GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

PHX Phoenix Suns
S Devin Booker 38.5m
31
pts
3
reb
8
ast
Impact
+8.7

Carried the primary creation burden with relentless downhill attacks, generating a robust net positive impact. Even with a high volume of missed shots, his ability to draw defensive attention and create secondary actions kept the offense humming.

Shooting
FG 10/23 (43.5%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 58.4%
USG% 32.6%
Net Rtg +14.1
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.5m
Offense +21.5
Hustle +4.4
Defense +1.2
Raw total +27.1
Avg player in 38.5m -18.4
Impact +8.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Royce O'Neale 33.2m
12
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.3

Spot-up shooting efficiency kept his box score looking clean, but his overall impact dipped slightly into the red. Struggled to contain dribble penetration on the wing, forcing defensive rotations that compromised the rebounding glass.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 8.6%
Net Rtg +5.9
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.2m
Offense +12.3
Hustle +1.7
Defense +1.6
Raw total +15.6
Avg player in 33.2m -15.9
Impact -0.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
S Dillon Brooks 33.0m
27
pts
7
reb
5
ast
Impact
+12.6

Fueled a massive positive impact by pairing his signature physical perimeter defense with a surprising offensive explosion. Punished late closeouts relentlessly, turning what is usually a defensive-slanted profile into a lethal two-way performance.

Shooting
FG 8/15 (53.3%)
3PT 5/9 (55.6%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 76.5%
USG% 27.4%
Net Rtg +17.7
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.0m
Offense +21.3
Hustle +3.4
Defense +3.7
Raw total +28.4
Avg player in 33.0m -15.8
Impact +12.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 31.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
6
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.9

Offensive struggles completely tanked his overall value despite decent effort on the defensive end. A string of forced, low-quality perimeter shots killed the team's offensive rhythm and sparked opponent transition opportunities.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 15.0%
Net Rtg -7.9
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.0m
Offense -0.0
Hustle +3.0
Defense +1.5
Raw total +4.5
Avg player in 28.0m -13.4
Impact -8.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Mark Williams 24.8m
10
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.9

Anchored the paint masterfully, translating his massive wingspan into an elite defensive impact. His disciplined drop coverage deterred drives, while his high-percentage finishing around the rim maximized his offensive touches.

Shooting
FG 5/6 (83.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 13.7%
Net Rtg +18.0
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.8m
Offense +9.1
Hustle +3.0
Defense +5.7
Raw total +17.8
Avg player in 24.8m -11.9
Impact +5.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
10
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+3.2

Overcame a brutal perimeter shooting slump by completely emptying the tank on the margins. His stellar hustle rating and gritty point-of-attack defense salvaged a positive impact out of an otherwise disastrous offensive night.

Shooting
FG 2/10 (20.0%)
3PT 0/6 (0.0%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 39.6%
USG% 23.7%
Net Rtg +20.4
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.9m
Offense +5.1
Hustle +6.0
Defense +4.4
Raw total +15.5
Avg player in 25.9m -12.3
Impact +3.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Oso Ighodaro 23.0m
0
pts
0
reb
3
ast
Impact
-9.7

A complete lack of offensive assertiveness allowed the defense to ignore him, destroying the team's half-court spacing. Operating as an offensive ghost for over two quarters drove a catastrophic impact score as the unit was forced to play four-on-five.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 3.7%
Net Rtg -4.0
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.0m
Offense -1.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense +0.4
Raw total +1.3
Avg player in 23.0m -11.0
Impact -9.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
7
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.1

Kept his head above water defensively, but his shot selection was highly detrimental to the team's momentum. Chucking up empty looks from deep stalled possessions and neutralized his otherwise solid hustle metrics.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 0/7 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 30.6%
USG% 26.8%
Net Rtg -2.7
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.5m
Offense +3.9
Hustle +3.4
Defense +1.1
Raw total +8.4
Avg player in 17.5m -8.5
Impact -0.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 83.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Ryan Dunn 12.4m
7
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+2.5

Maximized a short rotation stint by taking exactly what the defense gave him. Flawless shot selection and disciplined positional defense resulted in a highly efficient impact during his time on the floor.

Shooting
FG 3/3 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 116.7%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -19.4
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.4m
Offense +5.9
Hustle +0.7
Defense +2.0
Raw total +8.6
Avg player in 12.4m -6.1
Impact +2.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
+1.6

Provided a brief but effective spark by executing his role perfectly. Stayed within the scheme, handled his defensive assignments cleanly, and didn't force any unnecessary actions.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg -50.0
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.6m
Offense +1.1
Hustle +0.4
Defense +1.8
Raw total +3.3
Avg player in 3.6m -1.7
Impact +1.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
NYK New York Knicks
S Miles McBride 39.5m
17
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.8

An absolute terror at the point of attack, generating a massive defensive impact through relentless ball pressure. This two-way breakout performance was amplified by confident perimeter shooting that punished defensive drop coverages.

Shooting
FG 7/15 (46.7%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 56.7%
USG% 17.0%
Net Rtg -0.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.5m
Offense +9.6
Hustle +5.6
Defense +6.5
Raw total +21.7
Avg player in 39.5m -18.9
Impact +2.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 31.6%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
S OG Anunoby 37.9m
15
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
-0.3

Despite strong defensive metrics and active hands on the perimeter, his overall impact slipped into the red. A sluggish shooting night from inside the arc limited his offensive gravity, allowing the defense to sag and disrupt the team's half-court spacing.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 7/9 (77.8%)
Advanced
TS% 57.9%
USG% 15.7%
Net Rtg +3.6
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.9m
Offense +11.6
Hustle +3.0
Defense +3.1
Raw total +17.7
Avg player in 37.9m -18.0
Impact -0.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jalen Brunson 37.0m
27
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
+3.7

Controlled the tempo beautifully by leveraging his penetration to warp the defensive shell. His positive net impact was driven by high-quality shot selection and minimizing live-ball mistakes during crucial transition sequences.

Shooting
FG 9/19 (47.4%)
3PT 5/10 (50.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.0%
USG% 29.4%
Net Rtg -9.1
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.0m
Offense +14.3
Hustle +3.7
Defense +3.4
Raw total +21.4
Avg player in 37.0m -17.7
Impact +3.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
15
pts
12
reb
5
ast
Impact
-5.3

A stark drop in offensive aggression resulted in a highly negative overall impact. While he fought hard on the glass to pad his hustle stats, his inability to establish deep post position forced the offense into late-clock bailouts.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.8%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg -6.4
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.0m
Offense +4.5
Hustle +4.1
Defense +1.9
Raw total +10.5
Avg player in 33.0m -15.8
Impact -5.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 5
S Mikal Bridges 32.5m
11
pts
8
reb
4
ast
Impact
-2.2

Elite hustle numbers highlight his relentless off-ball movement and loose-ball recoveries. However, his overall value was dragged down by empty offensive possessions and missed mid-range looks that stalled momentum.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 55.0%
USG% 13.9%
Net Rtg +0.3
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.5m
Offense +7.2
Hustle +4.7
Defense +1.4
Raw total +13.3
Avg player in 32.5m -15.5
Impact -2.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
8
pts
14
reb
1
ast
Impact
+11.3

Dominated the interior with elite rim protection and vertical spacing, driving a massive positive overall impact. His flawless shot selection and ability to generate extra possessions via offensive tip-outs completely tilted the math in the frontcourt.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 80.0%
USG% 10.9%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.0m
Offense +16.2
Hustle +3.1
Defense +3.6
Raw total +22.9
Avg player in 24.0m -11.6
Impact +11.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 61.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
12
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.7

Scoring efficiency off the bench couldn't mask his defensive liabilities in isolation matchups. His negative net impact stems from defensive lapses and a lack of secondary playmaking when his primary actions were cut off.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.4%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg -18.3
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.5m
Offense +8.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.5
Raw total +8.1
Avg player in 20.5m -9.8
Impact -1.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Tyler Kolek 10.2m
2
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-10.3

Completely unraveled during his short rotation stint, hemorrhaging value through poor offensive execution. Bricked perimeter looks and a total lack of hustle plays allowed the opposing second unit to build rapid momentum.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -35.0
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.2m
Offense -4.3
Hustle 0.0
Defense -1.2
Raw total -5.5
Avg player in 10.2m -4.8
Impact -10.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.8

Invisible on the offensive end while giving up critical positioning on defense. His brief stretch was a net negative due to late closeouts and failing to execute the defensive scheme.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -35.7
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.2m
Offense 0.0
Hustle 0.0
Defense -0.8
Raw total -0.8
Avg player in 4.2m -2.0
Impact -2.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.5

Bleeding negative impact in barely over a minute of action points to immediate blown assignments. A quick defensive lapse during a brief rotation stint forced an early hook from the coaching staff.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 50.0%
Net Rtg -83.3
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.3m
Offense -0.4
Hustle 0.0
Defense -1.5
Raw total -1.9
Avg player in 1.3m -0.6
Impact -2.5
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0