Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
WAS lead NOP lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
NOP 2P — 3P —
WAS 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 182 attempts

NOP NOP Shot-making Δ

Murphy III Hard 13/24 +11.5
Fears 9/15 +3.9
Williamson Open 12/14 +7.5
Queen Open 7/13 -2.4
Peavy 4/9 -1.7
McGowens Hard 2/6 -1.0
Hawkins 2/5 -1.6
Missi Open 1/5 -4.2
Matković 1/2 -0.3
Poole Hard 0/2 -1.7

WAS WAS Shot-making Δ

Vukcevic Hard 4/14 -5.3
George Hard 6/13 +2.4
Champagnie Open 6/12 -3.7
Sarr Open 5/11 -3.2
Carrington Hard 4/10 +2.4
Johnson Hard 3/7 +1.9
Johnson 3/6 -0.9
Coulibaly Hard 2/6 -1.0
Middleton Hard 2/5 -0.3
Branham Hard 2/3 +3.1
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
NOP
WAS
51/95 Field Goals 37/87
53.7% Field Goal % 42.5%
11/34 3-Pointers 11/35
32.4% 3-Point % 31.4%
15/24 Free Throws 22/33
62.5% Free Throw % 66.7%
60.6% True Shooting % 52.7%
64 Total Rebounds 50
10 Offensive 11
41 Defensive 29
30 Assists 24
1.58 Assist/TO Ratio 1.26
17 Turnovers 19
12 Steals 10
4 Blocks 8
22 Fouls 23
68 Points in Paint 46
8 Fast Break Pts 15
25 Points off TOs 19
12 Second Chance Pts 21
21 Bench Points 54
26 Largest Lead 1
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Trey Murphy III
35 PTS · 8 REB · 4 AST · 36.1 MIN
+36.43
2
Zion Williamson
31 PTS · 4 REB · 3 AST · 29.2 MIN
+28.03
3
Derik Queen
14 PTS · 16 REB · 12 AST · 34.7 MIN
+15.29
4
Malaki Branham
10 PTS · 2 REB · 1 AST · 23.7 MIN
+14.74
5
Jeremiah Fears
21 PTS · 5 REB · 6 AST · 31.9 MIN
+14.32
6
Justin Champagnie
12 PTS · 9 REB · 4 AST · 21.6 MIN
+13.96
7
Tre Johnson
12 PTS · 1 REB · 2 AST · 25.2 MIN
+9.89
8
Jordan Hawkins
7 PTS · 4 REB · 0 AST · 20.4 MIN
+9.37
9
Tristan Vukcevic
15 PTS · 4 REB · 2 AST · 22.7 MIN
+7.78
10
AJ Johnson
6 PTS · 6 REB · 1 AST · 15.9 MIN
+7.39
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:21 B. Carrington 15' pullup Jump Shot (11 PTS) 128–107
Q4 0:28 M. Branham STEAL (2 STL) 128–105
Q4 0:28 D. Queen bad pass TURNOVER (5 TO) 128–105
Q4 0:44 K. Matković REBOUND (Off:1 Def:2) 128–105
Q4 0:46 K. Matković BLOCK (1 BLK) 128–105
Q4 0:46 MISS A. Johnson running Layup - blocked 128–105
Q4 0:51 A. Johnson STEAL (1 STL) 128–105
Q4 0:51 J. Fears lost ball TURNOVER (6 TO) 128–105
Q4 0:55 T. Vukcevic Free Throw 1 of 1 (15 PTS) 128–105
Q4 0:55 K. Matković shooting personal FOUL (1 PF) (Vukcevic 1 FT) 128–104
Q4 0:55 J. Hawkins defensive goaltending VIOLATION 128–104
Q4 0:55 T. Vukcevic driving Layup (14 PTS) 128–104
Q4 1:03 J. Hawkins 18' pullup Jump Shot (7 PTS) (J. Fears 6 AST) 128–102
Q4 1:12 J. Fears REBOUND (Off:0 Def:5) 126–102
Q4 1:16 MISS T. Vukcevic 15' Jump Shot 126–102

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

WAS Washington Wizards
S Bilal Coulibaly 29.5m
8
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
-9.2

Impact cratered dramatically (-11.8 Total) due to a passive offensive approach and a slew of unforced errors. He faded into the background on offense, failing to pressure the rim or space the floor effectively. The resulting stagnant spacing allowed the defense to load up, bleeding value across his entire stint and stalling the offensive engine.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 3/6 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.3%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg -45.7
+/- -26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.5m
Scoring +3.3
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +1.5
Defense -1.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
S Tre Johnson 25.2m
12
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.7

Timely shot-making and highly disruptive perimeter defense (+5.7 Def) generated a solid positive return. He broke out of a recent shooting slump by attacking closeouts decisively rather than settling for contested jumpers. His two-way engagement during the middle quarters helped stabilize the lineup and swing the momentum.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.5%
USG% 18.0%
Net Rtg -48.3
+/- -29
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.2m
Scoring +8.6
Creation +2.3
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 53.8%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
S Alex Sarr 25.2m
14
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
-9.7

A welcome uptick in scoring volume was completely undone by costly mistakes that tanked his net impact (-6.6 Total). Despite finding his touch offensively, his inability to anchor the defensive glass allowed crippling second-chance points. The raw production was there, but poor shot selection in key moments and situational defensive lapses remained highly detrimental.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 4/8 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 48.2%
USG% 28.3%
Net Rtg -50.0
+/- -31
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.2m
Scoring +7.5
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +1.3
Defense -4.2
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
S Kyshawn George 23.6m
15
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.4

Solid perimeter shot-making inflated his box score, but his overall impact slid into the red (-2.5 Total) due to defensive miscommunications. He frequently lost his man off the ball, surrendering easy backdoor cuts that negated his offensive contributions. A performance where the counting stats masked underlying structural leaks and poor closeout angles.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 57.7%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg -31.2
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.6m
Scoring +9.7
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +4.1
Hustle +5.4
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -7.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Khris Middleton 20.9m
4
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-14.4

A severe lack of offensive rhythm (-4.6 Box) heavily penalized his overall impact, continuing a troubling trend of poor shooting efficiency. He struggled to separate from his primary defender, leading to stalled possessions and forced late-clock attempts. The minor defensive positives were entirely overshadowed by his inability to generate reliable offense or bend the defense.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 36.8%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg -53.1
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.9m
Scoring +1.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 88.9%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
11
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
-1.7

Flashes of playmaking and solid defensive metrics were wiped out by a highly negative overall rating (-6.1 Total). He suffered from poor shot selection and ill-timed turnovers that ignited opponent fast breaks. While the raw tools were visible, the negative swing plays and rushed decisions dictated his true effectiveness on the floor.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 55.0%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg +1.5
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.8m
Scoring +6.6
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +1.5
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 76.9%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
10
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
+7.3

Hyper-efficient scoring and locked-in point-of-attack defense (+6.2 Def) defined a highly productive two-way shift. He picked his spots perfectly on offense, refusing to force the issue while punishing defensive lapses. His ability to navigate screens defensively completely disrupted the opponent's backcourt rhythm and fueled transition opportunities.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 105.0%
USG% 9.5%
Net Rtg +25.9
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.7m
Scoring +9.2
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +2.5
Defense +5.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
15
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.1

Elite defensive positioning (+9.3 Def) and high-motor hustle plays drove a highly positive impact despite a brutal shooting night. He refused to let his offensive struggles dictate his effort, consistently blowing up pick-and-rolls and securing contested rebounds. A masterclass in finding alternative ways to influence winning when the jumper isn't falling.

Shooting
FG 4/14 (28.6%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 7/10 (70.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.8%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg +22.6
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.7m
Scoring +6.6
Creation +2.4
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +5.1
Defense +0.9
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 5
TO 2
12
pts
9
reb
4
ast
Impact
+8.3

Sustained his recent streak of high-efficiency basketball, using relentless offensive rebounding to drive a strong box score impact (+13.2). He punished smaller defenders in the paint and capitalized on every second-chance opportunity. A highly physical performance that consistently tilted the possession battle in his team's favor and wore down the opposing frontcourt.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 20.7%
Net Rtg -3.3
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.6m
Scoring +6.9
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +1.2
Hustle +11.4
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
AJ Johnson 15.9m
6
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.5

A surprising burst of offensive aggression perfectly balanced his overall impact to a dead neutral rating. He attacked the glass well for his position, but those gains were likely offset by rookie mistakes in defensive transition. Ultimately, he provided a chaotic but even energy boost off the bench, defined by high-risk, high-reward plays.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 16.3%
Net Rtg +13.0
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.9m
Scoring +4.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +6.7
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.9

A brief, three-minute appearance snapped a highly efficient recent stretch of basketball. He barely had time to break a sweat, resulting in a negligible negative impact score. The game flow simply didn't allow him to establish his usual reliable interior presence or impact the rebounding battle.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -3.6
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.8m
Scoring +5.1
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +3.2
Defense -2.0
Turnovers -1.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
NOP New Orleans Pelicans
S Trey Murphy III 36.1m
35
pts
8
reb
4
ast
Impact
+36.3

Elite shot-making fueled a massive positive impact, as he relentlessly punished drop coverage to double his recent scoring average. His defensive rotations (+10.9 Def) completely suffocated the perimeter, ensuring his offensive explosion translated directly to the bottom line. A dominant two-way showcase that broke the game open during the middle quarters.

Shooting
FG 13/24 (54.2%)
3PT 7/16 (43.8%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 69.1%
USG% 28.3%
Net Rtg +38.8
+/- +32
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.1m
Scoring +26.1
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +8.5
Hustle +4.3
Defense +7.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 1
S Derik Queen 34.7m
14
pts
16
reb
12
ast
Impact
+6.8

Relentless activity on the glass and exceptional playmaking from the post anchored his highly positive overall impact. His hustle metrics (+5.3) highlight a willingness to do the dirty work, creating extra possessions that swung the momentum. Operating as a crucial offensive hub, his passing vision punished defensive double-teams and generated wide-open looks for cutters.

Shooting
FG 7/13 (53.8%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 53.8%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +20.2
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.7m
Scoring +8.8
Creation +3.2
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +15.5
Defense -2.1
Turnovers -10.6
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 27
FGM Against 12
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 5
S Jeremiah Fears 31.9m
21
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
+5.6

Strong individual defensive metrics (+7.5 Def) couldn't completely rescue a slightly negative overall impact. Hidden inefficiencies—likely live-ball turnovers or poor spacing—dragged down the lineup's net rating despite his usual scoring punch. A classic case where solid on-ball pressure was negated by disjointed offensive execution and rushed decisions in traffic.

Shooting
FG 9/15 (60.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.0%
USG% 25.6%
Net Rtg +23.1
+/- +20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.9m
Scoring +16.6
Creation +2.4
Shot Making +4.7
Hustle +1.5
Defense +6.2
Turnovers -14.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 72.7%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 6
S Zion Williamson 29.2m
31
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+28.2

Unstoppable interior finishing drove a stellar offensive rating, as he bullied his primary matchups to significantly outpace his recent scoring trends. He paired this physical dominance with active hands on the defensive end (+6.3 Def) to prevent easy counter-attacks. The sheer gravitational pull he exerted in the paint dictated the entire flow of the game and collapsed the opposing defense.

Shooting
FG 12/14 (85.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 7/13 (53.8%)
Advanced
TS% 78.6%
USG% 24.1%
Net Rtg +28.7
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.2m
Scoring +26.7
Creation +2.0
Shot Making +5.5
Hustle +1.2
Defense +4.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Bryce McGowens 28.5m
6
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.2

Despite decent hustle metrics, his overall impact plunged into the negative (-6.0 Total) due to costly empty possessions and poor shot selection. He struggled to find an offensive rhythm, forcing contested looks that triggered opponent transition opportunities. The underlying defensive lapses and mistimed closeouts ultimately outweighed his flashes of energy.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 43.6%
USG% 9.9%
Net Rtg +28.6
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.5m
Scoring +2.4
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +0.3
Defense -3.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Micah Peavy 27.7m
9
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.6

An unexpected scoring surge provided a nice box score boost, but his overall footprint remained negative (-3.9 Total). His high hustle rating (+4.4) was offset by defensive breakdowns and mistimed rotations that bled points on the other end. The energy was palpable, yet it lacked the discipline required to drive winning basketball against a set defense.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 12.7%
Net Rtg +9.7
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.7m
Scoring +4.3
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +0.3
Defense -4.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
7
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
+3.5

Excellent defensive tracking (+6.0 Def) kept his head above water despite a noticeable dip in his recent hyper-efficient shooting. He struggled to find clean looks on the perimeter, but compensated by locking down his assignment and fighting over screens. The neutral total impact reflects a gritty effort to salvage an off-shooting night through sheer defensive willpower.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 55.4%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -6.0
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.4m
Scoring +4.6
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +5.1
Defense +4.7
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
Yves Missi 12.7m
3
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.2

Quiet offensive production was perfectly balanced by sturdy rim protection and disciplined positioning (+4.0 Def). He embraced a low-usage role, focusing entirely on deterring drives and securing the defensive glass to keep his overall impact positive. A steadying, unselfish presence that stabilized the second unit during a chaotic stretch of the first half.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.5%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg +13.6
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.7m
Scoring -2.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +6.6
Defense -2.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 10.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Jordan Poole 11.7m
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-23.5

A completely derailed offensive stint cratered his impact score in just under 12 minutes of action. Failing to generate any scoring gravity, his empty trips and defensive apathy (-3.0 Def) allowed the opposition to build massive momentum. This performance was defined by a total lack of engagement and poor shot selection that actively hurt the team's rhythm.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg -21.4
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.7m
Scoring -1.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -5.0
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
2
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.4

Maximized a brief five-minute cameo through sharp defensive rotations and efficient movement. Even with a sharp drop in scoring volume compared to his recent hot streak, his ability to contest shots without fouling (+2.6 Def) provided an immediate spark. Proved highly effective as a situational rim deterrent during a crucial transitional stretch.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -34.6
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.4m
Scoring +1.2
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +2.8
Defense -1.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.0

Barely registered a blip during a fleeting appearance at the end of the rotation. The slight negative impact (-0.9 Total) stems from being on the floor during a quick opponent run. Simply not enough court time to establish any meaningful rhythm or defensive footprint.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -45.0
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.8m
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0