GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

CLE Cleveland Cavaliers
27
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
+3.8

Slicing through the defense with surgical precision, his highly efficient shot creation drove a solid positive footprint (+3.8). He actively recognized mismatches and hunted them in isolation, breaking out of a recent efficiency slump. The sheer quality of his shot selection kept the offense humming during crucial stretches.

Shooting
FG 11/16 (68.8%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 76.0%
USG% 24.7%
Net Rtg +28.4
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.7m
Offense +19.4
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.8
Raw total +23.1
Avg player in 29.7m -19.3
Impact +3.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Darius Garland 28.6m
10
pts
1
reb
8
ast
Impact
-10.6

Stagnating the offense with hesitant decision-making led to a severe drop in his usual production and a brutal net rating (-10.6). He struggled to navigate blitzing pick-and-roll coverages, resulting in dead-end possessions that fueled opponent fast breaks. The sharp decline from his recent high-scoring form left a massive playmaking void.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 55.6%
USG% 17.4%
Net Rtg +21.9
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.6m
Offense +4.4
Hustle +2.1
Defense +1.4
Raw total +7.9
Avg player in 28.6m -18.5
Impact -10.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Jarrett Allen 26.3m
14
pts
9
reb
3
ast
Impact
-1.5

Uncharacteristically soft rim protection (+0.8) allowed the opponent to feast in the paint, dragging his net impact into the negative (-1.5). While he continued his streak of hyper-efficient finishing around the basket, he was repeatedly pulled away from the hoop by stretch bigs. The resulting lack of interior deterrence overshadowed his reliable offensive output.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 70.9%
USG% 16.9%
Net Rtg +25.0
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.3m
Offense +11.7
Hustle +3.0
Defense +0.8
Raw total +15.5
Avg player in 26.3m -17.0
Impact -1.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 41.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Sam Merrill 25.7m
22
pts
6
reb
7
ast
Impact
+10.7

Catching fire from beyond the arc punished the defense's drop coverage and generated a massive offensive surge (+10.7). He broke out of a recent shooting funk by constantly relocating off the ball, forcing defensive breakdowns. His elite spacing gravity opened up driving lanes for everyone else on the floor.

Shooting
FG 7/12 (58.3%)
3PT 6/10 (60.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 85.4%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg +30.5
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.7m
Offense +21.8
Hustle +1.4
Defense +4.2
Raw total +27.4
Avg player in 25.7m -16.7
Impact +10.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Dean Wade 24.9m
11
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
-3.0

Despite finding his stroke after a brutal four-game slump, his minutes coincided with massive opponent runs that sank his overall rating (-3.0). He was frequently caught out of position in transition, negating the value of his perimeter shot-making. The underlying defensive metrics (+2.4) couldn't save him from the structural breakdowns that happened on his watch.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 55.0%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg +16.4
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.9m
Offense +7.7
Hustle +3.0
Defense +2.4
Raw total +13.1
Avg player in 24.9m -16.1
Impact -3.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 26.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Jaylon Tyson 24.6m
18
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.8

Capitalizing on aggressive straight-line drives, he shattered his recent efficiency woes to post a highly positive overall mark (+6.8). His willingness to attack closeouts decisively kept the defense scrambling all night. This confident offensive rhythm perfectly complemented a steady, mistake-free defensive shift.

Shooting
FG 8/13 (61.5%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 69.2%
USG% 19.7%
Net Rtg +29.8
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.6m
Offense +19.5
Hustle +2.7
Defense +0.7
Raw total +22.9
Avg player in 24.6m -16.1
Impact +6.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
10
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.7

Clanking every attempt from beyond the arc severely cramped the floor, undermining his elite defensive contributions (+7.5). He operated as an absolute lockdown presence on the wing, but his offensive limitations allowed his defender to freely roam the paint. Ultimately, the spacing issues he created dragged his overall impact into the red (-2.7).

Shooting
FG 5/13 (38.5%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 38.5%
USG% 21.2%
Net Rtg +35.6
+/- +23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.1m
Offense +1.9
Hustle +3.5
Defense +7.5
Raw total +12.9
Avg player in 24.1m -15.6
Impact -2.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
12
pts
8
reb
8
ast
Impact
+10.7

Swarming the perimeter with elite point-of-attack defense (+9.3) completely derailed the opponent's offensive sets. He backed up this defensive masterclass by confidently knocking down open looks, erasing the memory of a recent brutal slump. His relentless energy and timely shot-making drove a massive positive swing (+10.7) whenever he was on the floor.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.6%
USG% 15.9%
Net Rtg +10.2
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.3m
Offense +13.5
Hustle +2.4
Defense +9.3
Raw total +25.2
Avg player in 22.3m -14.5
Impact +10.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
15
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+13.8

Dominating the interior with fierce rolls to the rim generated a spectacular two-way performance (+13.8). He completely outworked the opposing bigs on the glass and provided surprisingly stout rim protection (+6.6). This massive spike in production provided the exact physical edge the second unit needed.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 88.9%
USG% 13.1%
Net Rtg +16.7
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.7m
Offense +19.3
Hustle +2.0
Defense +6.6
Raw total +27.9
Avg player in 21.7m -14.1
Impact +13.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 58.8%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.9

Forcing up terrible shots early in the clock completely torpedoed his brief stint on the floor (-7.9). His inability to convert a single attempt abruptly ended a solid streak of efficient games. The resulting empty possessions handed the opponent free momentum during a critical rotation window.

Shooting
FG 0/5 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 29.2%
Net Rtg -42.1
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.3m
Offense -6.3
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.9
Raw total -2.5
Avg player in 8.3m -5.4
Impact -7.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
+4.3

Making the most of a fleeting appearance, his hyper-active defensive rotations (+4.1) immediately stifled the opposition. He executed his role perfectly by staying within himself and contesting everything at the rim. This brief burst of disciplined energy yielded a surprisingly high net positive (+4.3) for such limited action.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg -33.3
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.8m
Offense +1.1
Hustle +1.5
Defense +4.1
Raw total +6.7
Avg player in 3.8m -2.4
Impact +4.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
NOP New Orleans Pelicans
S Bryce McGowens 30.6m
8
pts
7
reb
3
ast
Impact
-0.6

Elite defensive activity (+6.5) and relentless loose-ball recoveries kept his team afloat during messy stretches. However, his extreme passivity on the offensive end ultimately dragged his net impact slightly below neutral (-0.6). He operated as a pure specialist, locking down the perimeter but failing to bend the defense on the other end.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.8%
USG% 12.0%
Net Rtg -17.4
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.6m
Offense +7.0
Hustle +5.7
Defense +6.5
Raw total +19.2
Avg player in 30.6m -19.8
Impact -0.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jeremiah Fears 27.2m
11
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
-10.4

Forcing contested looks early in the shot clock cratered his offensive value and dragged his net impact into the abyss (-10.4). The stark drop-off from his recent efficient stretch was glaring, as he repeatedly drove into traffic with no exit plan. Even a highly disruptive defensive performance (+5.5) couldn't mask the damage done by his erratic shot selection.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 22.9%
Net Rtg -11.3
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.2m
Offense +0.2
Hustle +1.6
Defense +5.5
Raw total +7.3
Avg player in 27.2m -17.7
Impact -10.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Trey Murphy III 26.4m
14
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
-3.1

Despite decent surface-level efficiency, his overall footprint skewed negative (-3.1) due to defensive lapses that aren't captured in traditional stats. He hit a few timely perimeter looks, but his off-ball tracking allowed too many open driving lanes. The scoring volume simply wasn't enough to cover his rotational mistakes.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 58.3%
USG% 21.5%
Net Rtg -29.0
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.4m
Offense +9.4
Hustle +2.2
Defense +2.4
Raw total +14.0
Avg player in 26.4m -17.1
Impact -3.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 64.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Saddiq Bey 26.1m
11
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.7

A sharp regression from his recent offensive tear left his overall impact firmly in the red (-7.7). Clanking away from the perimeter stalled out offensive possessions, completely neutralizing his otherwise solid defensive rotations (+2.9). His inability to find a rhythm from deep defined a sluggish outing.

Shooting
FG 5/13 (38.5%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 42.3%
USG% 21.3%
Net Rtg -1.7
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.1m
Offense +5.4
Hustle +1.0
Defense +2.9
Raw total +9.3
Avg player in 26.1m -17.0
Impact -7.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
S Derik Queen 25.2m
21
pts
7
reb
5
ast
Impact
+7.8

Exploded out of a recent slump by aggressively attacking mismatches in the paint and stretching the floor effectively. His high-energy rim runs and active hands generated a massive two-way footprint (+7.8). The sheer volume of his hustle plays (+4.2) completely shifted the momentum whenever he checked in.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 63.1%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg -21.6
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.2m
Offense +15.0
Hustle +4.2
Defense +5.0
Raw total +24.2
Avg player in 25.2m -16.4
Impact +7.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
6
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-13.2

A catastrophic negative impact (-13.2) stemmed from being repeatedly targeted and overpowered in pick-and-roll switches. He simply couldn't stay in front of larger ball-handlers, bleeding points on the defensive end despite hitting a couple of timely perimeter shots. His trademark peskiness was entirely neutralized by an opponent that passed right over his head.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 8.8%
Net Rtg -32.1
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.4m
Offense +1.4
Hustle +0.8
Defense +1.0
Raw total +3.2
Avg player in 25.4m -16.4
Impact -13.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
7
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.7

Bleeding value on the defensive end (-0.2) and failing to generate enough offensive volume dragged his overall rating firmly into the red (-8.7). He struggled to navigate off-ball screens, frequently losing his man and giving up easy perimeter looks. The regression from his recent blistering efficiency left him without a way to positively influence the game.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.5%
USG% 14.0%
Net Rtg -12.3
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.6m
Offense +3.7
Hustle +1.9
Defense -0.2
Raw total +5.4
Avg player in 21.6m -14.1
Impact -8.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
26
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+7.2

Bullying defenders in the low post allowed him to generate a massive positive impact (+7.2) in limited minutes. His sheer physical dominance forced constant double-teams, warping the opponent's defensive shell and creating high-quality looks. While his defensive metrics were quiet, his unstoppable downhill gravity dictated the terms of the game.

Shooting
FG 9/15 (60.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 8/9 (88.9%)
Advanced
TS% 68.6%
USG% 39.6%
Net Rtg -34.2
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.9m
Offense +18.7
Hustle +0.7
Defense +1.4
Raw total +20.8
Avg player in 20.9m -13.6
Impact +7.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
Micah Peavy 13.7m
5
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+1.5

Providing a much-needed spark off the bench, his aggressive point-of-attack defense (+4.7) disrupted the opponent's rhythm. He finally broke out of a prolonged shooting slump by taking only high-percentage looks within the flow of the offense. This disciplined approach yielded a steady, positive footprint (+1.5) in his brief stint.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 10.5%
Net Rtg -24.3
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.7m
Offense +4.9
Hustle +0.8
Defense +4.7
Raw total +10.4
Avg player in 13.7m -8.9
Impact +1.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Yves Missi 12.8m
7
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+11.6

Absolute dominance as a rim deterrent (+9.4) fueled an astronomical per-minute impact (+11.6). He altered virtually every shot in his vicinity while converting all of his offensive touches through decisive, powerful finishes. This brief but flawless two-way burst completely suffocated the opposing second unit.

Shooting
FG 3/3 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 101.7%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg -3.6
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.8m
Offense +7.6
Hustle +2.9
Defense +9.4
Raw total +19.9
Avg player in 12.8m -8.3
Impact +11.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
2
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.0

Snapping a highly efficient four-game stretch, his inability to finish through contact at the rim severely punished the second unit (-6.0). He rushed his touch shots in the paint, wasting valuable possessions during a crucial rotation window. The lack of offensive execution completely overshadowed his adequate rim protection.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 16.7%
USG% 23.3%
Net Rtg -47.8
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.0m
Offense -1.3
Hustle +1.0
Defense +0.8
Raw total +0.5
Avg player in 10.0m -6.5
Impact -6.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1