Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
MIL lead CHA lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
CHA 2P — 3P —
MIL 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 169 attempts

CHA CHA Shot-making Δ

Bridges 8/17 +2.6
Knueppel 9/16 +4.1
Miller Hard 6/15 +0.9
Ball Hard 4/12 -0.9
Sexton 5/8 +2.9
Salaün Hard 4/5 +4.6
James 3/4 +2.2
Hall Open 1/4 -3.0
Green Hard 0/1 -1.1

MIL MIL Shot-making Δ

Antetokounmpo Open 11/18 +1.1
Porter Jr. 4/14 -6.2
Rollins 11/13 +14.1
Green Hard 4/13 -1.6
Portis Hard 7/11 +6.7
Kuzma Hard 7/10 +6.5
Turner Hard 0/4 -3.5
Trent Jr. Hard 0/3 -3.1
Sims Open 1/1 +0.6
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
CHA
MIL
40/82 Field Goals 45/87
48.8% Field Goal % 51.7%
18/40 3-Pointers 16/37
45.0% 3-Point % 43.2%
23/28 Free Throws 16/18
82.1% Free Throw % 88.9%
64.1% True Shooting % 64.3%
47 Total Rebounds 45
8 Offensive 8
31 Defensive 28
27 Assists 31
1.93 Assist/TO Ratio 2.82
14 Turnovers 11
5 Steals 7
3 Blocks 4
18 Fouls 23
38 Points in Paint 48
14 Fast Break Pts 16
13 Points off TOs 13
14 Second Chance Pts 13
35 Bench Points 40
16 Largest Lead 3
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Ryan Rollins
29 PTS · 4 REB · 8 AST · 37.0 MIN
+37.11
2
Giannis Antetokounmpo
30 PTS · 10 REB · 5 AST · 29.8 MIN
+27.64
3
Bobby Portis
20 PTS · 6 REB · 1 AST · 22.4 MIN
+17.16
4
Kon Knueppel
26 PTS · 4 REB · 3 AST · 33.8 MIN
+14.38
5
LaMelo Ball
12 PTS · 2 REB · 7 AST · 25.9 MIN
+13.98
6
Miles Bridges
25 PTS · 6 REB · 2 AST · 36.6 MIN
+13.49
7
Collin Sexton
16 PTS · 0 REB · 6 AST · 27.3 MIN
+12.46
8
Sion James
7 PTS · 6 REB · 3 AST · 27.2 MIN
+11.94
9
Tidjane Salaün
12 PTS · 4 REB · 1 AST · 22.1 MIN
+11.48
10
Kyle Kuzma
18 PTS · 6 REB · 1 AST · 32.0 MIN
+10.33
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:00 TEAM offensive REBOUND 121–122
Q4 0:00 MISS B. Miller driving finger roll Layup 121–122
Q4 0:04 G. Antetokounmpo alley-oop DUNK (30 PTS) (K. Porter Jr. 10 AST) 121–122
Q4 0:08 M. Bridges Free Throw 1 of 1 (25 PTS) 121–120
Q4 0:08 K. Kuzma shooting personal FOUL (6 PF) (Bridges 1 FT) 120–120
Q4 0:08 M. Bridges alley-oop Layup (24 PTS) (S. James 3 AST) 120–120
Q4 0:10 K. Kuzma 27' 3PT (18 PTS) (R. Rollins 8 AST) 118–120
Q4 0:29 M. Bridges driving finger roll Layup (22 PTS) (L. Ball 7 AST) 118–117
Q4 0:45 R. Rollins 25' 3PT pullup (29 PTS) (G. Antetokounmpo 5 AST) 116–117
Q4 0:52 G. Antetokounmpo REBOUND (Off:2 Def:8) 116–114
Q4 0:55 MISS B. Miller 26' 3PT 116–114
Q4 1:12 M. Bridges REBOUND (Off:0 Def:6) 116–114
Q4 1:16 MISS A. Green 3PT 116–114
Q4 1:34 B. Miller offensive foul TURNOVER (5 TO) 116–114
Q4 1:34 B. Miller offensive FOUL (4 PF) 116–114

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

MIL Milwaukee Bucks
S AJ Green 40.7m
12
pts
0
reb
3
ast
Impact
-9.7

A brutal combination of heavy minutes and poor shot selection cratered his overall metrics. Continually forcing contested looks early in the shot clock derailed the team's offensive rhythm and allowed the opposition to leak out in transition.

Shooting
FG 4/13 (30.8%)
3PT 3/10 (30.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 43.2%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg +4.7
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 40.7m
Scoring +4.2
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +0.0
Defense -2.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Ryan Rollins 37.0m
29
pts
4
reb
8
ast
Impact
+35.2

Delivered a masterclass in offensive efficiency, punishing drop coverage with lethal precision from beyond the arc. His phenomenal two-way performance was punctuated by relentless on-ball pressure that completely disrupted the opponent's initiation sequences.

Shooting
FG 11/13 (84.6%)
3PT 6/7 (85.7%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 107.9%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +18.8
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.0m
Scoring +27.6
Creation +2.2
Shot Making +7.8
Hustle +4.1
Defense +6.7
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 1
10
pts
4
reb
10
ast
Impact
-6.5

Errant perimeter shooting and forced playmaking attempts into traffic severely undermined his value as a primary initiator. Despite showing solid engagement on the defensive end, his wasted possessions on offense stalled out multiple potential runs.

Shooting
FG 4/14 (28.6%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 33.6%
USG% 18.6%
Net Rtg -2.0
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.0m
Scoring +2.9
Creation +2.0
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +2.2
Defense -0.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
30
pts
10
reb
5
ast
Impact
+28.6

Utterly dominated the restricted area by leveraging his physical tools to overwhelm primary defenders and force constant double-teams. His gravity in the paint warped the opposing scheme, while his active hands in the passing lanes fueled a highly disruptive defensive showing.

Shooting
FG 11/18 (61.1%)
3PT 0/0
FT 8/8 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.7%
USG% 36.4%
Net Rtg +32.2
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.8m
Scoring +25.6
Creation +3.5
Shot Making +4.2
Hustle +12.7
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -7.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Myles Turner 22.4m
1
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-9.5

Completely neutralized as a pick-and-pop threat, which severely clogged the driving lanes for his guards. While he offered some resistance at the rim, his inability to stretch the floor made the half-court offense painfully stagnant.

Shooting
FG 0/4 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 10.2%
USG% 8.9%
Net Rtg +12.2
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.4m
Scoring -2.2
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +3.1
Defense +0.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
Kyle Kuzma 32.0m
18
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.2

Found a great rhythm as a secondary scorer by exploiting mismatches in the mid-post, yet his overall impact hovered in the red. Frequent defensive lapses off the ball, including losing cutters back-door, negated much of his highly efficient offensive output.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 86.2%
USG% 17.4%
Net Rtg -6.9
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.0m
Scoring +15.7
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +4.4
Hustle +2.8
Defense -8.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Bobby Portis 22.4m
20
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+13.0

Provided a massive scoring punch off the bench by consistently finding the soft spots in the opponent's zone coverage. His willingness to battle for positioning on the block also translated to a surprisingly stout defensive performance against bigger matchups.

Shooting
FG 7/11 (63.6%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 84.2%
USG% 30.4%
Net Rtg -21.7
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.4m
Scoring +17.1
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +5.3
Hustle +5.7
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
0
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-15.7

Looked completely out of sync offensively, rushing his mechanics and failing to capitalize on open spot-up opportunities. His lack of secondary contributions meant that when the jumper wasn't falling, he became an active detriment to the lineup.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg -48.4
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.4m
Scoring -2.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-14.5

Struggled to anchor the paint during a very brief rotational stint, getting sealed off too easily by opposing bigs. His lack of spatial awareness in drop coverage allowed easy floaters that quickly pushed his net impact negative.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 40.0%
Net Rtg -185.0
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.3m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -3.1
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
CHA Charlotte Hornets
S Miles Bridges 36.6m
25
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.4

Relentless energy on the margins fueled a highly positive showing, highlighted by a massive hustle rating that kept possessions alive. His two-way engagement was evident as he paired aggressive downhill drives with sharp defensive rotations to anchor the forward spot.

Shooting
FG 8/17 (47.1%)
3PT 5/10 (50.0%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.1%
USG% 24.7%
Net Rtg -30.3
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.6m
Scoring +17.7
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +5.8
Hustle +1.8
Defense -2.3
Turnovers -5.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 21
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 38.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Kon Knueppel 33.8m
26
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+8.4

High-volume scoring output masked underlying defensive liabilities that dragged his overall impact into the red. Despite finding an excellent rhythm from the perimeter, his inability to string together stops at the point of attack allowed opponents to easily match his production.

Shooting
FG 9/16 (56.2%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 5/7 (71.4%)
Advanced
TS% 68.1%
USG% 26.6%
Net Rtg -2.8
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.8m
Scoring +20.0
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +5.4
Hustle +2.2
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Brandon Miller 30.3m
19
pts
7
reb
4
ast
Impact
-4.3

Forced isolations and contested mid-range jumpers severely hampered his offensive efficiency, resulting in a steep negative overall impact. While he generated some decent looks, the overall shot diet was too heavily skewed toward low-yield attempts against set defenses.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 4/7 (57.1%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.7%
USG% 29.3%
Net Rtg -13.1
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.3m
Scoring +11.7
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +4.5
Hustle +6.0
Defense -2.2
Turnovers -12.6
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 61.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 5
S LaMelo Ball 25.9m
12
pts
2
reb
7
ast
Impact
+4.5

An uncharacteristically quiet scoring night was salvaged by elite defensive engagement and excellent floor mapping. By shifting his focus away from forcing his own shot, he managed to control the game's tempo and generate high-quality looks for his wings.

Shooting
FG 4/12 (33.3%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.6%
USG% 19.7%
Net Rtg -21.6
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.9m
Scoring +6.2
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense +4.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
S PJ Hall 18.9m
4
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.0

Offensive struggles were completely offset by exceptional rim-protection and positional awareness on the other end. He functioned as a crucial defensive anchor during his minutes, proving that low-usage bigs can still drive winning basketball through sheer disruption.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.0%
USG% 12.8%
Net Rtg -58.8
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.9m
Scoring +1.0
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +0.2
Hustle +10.2
Defense -0.9
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
16
pts
0
reb
6
ast
Impact
+2.5

Paced the second unit with surgical drives to the basket, maximizing his touches without stalling the ball. His ability to consistently break the paint forced defensive collapses, creating a ripple effect of positive offensive flow.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 75.2%
USG% 22.4%
Net Rtg +20.9
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.3m
Scoring +13.4
Creation +2.2
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
Sion James 27.2m
7
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
+4.0

Capitalized on limited offensive touches with decisive, quick-trigger actions that kept the defense off balance. His real value came from hounding opposing ball-handlers, turning up the pressure at the point of attack to stall out enemy sets.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 87.5%
USG% 6.5%
Net Rtg +8.6
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.2m
Scoring +6.2
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +7.6
Defense +0.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
12
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.7

Supreme shot discipline defined this outing, as he only took what the defense conceded and converted at an elite clip. His opportunistic cuts and spot-up readiness provided a steadying presence that kept the offensive engine humming without demanding touches.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 102.0%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg +59.1
+/- +26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.1m
Scoring +11.2
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +1.2
Defense -1.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Josh Green 12.8m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-14.2

Brought a noticeable jolt of energy through loose-ball recoveries and hard closeouts, though his complete offensive invisibility hurt the spacing. Opponents aggressively sagged off him, effectively turning half-court sets into a four-on-five disadvantage.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 3.8%
Net Rtg +52.6
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.8m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.7

Barely registered a pulse during a brief stint, failing to impact the game in any measurable category. He looked a step slow navigating screens, allowing his assignment too much breathing room on the perimeter.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +31.1
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.2m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0