Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
OKC lead POR lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
POR 2P — 3P —
OKC 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 177 attempts

POR POR Shot-making Δ

Sharpe 5/17 -8.1
Avdija 5/14 -4.1
Love Hard 4/12 -2.8
Cissoko Hard 7/10 +8.2
Camara Hard 2/7 -1.9
Rupert 1/6 -4.5
Murray 3/5 +1.9
Clingan Open 2/5 -1.2
Williams III Open 4/4 +2.4
Hansen Hard 1/4 -0.8

OKC OKC Shot-making Δ

Gilgeous-Alexander Open 11/15 +5.7
Williams Open 6/13 -3.8
Joe Hard 5/10 +4.2
Dort Hard 4/10 +1.4
Holmgren 5/10 +0.4
Carlson 5/9 +2.0
Wallace Hard 2/5 -0.4
Williams 1/5 -3.7
Wiggins Hard 0/5 -5.1
Mitchell 4/4 +4.8
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
POR
OKC
34/87 Field Goals 44/90
39.1% Field Goal % 48.9%
14/35 3-Pointers 16/49
40.0% 3-Point % 32.7%
13/17 Free Throws 20/26
76.5% Free Throw % 76.9%
50.3% True Shooting % 61.1%
59 Total Rebounds 52
12 Offensive 5
38 Defensive 36
20 Assists 29
0.80 Assist/TO Ratio 1.93
24 Turnovers 14
10 Steals 15
3 Blocks 10
21 Fouls 18
34 Points in Paint 52
12 Fast Break Pts 25
17 Points off TOs 28
17 Second Chance Pts 17
33 Bench Points 52
3 Largest Lead 31
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander
30 PTS · 2 REB · 6 AST · 28.6 MIN
+37.32
2
Ajay Mitchell
17 PTS · 6 REB · 3 AST · 23.2 MIN
+19.81
3
Robert Williams III
8 PTS · 8 REB · 0 AST · 16.2 MIN
+15.96
4
Jalen Williams
13 PTS · 7 REB · 7 AST · 25.7 MIN
+14.43
5
Chet Holmgren
12 PTS · 10 REB · 1 AST · 24.7 MIN
+12.28
6
Sidy Cissoko
19 PTS · 1 REB · 2 AST · 27.2 MIN
+11.53
7
Luguentz Dort
12 PTS · 2 REB · 1 AST · 24.8 MIN
+9.56
8
Isaiah Joe
15 PTS · 1 REB · 1 AST · 19.4 MIN
+9.18
9
Kris Murray
10 PTS · 3 REB · 1 AST · 25.8 MIN
+6.51
10
Branden Carlson
12 PTS · 7 REB · 1 AST · 19.7 MIN
+6.32
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:00 OKC shot clock Team TURNOVER 95–124
Q4 0:22 B. Carlson REBOUND (Off:1 Def:6) 95–124
Q4 0:25 MISS Yang 13' pullup bank Shot 95–124
Q4 0:40 C. Youngblood loose ball personal FOUL (1 PF) 95–124
Q4 0:40 TEAM offensive REBOUND 95–124
Q4 0:43 MISS C. Love 26' 3PT 95–124
Q4 0:45 Yang REBOUND (Off:1 Def:4) 95–124
Q4 0:48 MISS D. Reath driving Layup 95–124
Q4 0:59 R. Rupert REBOUND (Off:1 Def:3) 95–124
Q4 1:01 MISS C. Youngblood 3PT 95–124
Q4 1:13 C. Love driving DUNK (10 PTS) 95–124
Q4 1:21 Yang REBOUND (Off:0 Def:4) 93–124
Q4 1:25 MISS K. Williams 26' pullup 3PT 93–124
Q4 1:33 I. Joe REBOUND (Off:0 Def:1) 93–124
Q4 1:35 MISS D. Reath 7' turnaround Hook 93–124

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

Why this game is worth arguing about

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

OKC Oklahoma City Thunder
30
pts
2
reb
6
ast
Impact
+39.1

An absolute masterclass in offensive efficiency drove an astronomical Box score (+30.1) and total impact (+29.0). Slicing through the defense at will, his near-perfect shot selection was paired with excellent defensive metrics (+8.7). He completely controlled the pace and outcome of the game, operating as an unstoppable force on both ends of the floor.

Shooting
FG 11/15 (73.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 83.0%
USG% 26.1%
Net Rtg +34.9
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.6m
Scoring +26.9
Creation +4.4
Shot Making +4.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense +6.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 0
S Cason Wallace 26.5m
5
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-7.7

A sharp drop in offensive production and reluctance to shoot tanked his total impact (-6.1) despite positive underlying metrics. His poor perimeter efficiency limited the team's spacing, neutralizing the value of his solid hustle (+3.4) and defensive (+1.8) contributions. The lack of scoring gravity ultimately hurt the overall offensive flow during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 9.2%
Net Rtg +23.1
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.5m
Scoring +2.7
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jalen Williams 25.7m
13
pts
7
reb
7
ast
Impact
+4.5

Elite defensive metrics (+7.8) and high-level hustle (+6.3) drove a stellar overall impact (+8.0). Despite struggling from deep, his ability to score inside the arc and disrupt the opponent's offense fueled a strong Box score (+7.5). His two-way versatility was on full display, impacting winning through effort and execution rather than raw scoring volume.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 48.4%
USG% 24.2%
Net Rtg +21.0
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.7m
Scoring +6.9
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +2.1
Defense +5.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
S Luguentz Dort 24.8m
12
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
+3.2

A heavy diet of three-pointers paid off, driving a strong Box score (+7.6) and breaking him out of a recent scoring slump. Combined with his trademark physical defense (+4.3) and relentless hustle (+4.6), his floor-spacing provided a solid positive impact (+3.4). He embraced his role as a 3-and-D enforcer perfectly, launching exclusively from beyond the arc.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 4/10 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 17.2%
Net Rtg +20.4
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.8m
Scoring +7.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.7
Hustle +0.6
Defense +1.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
S Chet Holmgren 24.7m
12
pts
10
reb
1
ast
Impact
+11.3

Generational defensive impact (+15.9) and off-the-charts hustle (+10.2) resulted in a massive total rating (+15.4). He completely locked down the paint, altering shots and dominating the glass, which far outweighed a modest offensive output. Operating as an absolute terror in drop coverage, his rim protection was the defining feature of the game.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 55.1%
USG% 24.6%
Net Rtg +53.0
+/- +29
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.7m
Scoring +8.0
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +10.8
Defense +7.4
Turnovers -10.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 26.7%
STL 2
BLK 6
TO 4
17
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
+16.7

Flawless shooting efficiency drove a massive Box score (+16.4) and stellar total impact (+12.8). Capitalizing on every single offensive touch, his perfect shot selection was paired with strong defensive value (+5.8). He operated as a highly effective weapon, maximizing his minutes through sheer offensive perfection.

Shooting
FG 4/4 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 8/8 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 113.0%
USG% 15.3%
Net Rtg +35.4
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.2m
Scoring +17.0
Creation +2.0
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +6.7
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
2
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.7

Snapping a streak of highly efficient games, a complete offensive disappearing act cratered his Box score (-5.2) and total impact (-8.5). Missing all of his attempts from the field completely negated excellent defensive metrics (+5.9) and solid hustle (+2.5). The stark contrast between his defensive value and offensive void defined his frustrating night.

Shooting
FG 0/5 (0.0%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 14.8%
USG% 14.5%
Net Rtg +39.2
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.0m
Scoring -2.9
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +4.7
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
12
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+6.4

A massive surge in scoring efficiency compared to recent outings drove a solid Box score (+4.7). Hitting a couple of threes stretched the floor effectively, complementing his surprisingly strong defensive metrics (+4.3). He capitalized perfectly on increased opportunity to deliver a positive overall impact, breaking out of a severe shooting slump.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 60.7%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +11.9
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.7m
Scoring +7.8
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +8.9
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
Isaiah Joe 19.4m
15
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.7

Elite perimeter spacing fueled a strong Box score (+11.4) and kept his total impact positive (+0.9). Launching exclusively from beyond the arc, his offensive gravity masked subpar defensive (-0.7) and hustle (+0.4) metrics. He functioned purely as a floor-stretching specialist, punishing the defense for any lapses in coverage.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 5/10 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 20.4%
Net Rtg +18.4
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.4m
Scoring +10.9
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +4.7
Hustle +0.3
Defense -2.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
-6.1

Continued struggles with shooting efficiency dragged his Box score (-1.6) and total impact (-2.4) into the red. Solid defensive metrics (+3.8) couldn't offset the damage done by missing multiple perimeter looks. His inability to provide any reliable offensive value severely limited his effectiveness during a short stint.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.5%
USG% 22.6%
Net Rtg +40.7
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.0m
Scoring -0.6
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
3
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.5

Strong defensive rotations (+2.8) kept his impact near neutral (-0.1) during a very brief stint. Limited offensive involvement resulted in a negligible Box score (+0.5), as he barely factored into the scoring equation. He provided his standard perimeter disruption but simply didn't play enough minutes to swing the game.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 13.6%
Net Rtg +5.0
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.6m
Scoring +2.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.3
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.3

A brief, empty shift resulted in negative metrics across the board, culminating in a -3.2 total impact. Missing his only attempts and failing to register defensively made him a complete non-factor. He couldn't replicate his recent efficiency, failing to make a mark during his limited garbage-time minutes.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +20.0
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.9m
Scoring -1.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
POR Portland Trail Blazers
S Toumani Camara 33.5m
6
pts
7
reb
4
ast
Impact
-15.6

A severe offensive regression from his recent hot streak tanked his overall impact (-18.6). Inability to finish inside the arc dragged down his Box score, neutralizing the value of his typically strong hustle plays (+3.3). The stark drop-off in scoring efficiency completely derailed his overall effectiveness.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 38.1%
USG% 14.8%
Net Rtg -33.2
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.5m
Scoring +1.1
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +4.0
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -12.6
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 73.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 5
S Deni Avdija 31.9m
17
pts
7
reb
7
ast
Impact
-3.0

Elite defensive rotations and a relentless motor (+6.7 Hustle) were completely undone by poor shot selection. Clanking away on high volume dragged his Box score into the negative, pulling his total impact down to -4.3. The stark contrast between his defensive intensity and offensive inefficiency defined the outing.

Shooting
FG 5/14 (35.7%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 6/7 (85.7%)
Advanced
TS% 49.8%
USG% 28.9%
Net Rtg -31.9
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.9m
Scoring +10.1
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +2.1
Defense +3.7
Turnovers -16.6
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 7
S Shaedon Sharpe 28.4m
14
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.8

Brutal shooting efficiency cratered his overall impact (-5.7) despite excellent defensive metrics (+7.3). Forcing contested looks rather than letting the offense flow resulted in a negative Box score. While his athleticism translated to strong defensive stops, operating as an offensive black hole negated those gains.

Shooting
FG 5/17 (29.4%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 37.3%
USG% 29.3%
Net Rtg -32.2
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.4m
Scoring +6.3
Creation +2.1
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +1.2
Defense +6.2
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 11.1%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 3
S Sidy Cissoko 27.2m
19
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.2

A massive perimeter shooting explosion completely flipped his recent offensive slump, driving a stellar Box score (+12.9). Knocking down a barrage of triples stretched the floor in ways he rarely provides, anchoring a positive overall impact. The sudden offensive eruption masked a relatively quiet defensive night.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 5/7 (71.4%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 95.0%
USG% 17.8%
Net Rtg -37.8
+/- -21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.2m
Scoring +16.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +5.7
Hustle +1.3
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -8.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
S Donovan Clingan 17.4m
6
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.9

Rim protection and active rotations kept his defensive metrics (+2.5) firmly in the green during a brief stint. Stepping out to hit a rare perimeter shot buoyed his Box score, but limited overall volume prevented him from making a larger dent. Ultimately, a lack of paint dominance resulted in a slightly negative total impact (-0.6).

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.0%
USG% 15.9%
Net Rtg -68.8
+/- -29
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.4m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +5.4
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 13
Opp FG% 68.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Caleb Love 30.1m
10
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
-3.5

Taking on a significantly larger offensive workload only amplified his struggles with shot selection, tanking his total impact (-6.7). Strong defensive metrics (+6.8) and active hustle couldn't overcome the damage done by forcing low-quality perimeter looks. The increased volume ultimately hurt the team's offensive flow.

Shooting
FG 4/12 (33.3%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 19.5%
Net Rtg -14.9
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.1m
Scoring +3.8
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +1.5
Defense +3.7
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 3
Kris Murray 25.8m
10
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.1

Highly efficient opportunistic scoring boosted his Box score (+8.2), capitalizing perfectly on limited touches. However, a complete lack of defensive resistance (-0.7) and minimal hustle (+0.2) dragged his total impact deep into the red (-6.0). He provided an offensive spark but gave it all back on the other end.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 85.0%
USG% 10.3%
Net Rtg -8.7
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.8m
Scoring +8.2
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +3.8
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
8
pts
8
reb
0
ast
Impact
+12.0

Flawless finishing around the rim drove a massive Box score (+13.4) and a stellar overall impact (+10.4). Continuing a streak of hyper-efficient interior play, he paired perfect shot selection with strong defensive anchoring (+4.6). He maximized every minute of his brief stint by dominating the paint on both ends.

Shooting
FG 4/4 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 9.3%
Net Rtg +14.3
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.2m
Scoring +8.0
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +10.2
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
Rayan Rupert 12.1m
2
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.6

Continuing a troubling trend of offensive inefficiency, his inability to find a rhythm dragged his total impact to -3.6. Clanking multiple looks negated his modest defensive (+1.2) and hustle (+1.9) contributions. The complete lack of scoring punch made him a liability during his brief rotation minutes.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 16.7%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg -40.1
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.1m
Scoring -1.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +4.1
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Hansen Yang 10.8m
3
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.9

Solid defensive positioning (+2.9) kept his impact positive (+1.2) despite a noticeable dip in offensive efficiency. Hitting a perimeter shot salvaged a positive Box score (+2.1) on a night where his interior finishing abandoned him. He managed to provide value through effort and rotations rather than scoring.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg -17.9
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.8m
Scoring +0.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +2.5
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Duop Reath 6.5m
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.7

A completely empty offensive shift tanked his Box score (-4.4) and overall impact (-4.0). Missing all of his attempts in a short stint completely negated a surprisingly solid defensive rating (+3.0). He failed to capitalize on his brief opportunity, acting as an offensive zero while on the floor.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 23.5%
Net Rtg -24.8
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.5m
Scoring -2.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1