Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
SAC lead HOU lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
HOU 2P — 3P —
SAC 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 189 attempts

HOU HOU Shot-making Δ

Durant Hard 8/21 +0.6
Sengun 12/17 +5.8
Smith Jr. Hard 6/16 +1.4
Sheppard Hard 4/13 +0.2
Thompson 7/10 +4.5
Eason Hard 6/8 +7.2
Okogie Hard 1/5 -2.3
Capela Open 1/4 -2.5

SAC SAC Shot-making Δ

Westbrook Hard 8/24 -2.0
DeRozan Hard 9/17 +4.1
Murray Hard 9/14 +9.6
Schröder Hard 7/13 +4.3
Raynaud 6/12 +0.3
Clifford Hard 2/8 -3.7
Ellis Hard 0/3 -2.6
Achiuwa Open 1/2 -0.3
Cardwell Hard 1/1 +1.1
Monk Open 1/1 +0.6
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
HOU
SAC
45/94 Field Goals 44/95
47.9% Field Goal % 46.3%
16/38 3-Pointers 12/32
42.1% 3-Point % 37.5%
18/24 Free Throws 25/36
75.0% Free Throw % 69.4%
59.3% True Shooting % 56.4%
54 Total Rebounds 65
13 Offensive 19
34 Defensive 36
31 Assists 29
2.07 Assist/TO Ratio 2.42
14 Turnovers 11
9 Steals 8
2 Blocks 5
20 Fouls 21
50 Points in Paint 42
9 Fast Break Pts 12
18 Points off TOs 18
18 Second Chance Pts 12
33 Bench Points 34
14 Largest Lead 10
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
DeMar DeRozan
27 PTS · 4 REB · 9 AST · 40.1 MIN
+27.6
2
Amen Thompson
18 PTS · 9 REB · 8 AST · 45.1 MIN
+24.78
3
Keegan Murray
26 PTS · 4 REB · 0 AST · 47.0 MIN
+24.72
4
Dennis Schröder
24 PTS · 7 REB · 10 AST · 31.9 MIN
+23.96
5
Alperen Sengun
28 PTS · 6 REB · 3 AST · 40.9 MIN
+21.85
6
Tari Eason
16 PTS · 3 REB · 3 AST · 15.5 MIN
+20.06
7
Kevin Durant
24 PTS · 10 REB · 8 AST · 47.5 MIN
+14.08
8
Jabari Smith Jr.
18 PTS · 5 REB · 2 AST · 36.4 MIN
+13.38
9
Russell Westbrook
21 PTS · 13 REB · 4 AST · 29.3 MIN
+12.06
10
Maxime Raynaud
12 PTS · 14 REB · 0 AST · 37.1 MIN
+9.16
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q5 0:00 TEAM offensive REBOUND 124–125
Q5 0:00 MISS K. Durant 21' pullup Shot 124–125
Q5 0:02 P. Achiuwa kicked ball VIOLATION 124–125
Q5 0:03 D. Schröder 26' 3PT (24 PTS) (D. DeRozan 9 AST) 124–125
Q5 0:09 R. Westbrook REBOUND (Off:6 Def:7) 124–122
Q5 0:10 MISS J. Smith Jr. Free Throw 3 of 3 124–122
Q5 0:10 J. Smith Jr. Free Throw 2 of 3 (18 PTS) 124–122
Q5 0:10 J. Smith Jr. Free Throw 1 of 3 (17 PTS) 123–122
Q5 0:10 R. Westbrook shooting personal FOUL (3 PF) (Smith Jr. 3 FT) 122–122
Q5 0:28 A. Thompson REBOUND (Off:2 Def:7) 122–122
Q5 0:30 MISS R. Westbrook 27' step back 3PT 122–122
Q5 0:38 J. Smith Jr. alley-oop DUNK (16 PTS) (A. Sengun 3 AST) 122–122
Q5 0:55 D. Schröder Free Throw 2 of 2 (21 PTS) 120–122
Q5 0:55 D. Schröder Free Throw 1 of 2 (20 PTS) 120–121
Q5 0:55 R. Sheppard shooting personal FOUL (5 PF) (Schröder 2 FT) 120–120

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

SAC Sacramento Kings
S Keegan Murray 47.0m
26
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
+19.1

Capitalizing on defensive stops to leak out in transition fueled a highly efficient two-way performance. He punished closeouts perfectly, taking only high-quality looks within the flow of the offense. Elite defensive positioning consistently disrupted opponent passing lanes.

Shooting
FG 9/14 (64.3%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 80.2%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg +7.6
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 47.0m
Scoring +22.7
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +6.3
Hustle +5.1
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S DeMar DeRozan 40.1m
27
pts
4
reb
9
ast
Impact
+20.6

Masterful control of the half-court tempo and precise playmaking dissected the opposing defense. He consistently drew two defenders and made the right read, generating high-quality looks for teammates. Methodical shot creation in the mid-range stabilized the offense during crucial stretches.

Shooting
FG 9/17 (52.9%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 8/9 (88.9%)
Advanced
TS% 64.4%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg +7.1
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 40.1m
Scoring +21.4
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +5.0
Hustle +4.1
Defense +3.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
S Maxime Raynaud 37.1m
12
pts
14
reb
0
ast
Impact
+6.5

Conceding easy looks in the paint and struggling with defensive rotations drove his negative impact. While active on the glass, his inability to protect the rim allowed opponents to score at will inside. Missed assignments in pick-and-roll coverage frequently compromised the defensive shell.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 16.1%
Net Rtg +7.4
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.1m
Scoring +7.4
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +16.8
Defense -3.2
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 22
FGM Against 14
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
21
pts
13
reb
4
ast
Impact
+7.5

A chaotic performance defined by 16 missed shots that severely damaged the team's offensive efficiency. While his relentless hustle generated extra possessions, his erratic shot selection frequently gave the ball right back. The sheer volume of forced attempts completely overshadowed his high-energy rebounding.

Shooting
FG 8/24 (33.3%)
3PT 5/12 (41.7%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 42.2%
USG% 38.7%
Net Rtg -0.4
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.3m
Scoring +9.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +6.3
Hustle +14.6
Defense +2.6
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 4
5
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-11.7

A severe lack of offensive involvement rendered him largely ineffective despite solid defensive metrics. Failing to establish himself as a roll threat allowed the defense to trap the ball-handler aggressively. He was essentially a non-factor on the offensive end during his 18 minutes.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/8 (37.5%)
Advanced
TS% 45.3%
USG% 14.0%
Net Rtg +0.6
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.2m
Scoring +1.8
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +1.3
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
24
pts
7
reb
10
ast
Impact
+13.4

Slicing through the point of attack to create high-quality looks drove a massive offensive breakout. He consistently collapsed the defense with dribble penetration, leading to easy dump-offs and kick-outs. Excellent decision-making in the pick-and-roll dictated the flow of the game.

Shooting
FG 7/13 (53.8%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 72.6%
USG% 24.7%
Net Rtg +6.3
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.9m
Scoring +19.0
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +5.0
Hustle +5.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
6
pts
6
reb
4
ast
Impact
-5.9

Excellent defensive intensity was completely undone by an inability to space the floor. Missing all four of his perimeter attempts allowed defenders to pack the paint and stifle driving lanes. His offensive struggles turned him into a liability despite holding his own on the other end.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 33.8%
USG% 16.4%
Net Rtg +7.5
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.9m
Scoring +1.5
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +1.2
Hustle +7.6
Defense +1.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
2
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.7

Existing on the floor without generating any tangible advantages resulted in a slightly negative impact. He failed to set meaningful screens or roll with purpose, stagnating the half-court offense. A completely passive approach left him floating through his 20 minutes of action.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 2.1%
Net Rtg -4.2
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.6m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +5.1
Defense -2.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
Keon Ellis 9.0m
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-16.9

Empty offensive possessions and missed perimeter looks defined a highly ineffective brief stint. He failed to capitalize on open spot-up opportunities, stalling the momentum of the second unit. Active perimeter defense couldn't make up for the complete lack of offensive production.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -66.7
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.0m
Scoring -2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.6
Defense -1.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Malik Monk 4.8m
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-13.8

A very quick hook prevented him from establishing any sort of rhythm or impact. He barely had time to break a sweat before being pulled from the rotation. The minimal sample size offered no real opportunity to influence the game's outcome.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.2%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -39.1
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.8m
Scoring +1.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
HOU Houston Rockets
S Kevin Durant 47.5m
24
pts
10
reb
8
ast
Impact
+14.4

Heavy volume and 13 missed field goals severely dragged down his overall efficiency. The sheer number of empty offensive possessions negated his otherwise solid defensive metrics. Forcing contested mid-range jumpers against double teams ultimately hurt the offense.

Shooting
FG 8/21 (38.1%)
3PT 3/9 (33.3%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 50.8%
USG% 24.5%
Net Rtg +2.1
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 47.5m
Scoring +14.6
Creation +2.9
Shot Making +5.4
Hustle +11.7
Defense -3.1
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 26.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Amen Thompson 45.1m
18
pts
9
reb
8
ast
Impact
+17.0

Relentless rim pressure and elite finishing around the basket drove a highly efficient performance. He consistently generated extra possessions through high-motor hustle plays in the trenches. Defensive versatility allowed him to seamlessly switch across multiple positions without giving up advantages.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 76.5%
USG% 13.6%
Net Rtg +1.3
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 45.1m
Scoring +15.3
Creation +2.1
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +10.5
Defense +4.0
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
S Alperen Sengun 40.9m
28
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
+13.6

Dominant interior positioning and highly efficient finishing created a massive positive swing. He consistently punished switches in the post, forcing defensive rotations that opened up the floor. Elite hustle metrics reflect his relentless effort in keeping offensive possessions alive.

Shooting
FG 12/17 (70.6%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 71.3%
USG% 25.6%
Net Rtg +3.8
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 40.9m
Scoring +23.2
Creation +2.2
Shot Making +4.9
Hustle +4.7
Defense +0.7
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 4
18
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.0

Clanking 10 shots from the field completely neutralized his decent defensive contributions. Opponents frequently capitalized on his long misses to push the pace in transition. His inability to find a rhythm from deep stalled several half-court sets.

Shooting
FG 6/16 (37.5%)
3PT 4/11 (36.4%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 52.0%
USG% 20.2%
Net Rtg -28.2
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.4m
Scoring +10.2
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +4.2
Hustle +1.5
Defense +0.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
S Josh Okogie 33.7m
3
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
-14.3

Offensive invisibility and poor spacing severely hampered the team's flow while he was on the floor. Missing four perimeter looks allowed defenders to completely sag off him and clog the paint. His defensive energy simply wasn't enough to offset playing 4-on-5 on the other end.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 30.0%
USG% 9.3%
Net Rtg -6.2
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.7m
Scoring +0.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +5.7
Defense -0.8
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 53.8%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
15
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-13.2

Poor shot selection and nine missed field goals created a significant drag on the offense. Opposing guards consistently targeted him on the perimeter, leading to defensive breakdowns and negative impact metrics. Forcing contested looks early in the shot clock fueled opponent transition opportunities.

Shooting
FG 4/13 (30.8%)
3PT 4/9 (44.4%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.4%
USG% 21.0%
Net Rtg +19.7
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.8m
Scoring +8.7
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +1.6
Defense -7.8
Turnovers -5.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 35.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
Tari Eason 15.5m
16
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+10.4

An absolute supernova off the bench who swung the game's momentum in just 15 minutes. Perfect perimeter execution and immediate defensive intensity overwhelmed the opposing second unit. Every minute he played felt like a massive net positive due to flawless shot selection.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 3/3 (100.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 90.1%
USG% 21.4%
Net Rtg -16.5
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.5m
Scoring +14.2
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +4.3
Hustle +3.8
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Clint Capela 11.9m
2
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
-11.9

Failing to convert high-percentage looks around the rim limited his effectiveness in a brief stint. He struggled to establish deep post position, resulting in empty offensive trips. The lack of interior gravity made it easy for the defense to stay home on shooters.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 16.1%
Net Rtg +0.6
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.9m
Scoring -0.0
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +6.7
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1