GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

TOR Toronto Raptors
S Scottie Barnes 43.2m
31
pts
7
reb
8
ast
Impact
+6.5

Total command of the half-court offense resulted in a massive spike in production and overall value. He consistently punished mismatches in the post, forcing double teams that opened up the perimeter. This aggressive offensive initiation snapped a recent stretch of passive play.

Shooting
FG 10/19 (52.6%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 10/12 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 63.8%
USG% 24.6%
Net Rtg +14.0
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 43.2m
Offense +21.7
Hustle +2.5
Defense +2.6
Raw total +26.8
Avg player in 43.2m -20.3
Impact +6.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
17
pts
15
reb
3
ast
Impact
+15.4

Absolute dominance on the interior and elite rim protection fueled a team-high net rating. He controlled the glass on both ends, generating crucial extra possessions while completely neutralizing the opponent's interior attack. Continuing his streak of high-efficiency finishing, he anchored the team's success from the inside out.

Shooting
FG 7/12 (58.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.8%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg +5.7
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 42.2m
Offense +19.8
Hustle +4.2
Defense +11.3
Raw total +35.3
Avg player in 42.2m -19.9
Impact +15.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 3
BLK 3
TO 2
20
pts
5
reb
7
ast
Impact
+2.4

Phenomenal point-of-attack defense salvaged a positive impact score despite a disastrous shooting performance. He disrupted the opponent's primary actions all night, creating transition opportunities that offset his own half-court inefficiency. The sheer volume of missed jumpers would have been catastrophic without his relentless defensive pressure.

Shooting
FG 6/22 (27.3%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 6/9 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 38.5%
USG% 25.5%
Net Rtg +16.9
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.8m
Offense +5.0
Hustle +5.2
Defense +10.9
Raw total +21.1
Avg player in 39.8m -18.7
Impact +2.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 57.9%
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 2
S Jamal Shead 37.0m
22
pts
1
reb
6
ast
Impact
+5.2

Aggressive dribble penetration shattered his usual scoring averages and generated high-quality looks for the entire unit. He capitalized on lazy drop coverage, consistently getting into the teeth of the defense to collapse the floor. A flurry of high-energy hustle plays further cemented his highly positive footprint.

Shooting
FG 7/15 (46.7%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 6/8 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.4%
USG% 20.4%
Net Rtg -15.2
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.0m
Offense +15.8
Hustle +6.2
Defense +0.5
Raw total +22.5
Avg player in 37.0m -17.3
Impact +5.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 53.8%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.6

Struggled to find the pace of the game during a very short rotational cameo. A couple of rushed attempts early in the shot clock prevented him from generating any positive momentum. The limited run kept the damage strictly minimal.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +37.3
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.7m
Offense +0.8
Hustle +0.8
Defense +0.1
Raw total +1.7
Avg player in 4.7m -2.3
Impact -0.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
9
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+9.1

Game-changing defensive rotations and elite hustle metrics completely erased the sting of a poor shooting night. He acted as a true disruptor, blowing up dribble hand-offs and diving for loose balls to steal extra possessions. His relentless motor dictated the physical tone of the game, driving a highly positive overall impact.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 35.3%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg -11.6
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.7m
Offense +3.8
Hustle +7.8
Defense +11.5
Raw total +23.1
Avg player in 29.7m -14.0
Impact +9.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 4
BLK 2
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.0

A complete offensive disappearing act derailed his value and killed the second unit's spacing. He passed up several open looks before forcing bad shots late in the clock, stalling the team's momentum. The steep drop-off from his recent scoring surge left a noticeable void in the rotation.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 8.7%
Net Rtg -48.0
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.1m
Offense -3.2
Hustle +3.0
Defense +0.7
Raw total +0.5
Avg player in 18.1m -8.5
Impact -8.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.7

Sluggish defensive closeouts and poor spatial awareness resulted in a heavily negative stint. He consistently gave up clean looks to perimeter shooters by getting caught ball-watching on the weak side. An inability to find an offensive rhythm only compounded the damage during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/3 (33.3%)
Advanced
TS% 34.2%
USG% 21.1%
Net Rtg +31.0
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.7m
Offense -1.0
Hustle +0.2
Defense -1.9
Raw total -2.7
Avg player in 14.7m -7.0
Impact -9.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Ochai Agbaji 14.6m
6
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+2.2

Decisive off-ball cutting unlocked a highly efficient, positive shift that easily surpassed his recent slump. He punished sleeping defenders with perfectly timed baseline runs, converting easy opportunities at the rim. Solid positional defense ensured those quick offensive bursts translated directly to the plus-minus column.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -6.5
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.6m
Offense +4.9
Hustle +1.9
Defense +2.3
Raw total +9.1
Avg player in 14.6m -6.9
Impact +2.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
Gradey Dick 11.2m
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.2

Being targeted repeatedly on defense led to a severe negative rating in limited action. Opponents actively hunted him in pick-and-roll switches, bleeding points every time he was on an island. His inability to knock down open perimeter looks offered no offensive compensation for his defensive struggles.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 17.9%
Net Rtg -9.8
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.2m
Offense -2.1
Hustle +1.3
Defense -2.1
Raw total -2.9
Avg player in 11.2m -5.3
Impact -8.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.5

Forcing the issue in transition led to empty possessions that dragged his overall rating into the red. While his on-ball defensive pressure was commendable, his shot selection on the other end short-circuited potential runs. He struggled to find the balance between pushing the pace and playing under control.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 18.5%
Net Rtg +20.0
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.7m
Offense -1.2
Hustle +0.8
Defense +3.4
Raw total +3.0
Avg player in 9.7m -4.5
Impact -1.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
PHI Philadelphia 76ers
S VJ Edgecombe 44.6m
17
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
-10.0

Brutal shot selection and forced perimeter attempts cratered his net impact despite commendable defensive effort. He consistently bailed out the defense with early-clock contested jumpers, breaking the team's offensive rhythm. The sheer volume of empty possessions completely negated his high-energy hustle metrics.

Shooting
FG 6/19 (31.6%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.9%
USG% 23.6%
Net Rtg -14.5
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 44.6m
Offense -0.2
Hustle +6.0
Defense +5.1
Raw total +10.9
Avg player in 44.6m -20.9
Impact -10.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 31.6%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 4
S Tyrese Maxey 44.5m
38
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
+9.1

Relentless downhill attacking broke the defense's shell and fueled a massive surge in offensive rating. He capitalized on favorable matchups in isolation, turning defensive breakdowns into high-value scoring trips. His ability to maintain efficiency on an enormous usage spike ultimately decided the game's momentum.

Shooting
FG 13/27 (48.1%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 10/12 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 58.9%
USG% 33.9%
Net Rtg +17.3
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 44.5m
Offense +18.1
Hustle +5.3
Defense +6.5
Raw total +29.9
Avg player in 44.5m -20.8
Impact +9.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 21
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 5
S Kelly Oubre Jr. 34.0m
13
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.2

Elite defensive disruption anchored his positive impact, completely overshadowing a modest scoring night. His constant activity in the passing lanes and high-energy closeouts generated significant value. He maintained his recent offensive efficiency while letting his defensive versatility dictate the game.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.7%
USG% 17.3%
Net Rtg -12.5
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.0m
Offense +4.3
Hustle +5.7
Defense +11.1
Raw total +21.1
Avg player in 34.0m -15.9
Impact +5.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 4
BLK 3
TO 3
S Dominick Barlow 26.4m
13
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
+4.3

Flawless shot selection inside the paint drove a highly efficient offensive showing that spiked his usual scoring output. He continues to be a reliable finisher, extending his recent streak of high-percentage shooting. Strong rim deterrence further elevated his overall net rating.

Shooting
FG 5/6 (83.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 94.5%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg +1.8
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.4m
Offense +6.8
Hustle +3.8
Defense +6.0
Raw total +16.6
Avg player in 26.4m -12.3
Impact +4.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 52.9%
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 4
S Andre Drummond 19.8m
0
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.9

A complete lack of offensive involvement tanked his overall value during his minutes on the floor. While he provided some baseline rim protection, his inability to generate second-chance opportunities or finish inside rendered him a liability. The offense bogged down significantly when he operated as the roll man.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 4.3%
Net Rtg -38.1
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.8m
Offense +0.8
Hustle +2.3
Defense +2.3
Raw total +5.4
Avg player in 19.8m -9.3
Impact -3.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 85.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
13
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.4

Severe defensive breakdowns off the ball resulted in a heavily negative overall rating despite decent shooting splits. He repeatedly lost his man on back-door cuts, giving away easy points that erased his offensive contributions. The team bled points during his rotational shifts on the perimeter.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.0%
USG% 17.2%
Net Rtg +5.6
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.7m
Offense +3.3
Hustle +2.1
Defense +1.5
Raw total +6.9
Avg player in 34.7m -16.3
Impact -9.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
Adem Bona 32.8m
9
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
0.0

Opportunistic finishing around the basket significantly boosted his usual production, though his overall influence remained perfectly neutral. He executed his role as a lob threat effectively without forcing touches. However, a lack of secondary playmaking limited his ability to swing the momentum in either direction.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.1%
USG% 8.6%
Net Rtg +19.5
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.8m
Offense +10.0
Hustle +1.0
Defense +4.4
Raw total +15.4
Avg player in 32.8m -15.4
Impact 0.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
7
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.8

Settling for contested perimeter looks dragged down his efficiency and stalled out half-court sets. His inability to stretch the floor allowed defenders to pack the paint against the primary ball handlers. A few timely hustle plays kept his overall impact from completely bottoming out.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 39.4%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg +35.4
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.8m
Offense +3.9
Hustle +2.5
Defense -0.3
Raw total +6.1
Avg player in 16.8m -7.9
Impact -1.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.1

A brief, low-leverage stint yielded a perfectly neutral footprint on the game's flow. He executed basic offensive sets without making any glaring mistakes, keeping the ship steady while the starters rested. His defensive rotations were sound but largely untested.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -37.4
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.2m
Offense +3.1
Hustle +0.2
Defense +1.2
Raw total +4.5
Avg player in 9.2m -4.4
Impact +0.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.1

Barely saw the floor in a fleeting appearance that offered no time to establish a rhythm. His brief insertion into the lineup coincided with a quick opponent run, resulting in a slightly negative grade. He was essentially a non-factor in the grand scheme of the rotation.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -85.0
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.2m
Offense 0.0
Hustle +0.4
Defense -0.5
Raw total -0.1
Avg player in 2.2m -1.0
Impact -1.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0