GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

UTA Utah Jazz
5
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
-20.9

A disastrous overall performance (-20.9 impact) was defined by forced, low-quality perimeter shots that completely derailed the offense. Coming off a hot streak, his sudden inability to create separation resulted in empty possessions that fed directly into opponent transition runs.

Shooting
FG 2/9 (22.2%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 27.8%
USG% 12.6%
Net Rtg -11.6
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.3m
Offense -0.5
Hustle +2.2
Defense -0.2
Raw total +1.5
Avg player in 39.3m -22.4
Impact -20.9
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Keyonte George 38.5m
37
pts
6
reb
7
ast
Impact
+11.2

Explosive shot-making from all three levels drove a dominant offensive showing that overwhelmed the opposing backcourt. His ability to break down primary defenders in isolation consistently warped the defense, creating a massive net positive impact.

Shooting
FG 13/24 (54.2%)
3PT 6/12 (50.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 69.4%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg +11.4
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.5m
Offense +26.5
Hustle +1.9
Defense +4.8
Raw total +33.2
Avg player in 38.5m -22.0
Impact +11.2
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Lauri Markkanen 38.3m
22
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.8

Despite struggling to find his rhythm from the floor, a stellar defensive effort (+8.4 impact) salvaged his night. He used his length effectively to disrupt passing lanes and generated crucial extra possessions through active, high-motor hustle.

Shooting
FG 6/16 (37.5%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 8/8 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.4%
USG% 21.1%
Net Rtg +18.5
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.3m
Offense +16.3
Hustle +2.9
Defense +8.4
Raw total +27.6
Avg player in 38.3m -21.8
Impact +5.8
How is this calculated?
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
S Jusuf Nurkić 33.8m
26
pts
8
reb
8
ast
Impact
+12.0

Near-perfect shot selection and dominant interior positioning fueled a massive positive impact rating. He systematically dismantled the opposing frontcourt with bruising screens and flawless finishing out of the pick-and-roll.

Shooting
FG 10/11 (90.9%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 98.5%
USG% 21.3%
Net Rtg +17.2
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.8m
Offense +26.9
Hustle +2.7
Defense +1.7
Raw total +31.3
Avg player in 33.8m -19.3
Impact +12.0
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
3
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-5.1

An ongoing slump in shot creation continues to drag down his overall value. While he offered some resistance on the defensive end, his inability to capitalize on open spot-up opportunities crippled the offense's spacing and stalled momentum.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 9.1%
Net Rtg +2.6
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.4m
Offense +1.4
Hustle +1.6
Defense +1.9
Raw total +4.9
Avg player in 17.4m -10.0
Impact -5.1
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
7
pts
6
reb
8
ast
Impact
-4.3

Despite efficient shooting, his overall impact slipped into the red due to defensive miscommunications and poor ball security. He struggled to navigate screens at the point of attack, giving up easy penetration that compromised the team's defensive shell.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 70.0%
USG% 12.1%
Net Rtg -27.8
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.2m
Offense +7.0
Hustle +1.4
Defense +1.2
Raw total +9.6
Avg player in 24.2m -13.9
Impact -4.3
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
7
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-6.1

Defensive liabilities and poor perimeter shot selection overshadowed his otherwise solid hustle metrics. He was frequently targeted in isolation, bleeding points on one end while failing to stretch the floor effectively on the other.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 14.6%
Net Rtg -39.0
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.9m
Offense +4.3
Hustle +2.5
Defense -1.1
Raw total +5.7
Avg player in 20.9m -11.8
Impact -6.1
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
10
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.1

A sharp drop in offensive volume and efficiency from his recent hot streak dragged his impact into the negative. He settled for contested outside looks rather than establishing deep post position, effectively bailing out smaller defenders.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.2%
USG% 30.8%
Net Rtg -52.4
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.2m
Offense +2.4
Hustle +1.2
Defense +0.3
Raw total +3.9
Avg player in 14.2m -8.0
Impact -4.1
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.8

A stark regression from his recent scoring tear left him as a severe minus (-8.8 impact) on the floor. He looked hesitant attacking the paint and failed to generate any meaningful rim pressure, allowing the defense to completely ignore him in the half-court.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.8%
USG% 13.9%
Net Rtg -55.6
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.4m
Offense -2.4
Hustle +1.7
Defense -0.4
Raw total -1.1
Avg player in 13.4m -7.7
Impact -8.8
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
BOS Boston Celtics
S Derrick White 36.3m
27
pts
7
reb
6
ast
Impact
+18.8

A staggering two-way masterclass was defined by suffocating point-of-attack defense (+11.7 impact) that completely derailed the opposing backcourt. Even with a cold perimeter stroke, his aggressive downhill drives and relentless ball-pressure dictated the game's tempo and fueled a massive overall rating.

Shooting
FG 8/16 (50.0%)
3PT 2/10 (20.0%)
FT 9/9 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.6%
USG% 24.7%
Net Rtg +0.6
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.3m
Offense +23.8
Hustle +4.0
Defense +11.7
Raw total +39.5
Avg player in 36.3m -20.7
Impact +18.8
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 7
TO 1
18
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
-0.0

Heavy volume from beyond the arc yielded poor returns, neutralizing his otherwise solid offensive creation. His perfectly flat net impact reflects the tug-of-war between his steady playmaking and the empty possessions caused by forced, contested perimeter jumpers.

Shooting
FG 8/15 (53.3%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.3%
USG% 19.5%
Net Rtg +1.4
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.4m
Offense +16.0
Hustle +0.8
Defense +3.4
Raw total +20.2
Avg player in 35.4m -20.2
Impact -0.0
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Jaylen Brown 33.6m
23
pts
6
reb
10
ast
Impact
+5.4

A massive defensive rating (+6.4 impact) anchored his positive value despite a dip from his recent elite scoring volume. He consistently blew up opponent pick-and-roll actions and created transition opportunities through high-level hustle.

Shooting
FG 9/19 (47.4%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 53.1%
USG% 30.8%
Net Rtg +1.0
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.6m
Offense +15.6
Hustle +2.5
Defense +6.4
Raw total +24.5
Avg player in 33.6m -19.1
Impact +5.4
How is this calculated?
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S Neemias Queta 28.7m
12
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+4.8

Elite interior finishing and stout rim protection (+6.0 defensive impact) drove a highly efficient two-way performance. His relentless rim-running and high-motor hustle plays punished defensive rotations, continuing a dominant streak of high-percentage execution.

Shooting
FG 6/7 (85.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 85.7%
USG% 12.7%
Net Rtg -10.7
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.7m
Offense +10.8
Hustle +4.4
Defense +6.0
Raw total +21.2
Avg player in 28.7m -16.4
Impact +4.8
How is this calculated?
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 1
S Jordan Walsh 13.3m
6
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.9

A quiet rotational stint yielded a negative overall impact (-2.9) largely due to defensive breakdowns on the perimeter. While he hit a couple of timely shots, his inability to disrupt passing lanes or generate secondary hustle plays left the second unit vulnerable during his stretches.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 61.5%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg -28.0
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.3m
Offense +4.5
Hustle +0.4
Defense -0.2
Raw total +4.7
Avg player in 13.3m -7.6
Impact -2.9
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
20
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
+2.3

Volatile shot selection skewed heavily toward the perimeter, limiting his offensive ceiling despite some timely shot-making. However, surprisingly sharp defensive rotations (+3.5 impact) and a knack for finding the open man off drives kept his overall rating in the green.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 4/10 (40.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.7%
USG% 26.1%
Net Rtg +43.4
+/- +27
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.0m
Offense +14.0
Hustle +0.8
Defense +3.5
Raw total +18.3
Avg player in 28.0m -16.0
Impact +2.3
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Luka Garza 18.5m
15
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
+12.4

Ruthless offensive execution drove a massive positive impact rating during his short stint on the floor. He consistently abused mismatches in the post and stretched the defense flawlessly, punishing drop coverages every time he touched the ball.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 88.9%
USG% 15.7%
Net Rtg +27.9
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.5m
Offense +20.0
Hustle +1.4
Defense +1.6
Raw total +23.0
Avg player in 18.5m -10.6
Impact +12.4
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
3
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.2

High-energy hustle plays (+2.9 impact) weren't enough to rescue a negative overall rating. His total lack of offensive aggression allowed defenders to sag off and clog the paint, severely disrupting the team's half-court flow during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 7.0%
Net Rtg +20.6
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.5m
Offense +1.9
Hustle +2.9
Defense +0.9
Raw total +5.7
Avg player in 17.5m -9.9
Impact -4.2
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Sam Hauser 17.2m
5
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.5

A brutal shooting slump from deep cratered his overall value and stalled the second-unit offense. Without his usual gravity pulling defenders to the perimeter, spacing evaporated, and his minimal hustle contributions couldn't offset the string of empty possessions.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 31.3%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg +12.6
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.2m
Offense +1.0
Hustle +0.2
Defense +1.1
Raw total +2.3
Avg player in 17.2m -9.8
Impact -7.5
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.7

Complete offensive invisibility and poor defensive positioning (-1.6 impact) severely tanked his rating. He repeatedly passed up open looks and frequently lost his man on backdoor cuts, making him a clear liability during his brief run.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 3.8%
Net Rtg +18.4
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.6m
Offense -1.9
Hustle +1.4
Defense -1.6
Raw total -2.1
Avg player in 11.6m -6.6
Impact -8.7
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1