakdowns, while active hands generated valuable hustle points. A highly effective complementary performance defined by relentless energy and mistake-free execution.

Shooting
FG 8/11 (72.7%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 81.8%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg +20.7
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.8m
Offense +12.7
Hustle +4.4
Defense +3.4
Raw total +20.5
Avg player in 27.8m -14.4
Impact +6.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
2
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.9

Offensive struggles severely hampered his overall rating, as he failed to convert on multiple perimeter looks. While his point-of-attack defense remained stout, the inability to punish sagging defenders bogged down the spacing. He simply couldn't find the bottom of the net when left open, stalling the offensive flow.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 16.7%
USG% 20.5%
Net Rtg +22.6
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.9m
Offense -4.7
Hustle +2.8
Defense +4.8
Raw total +2.9
Avg player in 14.9m -7.8
Impact -4.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
Gui Santos 13.7m
6
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.0

Perfect execution on limited touches maximized his offensive value, continuing a trend of high-efficiency basketball. He capitalized on every opportunity presented, taking only high-value shots within the flow of the offense. Solid hustle plays slightly boosted his steady, mistake-free performance.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 9.7%
Net Rtg +4.6
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.7m
Offense +6.6
Hustle +2.5
Defense 0.0
Raw total +9.1
Avg player in 13.7m -7.1
Impact +2.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 12.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Buddy Hield 10.0m
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.5

Defensive limitations and a lack of hustle plays dragged his rating down during a brief, low-impact appearance. He failed to generate any meaningful gravity or spacing during his short stint on the floor. The overall lack of engagement on both ends resulted in a steep negative score.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 17.4%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.0m
Offense -1.7
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.1
Raw total -1.4
Avg player in 10.0m -5.1
Impact -6.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
2
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.0

Failing to establish himself physically, he settled for tough looks rather than aggressively attacking the rim. His defensive impact was virtually nonexistent, allowing opponents to navigate his space without resistance. A passive outing defined by a lack of force that resulted in empty minutes.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 20.0%
USG% 27.3%
Net Rtg -9.0
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.5m
Offense -1.3
Hustle +1.1
Defense +0.1
Raw total -0.1
Avg player in 9.5m -4.9
Impact -5.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+3.3

Operating strictly within his role as a connector and rim protector allowed him to maximize a short stint. His defensive positioning deterred drives, while quick decisions with the ball kept the offense flowing. A highly efficient, mistake-free cameo defined by excellent spatial awareness.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +18.8
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.8m
Offense +3.9
Hustle +0.2
Defense +2.7
Raw total +6.8
Avg player in 6.8m -3.5
Impact +3.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.4

Limited floor time resulted in a marginal positive impact driven entirely by solid defensive positioning. He didn't log enough minutes to influence the game's momentum or establish an offensive rhythm. A quiet, uneventful stint that barely registered on the radar.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -65.0
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.1m
Offense +0.6
Hustle +0.4
Defense +1.0
Raw total +2.0
Avg player in 3.1m -1.6
Impact +0.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1