GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

BKN Brooklyn Nets
24
pts
11
reb
5
ast
Impact
+8.9

High-volume perimeter shot-making stretched the defense and anchored a massive box score rating (+15.1). He paired the offensive barrage with engaged rebounding and solid defensive positioning to dominate his minutes.

Shooting
FG 9/18 (50.0%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.6%
USG% 26.8%
Net Rtg +36.6
+/- +26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.1m
Offense +15.1
Hustle +2.0
Defense +5.3
Raw total +22.4
Avg player in 36.1m -13.5
Impact +8.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 35.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Noah Clowney 33.4m
19
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
+15.9

An absolute breakout performance defined by elite rim protection (+9.7) and aggressive hustle (+5.5). He shattered his recent scoring averages while providing a suffocating two-way presence that completely altered the game's complexion.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 5/8 (62.5%)
Advanced
TS% 61.2%
USG% 23.3%
Net Rtg +44.8
+/- +28
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.4m
Offense +13.3
Hustle +5.5
Defense +9.7
Raw total +28.5
Avg player in 33.4m -12.6
Impact +15.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 24
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
S Egor Dëmin 30.4m
16
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+2.7

Balanced two-way execution highlighted by sharp perimeter shooting and switchable defense (+6.0). He capitalized on open looks from deep while consistently blowing up opponent sets on the other end.

Shooting
FG 6/10 (60.0%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 80.0%
USG% 21.9%
Net Rtg +42.7
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.4m
Offense +6.2
Hustle +1.9
Defense +6.0
Raw total +14.1
Avg player in 30.4m -11.4
Impact +2.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 4
S Nic Claxton 27.6m
12
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.3

Highly efficient interior finishing and vertical spacing drove a strong positive rating. He dominated his touches around the basket while providing the steady defensive anchor expected of him.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 17.7%
Net Rtg +31.5
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.6m
Offense +8.3
Hustle +3.7
Defense +3.6
Raw total +15.6
Avg player in 27.6m -10.3
Impact +5.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Terance Mann 25.7m
5
pts
3
reb
7
ast
Impact
-2.9

Excellent connective passing generated solid box score value, but hidden mistakes dragged his overall impact into the negative. The playmaking was ultimately overshadowed by defensive breakdowns or transition concessions not fully captured by his assist totals.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 8.9%
Net Rtg +53.5
+/- +28
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.7m
Offense +4.6
Hustle +0.8
Defense +1.4
Raw total +6.8
Avg player in 25.7m -9.7
Impact -2.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 22.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Nolan Traore 22.3m
8
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.8

Solid defensive rotations (+4.6) were undermined by a barrage of missed jumpers. His inability to convert from the perimeter continues a troubling trend of offensive inefficiency that limits his overall value.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.5%
USG% 20.4%
Net Rtg -16.0
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.3m
Offense +1.3
Hustle +1.6
Defense +4.6
Raw total +7.5
Avg player in 22.3m -8.3
Impact -0.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
8
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
+1.5

Capitalized on dump-offs and interior positioning to generate a highly efficient, albeit brief, offensive spark. His physical presence in the paint yielded a modest but clear positive impact.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 82.0%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg -0.6
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.4m
Offense +6.5
Hustle +2.1
Defense +0.6
Raw total +9.2
Avg player in 20.4m -7.7
Impact +1.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 77.8%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Danny Wolf 19.0m
0
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.0

A complete offensive collapse resulted in a disastrous overall rating (-8.0). Missing all of his attempts from the field completely neutralized his minor defensive contributions and stalled the second unit.

Shooting
FG 0/4 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 11.4%
Net Rtg -14.6
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.0m
Offense -4.2
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.7
Raw total -0.9
Avg player in 19.0m -7.1
Impact -8.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.4

An incredible defensive (+8.2) and hustle (+7.5) masterclass completely masked a scoreless offensive outing. He abandoned his recent scoring punch to focus entirely on shutting down his matchup and securing loose balls.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.8%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg -47.1
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.0m
Offense -5.1
Hustle +7.5
Defense +8.2
Raw total +10.6
Avg player in 14.0m -5.2
Impact +5.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 3
2
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-6.3

Failed to generate any meaningful traction during his rotation minutes, dragging down the lineup with empty offensive possessions. Defensive apathy and poor shooting efficiency compounded to create a steep negative impact.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -70.8
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.2m
Offense -2.6
Hustle +0.4
Defense +0.1
Raw total -2.1
Avg player in 11.2m -4.2
Impact -6.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
TOR Toronto Raptors
S Scottie Barnes 33.7m
6
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.4

Elite defensive metrics (+6.6) and high-energy hustle plays were entirely undone by a severe offensive regression. Missing seven shots and failing to connect from deep resulted in a massive drop-off from his recent scoring baseline.

Shooting
FG 3/10 (30.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 30.0%
USG% 16.5%
Net Rtg -31.4
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.7m
Offense -3.8
Hustle +2.5
Defense +6.6
Raw total +5.3
Avg player in 33.7m -12.7
Impact -7.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 53.8%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 3
S Brandon Ingram 33.5m
19
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
-4.8

Impact dragged into the red by 11 missed field goals that stalled offensive momentum. The scoring volume masked underlying inefficiency, though he managed to salvage some value through marginal defensive contributions.

Shooting
FG 7/18 (38.9%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.3%
USG% 31.4%
Net Rtg -21.9
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.5m
Offense +5.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense +1.6
Raw total +7.8
Avg player in 33.5m -12.6
Impact -4.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 3
17
pts
5
reb
10
ast
Impact
+7.1

Heavy playmaking volume and relentless hustle (+4.8) drove a highly positive rating despite significant shooting struggles. He missed 11 shots from the field, but his ability to orchestrate the offense and push the pace easily outweighed the inefficiency.

Shooting
FG 5/16 (31.2%)
3PT 3/10 (30.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.9%
USG% 26.4%
Net Rtg -6.2
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.5m
Offense +11.1
Hustle +4.8
Defense +3.1
Raw total +19.0
Avg player in 31.5m -11.9
Impact +7.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Ochai Agbaji 20.8m
7
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.3

A surprising offensive surge generated positive box score value, snapping him out of a prolonged shooting slump. However, defensive lapses kept his overall impact slightly negative despite the much-needed scoring punch.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 58.3%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg -31.6
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.8m
Offense +3.9
Hustle +1.6
Defense 0.0
Raw total +5.5
Avg player in 20.8m -7.8
Impact -2.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 14.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jakob Poeltl 6.6m
2
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.6

Early foul trouble or a rotational squeeze limited him to just a brief stint on the floor. He maintained his flawless interior finishing during those minutes, but the lack of court time neutralized any meaningful impact.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.6m
Offense +0.3
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.9
Raw total +1.8
Avg player in 6.6m -2.4
Impact -0.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
9
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+7.8

Near-perfect shot selection fueled a stellar overall rating (+7.8) in a highly efficient secondary role. His ability to capitalize on limited touches was perfectly complemented by disciplined perimeter defense.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 90.0%
USG% 10.3%
Net Rtg -20.6
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.1m
Offense +7.5
Hustle +3.9
Defense +5.1
Raw total +16.5
Avg player in 23.1m -8.7
Impact +7.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
Jamal Shead 20.5m
2
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-3.6

Relentless energy yielded an elite hustle score (+7.8), but bricking six shots completely tanked his overall value. The offensive cratering erased all the goodwill generated by his physical, disruptive play on the other end.

Shooting
FG 1/7 (14.3%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 14.3%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg -25.6
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.5m
Offense -5.0
Hustle +7.8
Defense +1.3
Raw total +4.1
Avg player in 20.5m -7.7
Impact -3.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
4
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.5

Active hustle (+3.0) on the margins couldn't compensate for a sharp decline in offensive execution. He struggled to find his spots against the defense, resulting in a steep drop-off from his recent high-scoring stretch.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.0%
USG% 17.0%
Net Rtg -56.1
+/- -23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Offense -1.3
Hustle +3.0
Defense +2.3
Raw total +4.0
Avg player in 19.9m -7.5
Impact -3.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
8
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.4

Consistent interior finishing allowed him to maintain his streak of highly efficient shooting performances. Strong positional rebounding and steady defensive rotations further cemented a highly productive two-way shift.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg +19.3
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.7m
Offense +7.7
Hustle +2.3
Defense +2.4
Raw total +12.4
Avg player in 18.7m -7.0
Impact +5.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Gradey Dick 17.1m
3
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.7

Continued perimeter shooting woes were partially offset by surprisingly stout defensive metrics (+4.1). He continues to struggle finding the bottom of the net, forcing him to rely entirely on off-ball rotations to stay afloat.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 14.0%
Net Rtg +13.1
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.1m
Offense +0.7
Hustle +1.0
Defense +4.1
Raw total +5.8
Avg player in 17.1m -6.5
Impact -0.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 22.2%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
4
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.1

Marginal production in limited minutes resulted in a nearly neutral overall rating. He failed to establish a rhythm or match his recent scoring output, largely blending into the background during his shifts.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg +13.8
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.4m
Offense +3.2
Hustle +0.4
Defense +1.0
Raw total +4.6
Avg player in 12.4m -4.7
Impact -0.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.3

Barely saw the floor during a brief cameo appearance. Generated virtually zero measurable impact on either end of the court.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +5.0
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.1m
Offense +0.5
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total +0.5
Avg player in 2.1m -0.8
Impact -0.3
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0