Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
NOP lead PHX lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
PHX 2P — 3P —
NOP 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 185 attempts

PHX PHX Shot-making Δ

Booker Hard 6/18 -2.8
Brooks 7/18 -2.8
Gillespie 6/14 +1.4
Goodwin 5/12 -1.5
O'Neale Hard 5/9 +5.7
Williams Open 4/9 -3.8
Fleming 2/7 -3.3
Bouyea 5/6 +5.3
Ighodaro Open 4/4 +2.4
Richards Open 1/1 +0.6

NOP NOP Shot-making Δ

Fears Open 7/19 -9.2
Queen Open 7/15 -2.4
Murphy III Hard 6/12 +6.3
Williamson Open 8/11 +1.4
Bey 5/10 -1.3
Alvarado 3/7 -1.3
McGowens Open 0/5 -6.7
Missi Open 2/3 -0.2
Poole Hard 0/3 -3.2
Peavy 0/2 -2.5
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
PHX
NOP
45/98 Field Goals 38/87
45.9% Field Goal % 43.7%
20/44 3-Pointers 9/27
45.5% 3-Point % 33.3%
13/19 Free Throws 29/33
68.4% Free Throw % 87.9%
57.8% True Shooting % 56.1%
65 Total Rebounds 47
22 Offensive 14
33 Defensive 29
26 Assists 16
1.53 Assist/TO Ratio 1.23
16 Turnovers 13
7 Steals 11
3 Blocks 7
23 Fouls 22
44 Points in Paint 56
19 Fast Break Pts 15
17 Points off TOs 23
30 Second Chance Pts 18
45 Bench Points 34
13 Largest Lead 4
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Trey Murphy III
24 PTS · 6 REB · 1 AST · 36.9 MIN
+21.14
2
Saddiq Bey
17 PTS · 5 REB · 2 AST · 32.7 MIN
+19.21
3
Collin Gillespie
17 PTS · 7 REB · 7 AST · 31.5 MIN
+18.78
4
Yves Missi
4 PTS · 8 REB · 1 AST · 20.8 MIN
+17.42
5
Jordan Goodwin
16 PTS · 9 REB · 4 AST · 23.1 MIN
+15.77
6
Mark Williams
10 PTS · 8 REB · 0 AST · 10.6 MIN
+15.44
7
Zion Williamson
22 PTS · 4 REB · 0 AST · 29.0 MIN
+15.26
8
Derik Queen
21 PTS · 11 REB · 3 AST · 26.9 MIN
+13.64
9
Jamaree Bouyea
12 PTS · 3 REB · 0 AST · 11.8 MIN
+12.33
10
Dillon Brooks
18 PTS · 4 REB · 1 AST · 33.2 MIN
+11.74
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:06 J. Fears driving Layup (18 PTS) 123–114
Q4 0:18 D. Brooks Free Throw 1 of 1 (18 PTS) 123–112
Q4 0:18 T. Murphy III shooting personal FOUL (2 PF) (Brooks 1 FT) 122–112
Q4 0:18 D. Brooks driving Layup (17 PTS) 122–112
Q4 0:25 Z. Williamson personal FOUL (3 PF) 120–112
Q4 0:36 J. Fears Free Throw 2 of 2 (16 PTS) 120–112
Q4 0:36 J. Fears Free Throw 1 of 2 (15 PTS) 120–111
Q4 0:36 D. Brooks shooting personal FOUL (2 PF) (Fears 2 FT) 120–110
Q4 0:46 C. Gillespie driving Layup (17 PTS) 120–110
Q4 0:56 T. Murphy III Free Throw 2 of 2 (24 PTS) 118–110
Q4 0:56 T. Murphy III Free Throw 1 of 2 (23 PTS) 118–109
Q4 0:56 D. Booker loose ball personal FOUL (5 PF) (Murphy III 2 FT) 118–108
Q4 0:56 D. Booker lost ball TURNOVER (4 TO) 118–108
Q4 1:13 Z. Williamson bad pass out-of-bounds TURNOVER (4 TO) 118–108
Q4 1:26 R. O'Neale 26' 3PT (15 PTS) (C. Gillespie 7 AST) 118–108

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

NOP New Orleans Pelicans
S Trey Murphy III 36.9m
24
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+20.4

Lethal off-ball movement and elite floor spacing warped the opposing defensive shell all night. His gravity opened up driving lanes for teammates, while his length on the perimeter disrupted multiple passing lanes to secure a strong positive rating.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 6/9 (66.7%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 82.0%
USG% 17.8%
Net Rtg +1.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.9m
Scoring +20.1
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +5.8
Hustle +5.7
Defense -0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jeremiah Fears 33.6m
18
pts
8
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.9

Tunnel vision on drives and a refusal to kick the ball out led to a high volume of blocked or altered shots at the rim. The sheer number of wasted offensive possessions dragged his overall impact deeply into the negative despite his aggressive downhill mentality.

Shooting
FG 7/19 (36.8%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 43.4%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg -16.9
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.6m
Scoring +8.6
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +9.2
Defense -2.9
Turnovers -7.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 29.4%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
S Saddiq Bey 32.7m
17
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+14.9

Grinding out physical drives to the rim salvaged his value on a night where his perimeter stroke abandoned him. He maintained a net-positive influence by utilizing his frame to absorb contact and play stout positional defense.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 62.9%
USG% 15.9%
Net Rtg -8.8
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.7m
Scoring +12.4
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +3.4
Defense +4.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
S Derik Queen 26.9m
21
pts
11
reb
3
ast
Impact
+10.6

Bullied his way through the paint, using superior footwork to generate consistent interior advantages. His stout rim protection and ability to contest without fouling anchored the frontcourt during critical stretches.

Shooting
FG 7/15 (46.7%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 59.5%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg -6.0
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.9m
Scoring +14.2
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +3.7
Hustle +10.1
Defense +0.4
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 53.8%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 4
S Bryce McGowens 23.6m
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-17.8

Offensive rhythm completely flatlined as he forced heavily contested looks early in the shot clock. The resulting transition opportunities for the opponent severely punished his team, resulting in a catastrophic net rating.

Shooting
FG 0/5 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 10.2%
Net Rtg -10.2
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.6m
Scoring -4.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
22
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
+11.1

Unstoppable rim pressure forced the defense into constant rotation, generating high-quality looks every time he touched the paint. His surprisingly disciplined weak-side help defense ensured his dominant offensive efficiency translated to a winning margin.

Shooting
FG 8/11 (72.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 6/8 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 75.8%
USG% 26.1%
Net Rtg -11.3
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.0m
Scoring +18.9
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +3.2
Hustle +4.1
Defense +3.4
Turnovers -10.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 4
Yves Missi 20.8m
4
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+8.8

Completely altered the geometry of the game with terrifying rim deterrence and elite vertical contests. His astronomical defensive metrics reflect a dominant interior presence who erased opponent drives without needing offensive touches to impact winning.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 5.7%
Net Rtg -17.8
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.8m
Scoring +3.3
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +10.2
Defense +4.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 2
BLK 4
TO 0
7
pts
0
reb
3
ast
Impact
-2.0

Trademark backcourt harassment disrupted the opponent's offensive initiation and burned crucial seconds off the shot clock. This relentless point-of-attack pressure yielded a slight positive edge during his energetic rotation minutes.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 21.2%
Net Rtg +6.0
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.4m
Scoring +3.9
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +0.0
Defense +3.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
Jordan Poole 13.6m
1
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
-10.8

Errant decision-making and rushed perimeter chucks completely derailed the second unit's offensive flow. A lack of situational awareness on offense negated the surprisingly decent defensive effort he showed on the perimeter.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 14.5%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg -8.6
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.6m
Scoring -1.3
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-12.2

Rushed his few offensive opportunities, resulting in empty trips that stalled momentum. While he battled admirably on the defensive end, his inability to capitalize on open space kept his overall rating submerged.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg -44.4
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.5m
Scoring -1.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +1.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
PHX Phoenix Suns
S Devin Booker 34.1m
20
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-7.6

A disastrous overall rating was fueled by forced isolation attempts and a heavy volume of clanked mid-range pull-ups. His inability to stay in front of dribble penetration compounded the offensive struggles, bleeding points on both ends of the floor.

Shooting
FG 6/18 (33.3%)
3PT 3/9 (33.3%)
FT 5/8 (62.5%)
Advanced
TS% 46.5%
USG% 27.2%
Net Rtg -1.7
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.1m
Scoring +10.1
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +4.6
Hustle +0.9
Defense -5.3
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
S Dillon Brooks 33.2m
18
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+7.5

Shot selection proved to be his undoing, as a barrage of contested perimeter misses negated his otherwise sturdy point-of-attack defense. The negative overall impact stems directly from wasted offensive possessions rather than defensive lapses.

Shooting
FG 7/18 (38.9%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 46.6%
USG% 23.5%
Net Rtg +5.9
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.2m
Scoring +9.5
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +4.1
Hustle +3.1
Defense +2.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Royce O'Neale 33.0m
15
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.9

Despite elite floor-spacing value and highly efficient perimeter execution, hidden mistakes cratered his overall rating. Costly live-ball turnovers and transition fouls wiped out the value of his spot-up gravity.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 5/8 (62.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 12.9%
Net Rtg +13.2
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.0m
Scoring +12.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +4.8
Hustle +1.5
Defense -2.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 47.1%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
17
pts
7
reb
7
ast
Impact
+17.2

Relentless ball pressure and exceptional rotational awareness defined a massive two-way performance. His astronomical defensive and hustle metrics reflect a guard who consistently blew up opponent handoffs and generated extra possessions through sheer effort.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 5/7 (71.4%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.7%
USG% 20.8%
Net Rtg +17.7
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.5m
Scoring +10.9
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +5.2
Hustle +8.9
Defense +4.7
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 47.1%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S Oso Ighodaro 28.9m
8
pts
10
reb
4
ast
Impact
+2.6

Flawless execution around the rim and disciplined roll-man mechanics drove a highly efficient stint. He anchored the interior without demanding touches, generating positive value through timely screens and vertical spacing.

Shooting
FG 4/4 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 8.7%
Net Rtg +26.2
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.9m
Scoring +8.0
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +12.7
Defense -3.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 31.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
16
pts
9
reb
4
ast
Impact
+10.5

Downhill aggression and secondary playmaking kept the second unit's offense humming during crucial rotation shifts. Even with a few forced drives into traffic, his ability to collapse the paint yielded a strong positive return.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.1%
USG% 23.2%
Net Rtg -4.5
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.1m
Scoring +10.6
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +10.5
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
5
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-12.6

Settling for contested perimeter jumpers rather than attacking closeouts severely damaged his offensive rating. The lack of defensive resistance failed to compensate for the empty possessions he accumulated on the other end.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 31.7%
USG% 19.0%
Net Rtg +11.7
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.2m
Scoring -0.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +0.0
Defense -2.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
12
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+3.9

Provided an instant spark by decisively attacking gaps in the drop coverage and converting at an elite clip. His flawless shot selection maximized every touch during a highly productive burst off the bench.

Shooting
FG 5/6 (83.3%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg +24.0
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.8m
Scoring +11.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +1.9
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
-12.6

Complete offensive passivity made it impossible to play 5-on-5, allowing defenders to freely roam off him to double others. While he didn't make glaring mistakes, his failure to even look at the rim effectively stalled the offensive flow.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 6.5%
Net Rtg +10.1
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.9m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +3.8
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
10
pts
8
reb
0
ast
Impact
+7.2

Dominated his brief stint by establishing deep post position and punishing smaller matchups inside. The sheer volume of high-percentage looks he generated in tight windows completely overwhelmed the opposing frontcourt.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.6%
USG% 27.8%
Net Rtg -57.1
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.6m
Scoring +5.9
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +10.2
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.8

Struggled to anchor the pick-and-roll defense during a brief stint, frequently getting caught in no-man's land. Despite converting his only look, defensive miscommunications dragged his overall impact into the red.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +17.6
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.7m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1