Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
PHX lead NYK lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
NYK 2P — 3P —
PHX 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 167 attempts

NYK NYK Shot-making Δ

Brunson Hard 9/19 +5.0
McBride Hard 7/15 +2.0
Towns Hard 5/11 +0.9
Bridges Hard 4/10 +0.5
Anunoby 3/9 -1.7
Clarkson Hard 4/8 +1.2
Robinson Open 4/5 +1.2
Kolek 1/4 -1.9
McCullar Jr. Hard 0/1 -0.9

PHX PHX Shot-making Δ

Booker Hard 10/23 +2.8
Brooks Hard 8/15 +7.4
Goodwin 3/11 -6.7
Allen Hard 2/10 -6.2
Gillespie Hard 2/8 -2.1
O'Neale Hard 4/6 +5.9
Williams Open 5/6 +2.4
Dunn Open 3/3 +3.3
Fleming 1/2 -0.3
Ighodaro Hard 0/1 -0.8
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
NYK
PHX
37/82 Field Goals 38/85
45.1% Field Goal % 44.7%
16/41 3-Pointers 16/42
39.0% 3-Point % 38.1%
17/21 Free Throws 20/23
81.0% Free Throw % 87.0%
58.6% True Shooting % 58.9%
58 Total Rebounds 43
16 Offensive 9
34 Defensive 28
22 Assists 23
1.22 Assist/TO Ratio 2.30
17 Turnovers 9
3 Steals 4
1 Blocks 4
23 Fouls 21
34 Points in Paint 38
4 Fast Break Pts 6
11 Points off TOs 22
16 Second Chance Pts 11
22 Bench Points 26
4 Largest Lead 12
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Devin Booker
31 PTS · 3 REB · 8 AST · 38.5 MIN
+21.64
2
Dillon Brooks
27 PTS · 7 REB · 5 AST · 32.9 MIN
+19.82
3
Mitchell Robinson
8 PTS · 14 REB · 1 AST · 24.0 MIN
+15.43
4
Miles McBride
17 PTS · 2 REB · 2 AST · 39.5 MIN
+13.83
5
Jalen Brunson
27 PTS · 3 REB · 5 AST · 37.0 MIN
+13.56
6
OG Anunoby
15 PTS · 8 REB · 3 AST · 37.9 MIN
+12.12
7
Royce O'Neale
12 PTS · 6 REB · 1 AST · 33.3 MIN
+11.42
8
Mark Williams
10 PTS · 5 REB · 0 AST · 24.8 MIN
+10.57
9
Mikal Bridges
11 PTS · 8 REB · 4 AST · 32.5 MIN
+7.91
10
Ryan Dunn
7 PTS · 5 REB · 3 AST · 12.4 MIN
+7.86
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:00 TEAM offensive REBOUND 107–112
Q4 0:00 NYK Heave 107–112
Q4 0:00 D. Brooks Free Throw 2 of 2 (27 PTS) 107–112
Q4 0:00 D. Brooks Free Throw 1 of 2 (26 PTS) 107–111
Q4 0:00 M. Bridges take personal FOUL (3 PF) (Brooks 2 FT) 107–110
Q4 0:02 O. Anunoby Free Throw 3 of 3 (15 PTS) 107–110
Q4 0:02 TEAM offensive REBOUND 106–110
Q4 0:02 MISS O. Anunoby Free Throw 2 of 3 106–110
Q4 0:02 TEAM offensive REBOUND 106–110
Q4 0:02 MISS O. Anunoby Free Throw 1 of 3 106–110
Q4 0:02 R. O'Neale shooting personal FOUL (4 PF) (Anunoby 3 FT) 106–110
Q4 0:04 G. Allen Free Throw 2 of 2 (10 PTS) 106–110
Q4 0:04 G. Allen Free Throw 1 of 2 (9 PTS) 106–109
Q4 0:04 M. McBride personal FOUL (4 PF) (Allen 2 FT) 106–108
Q4 0:05 M. Bridges 26' 3PT (11 PTS) (J. Brunson 5 AST) 106–108

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

PHX Phoenix Suns
S Devin Booker 38.5m
31
pts
3
reb
8
ast
Impact
+19.3

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
Scoring +22.0
Creation +3.0
Shot Making +6.9
Hustle +1.9
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -4.7
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
+7.5

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
Scoring +10.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +5.7
Defense -2.0
Turnovers +0.0
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
+20.6

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
Scoring +22.1
Creation +2.1
Shot Making +6.5
Hustle +7.9
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -4.2
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
-6.7

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
Scoring +1.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -1.1
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
+0.6

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
Scoring +9.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +1.5
Defense +1.0
Turnovers -2.4
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
-0.1

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
Scoring +3.8
Creation +2.0
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +3.8
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -2.4
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
-13.6

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
Scoring -1.7
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -2.9
Turnovers +0.0
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
-3.0

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
Scoring +0.5
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.8
Hustle +6.7
Defense -0.6
Turnovers +0.0
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
-0.0

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
Scoring +7.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +5.4
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -3.5
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
-8.7

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
Scoring +1.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.5
Turnovers +0.0
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
+8.6

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
Scoring +11.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +4.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense +3.4
Turnovers -1.1
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
+12.3

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
Scoring +9.9
Creation +2.9
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +10.2
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -2.4
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
+10.3

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
Scoring +19.8
Creation +2.2
Shot Making +7.1
Hustle +0.9
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -9.5
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
+4.2

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
Scoring +9.6
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +12.3
Defense -2.2
Turnovers -10.1
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
+0.9

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
Scoring +6.3
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +4.3
Defense -1.7
Turnovers -2.4
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
+10.7

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
Scoring +7.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.8
Hustle +16.8
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -1.1
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
-2.5

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
Scoring +9.4
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +1.3
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -2.4
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
-17.3

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
Scoring -0.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -8.5
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
-12.6

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
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
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
-11.1

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
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.6
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0