GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

PHX Phoenix Suns
16
pts
4
reb
8
ast
Impact
+7.7

Torched drop coverage with decisive pull-up shooting to shatter his recent offensive struggles. He paired this scoring punch with phenomenal screen navigation, completely blowing up the opponent's perimeter actions.

Shooting
FG 6/10 (60.0%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 80.0%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg +41.1
+/- +23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.1m
Offense +13.9
Hustle +1.2
Defense +8.4
Raw total +23.5
Avg player in 28.1m -15.8
Impact +7.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
S Devin Booker 27.3m
21
pts
2
reb
11
ast
Impact
+2.2

Masterful playmaking generated high-quality looks for teammates, but his own scoring gravity was diminished by uncharacteristic misses from deep. Hidden transition defensive lapses likely suppressed his overall net rating despite the elite offensive orchestration.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 59.9%
USG% 32.3%
Net Rtg +35.8
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.3m
Offense +12.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense +3.6
Raw total +17.5
Avg player in 27.3m -15.3
Impact +2.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 4
S Dillon Brooks 23.8m
25
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
+11.3

Punished mismatches in the mid-post to break out of a severe shooting slump with highly efficient volume. While his offensive execution was flawless, his defensive impact was surprisingly muted compared to his usual standard.

Shooting
FG 10/15 (66.7%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.7%
USG% 29.1%
Net Rtg +34.8
+/- +20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.8m
Offense +20.8
Hustle +4.0
Defense -0.0
Raw total +24.8
Avg player in 23.8m -13.5
Impact +11.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
S Royce O'Neale 22.9m
12
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+4.2

Excellent shot selection from the corners maximized his offensive value without demanding heavy touches. He perfectly executed the defensive game plan by consistently stunting and recovering to shooters.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 4/5 (80.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 120.0%
USG% 11.5%
Net Rtg +38.4
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.9m
Offense +12.4
Hustle +1.7
Defense +2.9
Raw total +17.0
Avg player in 22.9m -12.8
Impact +4.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Mark Williams 21.4m
18
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
+20.0

Absolute dominance in the painted area, converting nearly every look while sealing off the defensive glass. His rim protection deterred multiple drives, anchoring a flawless two-way performance that dictated the flow of the game.

Shooting
FG 7/8 (87.5%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 92.2%
USG% 16.3%
Net Rtg +43.2
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.4m
Offense +22.6
Hustle +3.5
Defense +5.9
Raw total +32.0
Avg player in 21.4m -12.0
Impact +20.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
Ryan Dunn 28.4m
4
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
-11.7

Complete offensive invisibility allowed his defender to roam freely as a free safety. Despite decent individual defensive metrics, the resulting 4-on-5 spacing on the other end crippled the offense and tanked his overall impact.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 12.7%
Net Rtg +10.7
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.4m
Offense +0.6
Hustle +1.4
Defense +2.2
Raw total +4.2
Avg player in 28.4m -15.9
Impact -11.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
14
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.6

Sliced through the defense with aggressive straight-line drives to snap a brutal shooting slump. His point-of-attack pressure yielded a few key deflections, though occasional over-helping surrendered open corner looks.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 70.0%
USG% 20.8%
Net Rtg +12.9
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.2m
Offense +10.4
Hustle +3.6
Defense +2.1
Raw total +16.1
Avg player in 24.2m -13.5
Impact +2.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
8
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
+2.9

Generated immense value through sheer grit, diving for loose balls and securing long rebounds to extend possessions. His chaotic energy disrupted the opponent's rhythm, even if his own shot selection left something to be desired.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.8%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg +33.3
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.7m
Offense +3.5
Hustle +7.3
Defense +4.3
Raw total +15.1
Avg player in 21.7m -12.2
Impact +2.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
Oso Ighodaro 20.8m
5
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+0.3

Maintained his streak of hyper-efficient finishing around the basket, serving as a reliable dump-off option in the dunker spot. However, a lack of rebounding presence against bigger matchups neutralized his offensive efficiency.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 86.8%
USG% 6.7%
Net Rtg +26.9
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.8m
Offense +8.0
Hustle +2.1
Defense +1.9
Raw total +12.0
Avg player in 20.8m -11.7
Impact +0.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
7
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+6.8

Maximized his limited minutes by decisively attacking closeouts and finishing with authority. His weak-side rim rotations were perfectly timed, erasing two guaranteed layups to boost his defensive rating.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 90.2%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -21.9
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.8m
Offense +8.7
Hustle +0.8
Defense +2.8
Raw total +12.3
Avg player in 9.8m -5.5
Impact +6.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.9

Looked a step slow on defensive rotations, frequently getting caught in no-man's land during pick-and-rolls. The inability to generate any offensive separation compounded a highly ineffective stint.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 21.4%
Net Rtg -45.5
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.8m
Offense -1.8
Hustle +0.2
Defense -0.1
Raw total -1.7
Avg player in 5.8m -3.2
Impact -4.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.4

Struggled to anchor the paint, frequently biting on pump fakes and surrendering deep post position. His offensive touch abandoned him, turning potential easy put-backs into empty possessions.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg -45.5
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.8m
Offense -0.2
Hustle +0.2
Defense -1.1
Raw total -1.1
Avg player in 5.8m -3.3
Impact -4.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
LAL Los Angeles Lakers
S Marcus Smart 29.9m
14
pts
3
reb
6
ast
Impact
+2.8

Relentless energy on 50/50 balls and loose-ball recoveries drove a massive hustle rating. Despite breaking out of a recent shooting slump with decisive perimeter strikes, his overall impact was capped by uncharacteristic blow-bys allowed on the wing.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 63.6%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -26.8
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.9m
Offense +12.5
Hustle +7.8
Defense -0.7
Raw total +19.6
Avg player in 29.9m -16.8
Impact +2.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jake LaRavia 28.9m
12
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.2

Excellent weak-side rotations and timely closeouts drove a stellar defensive rating. However, his overall impact slipped into the red due to stagnant off-ball movement that clogged the team's spacing.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 61.5%
USG% 16.9%
Net Rtg -21.7
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.9m
Offense +7.4
Hustle +3.1
Defense +5.5
Raw total +16.0
Avg player in 28.9m -16.2
Impact -0.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 2
S Nick Smith Jr. 28.2m
12
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-14.6

Bleeding points on the defensive end cratered his overall value, as opponents consistently targeted him in pick-and-roll actions. Any offensive momentum he generated was entirely negated by poor closeouts and late rotations.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.5%
USG% 21.9%
Net Rtg -13.8
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.2m
Offense +3.0
Hustle +0.7
Defense -2.3
Raw total +1.4
Avg player in 28.2m -16.0
Impact -14.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Deandre Ayton 27.4m
12
pts
10
reb
1
ast
Impact
+7.5

Anchored the paint masterfully by altering floaters and deterring drives at the rim. His continued streak of elite finishing provided a crucial safety valve against aggressive perimeter trapping.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 71.1%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg -38.3
+/- -23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.4m
Offense +11.3
Hustle +2.5
Defense +9.1
Raw total +22.9
Avg player in 27.4m -15.4
Impact +7.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
S LeBron James 25.8m
23
pts
2
reb
6
ast
Impact
+3.0

Impact was heavily suppressed despite high scoring volume, likely due to costly live-ball turnovers that fueled transition attacks. His ability to manipulate the defense out of the high post was evident, but defensive lapses in transition ate away at the margins.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 6/11 (54.5%)
Advanced
TS% 61.0%
USG% 32.2%
Net Rtg -32.4
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.8m
Offense +15.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense +1.3
Raw total +17.5
Avg player in 25.8m -14.5
Impact +3.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
17
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.3

Struggled mightily to navigate screens, leading to defensive breakdowns that erased his offensive production. A pattern of forced, contested shots early in the shot clock further damaged his overall efficiency.

Shooting
FG 6/11 (54.5%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.4%
USG% 29.1%
Net Rtg -45.0
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.7m
Offense +7.1
Hustle +0.2
Defense -2.4
Raw total +4.9
Avg player in 21.7m -12.2
Impact -7.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
5
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.6

Offensive spacing issues severely hampered the team's half-court execution when he was deployed on the wing. Even with solid on-ball defense, his inability to punish sagging defenders resulted in a net-negative stint.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 13.6%
Net Rtg -78.4
+/- -28
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Offense +3.7
Hustle +1.2
Defense +1.6
Raw total +6.5
Avg player in 19.9m -11.1
Impact -4.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 81.8%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
3
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.9

Cold shooting from the perimeter completely derailed his offensive impact, allowing defenders to cheat off him and crowd the paint. He managed a few decent defensive contests, but the lack of scoring gravity stalled the second unit.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 27.6%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg -7.4
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.4m
Offense -1.1
Hustle +0.2
Defense +1.1
Raw total +0.2
Avg player in 14.4m -8.1
Impact -7.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
Adou Thiero 13.9m
6
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-1.1

Showed flashes of aggressive downhill driving that broke his recent scoring drought. Unfortunately, a few ill-advised gambles in the passing lanes compromised the team's defensive shell and dragged his net score down.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 47.5%
USG% 21.2%
Net Rtg +14.3
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.9m
Offense +3.2
Hustle +1.6
Defense +2.0
Raw total +6.8
Avg player in 13.9m -7.9
Impact -1.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.3

Point-of-attack defense was a bright spot, as he successfully navigated screens to hound opposing ball-handlers. However, a complete lack of offensive rhythm and forced jumpers dragged his overall impact firmly into the red.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 13.6%
Net Rtg +21.9
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.8m
Offense -3.0
Hustle +1.1
Defense +2.1
Raw total +0.2
Avg player in 9.8m -5.5
Impact -5.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.2

Provided a marginal defensive lift through smart positioning, but offered zero threat as a floor spacer. His reluctance to let it fly from deep allowed the opposition to easily clog the driving lanes.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -21.7
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.8m
Offense +0.4
Hustle +0.2
Defense +1.2
Raw total +1.8
Avg player in 8.8m -5.0
Impact -3.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+7.8

Completely flipped the energy of the game during a brief cameo with relentless offensive rebounding and deflections. His chaotic but effective ball pressure created multiple extra possessions out of thin air to drive a massive positive swing.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +45.5
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.8m
Offense +1.3
Hustle +7.4
Defense +2.5
Raw total +11.2
Avg player in 5.8m -3.4
Impact +7.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.1

Failed to establish any rhythm during a brief stint, looking completely lost on defensive switches. The lack of rim-running gravity allowed the defense to pack the paint while he was on the floor.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 113.6%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -86.7
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.4m
Offense +0.1
Hustle +0.4
Defense -0.6
Raw total -0.1
Avg player in 5.4m -3.0
Impact -3.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1