GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

SAC Sacramento Kings
S DeMar DeRozan 36.8m
32
pts
2
reb
6
ast
Impact
+19.7

A midrange masterclass drove an exceptionally high positive rating, punishing defenders with elite shot-making inside the arc. Operating with peak efficiency, he completely bypassed the three-point line while still dominating the offensive flow.

Shooting
FG 14/19 (73.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 75.5%
USG% 25.3%
Net Rtg +5.3
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.8m
Offense +30.6
Hustle +3.6
Defense +6.3
Raw total +40.5
Avg player in 36.8m -20.8
Impact +19.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 72.7%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 0
22
pts
5
reb
7
ast
Impact
-7.3

High-volume offensive creation was severely undercut by the hidden costs of live-ball mistakes and erratic pacing. Even with a surprisingly hot hand from beyond the arc, the chaotic nature of his possessions ultimately gave more points back to the opposition.

Shooting
FG 8/16 (50.0%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 61.9%
USG% 30.7%
Net Rtg +12.4
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.4m
Offense +7.1
Hustle +1.4
Defense +3.6
Raw total +12.1
Avg player in 34.4m -19.4
Impact -7.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 5
S Zach LaVine 31.6m
19
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.0

Selective and highly efficient perimeter shot-making ensured his minutes were a net positive. He avoided forcing bad looks, allowing his clean outside stroke to naturally boost the offense.

Shooting
FG 6/11 (54.5%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 74.5%
USG% 20.6%
Net Rtg +16.2
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.6m
Offense +13.8
Hustle +1.0
Defense +4.0
Raw total +18.8
Avg player in 31.6m -17.8
Impact +1.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S Maxime Raynaud 31.3m
11
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.4

Despite maintaining his recent streak of highly efficient shooting, hidden costs elsewhere on the floor dragged his overall rating down. The solid box score numbers masked defensive lapses that allowed opponents to capitalize during his shifts.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 68.8%
USG% 12.7%
Net Rtg +5.1
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.3m
Offense +10.5
Hustle +3.1
Defense +1.7
Raw total +15.3
Avg player in 31.3m -17.7
Impact -2.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
9
pts
7
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.2

Strong defensive rotations and active hustle plays were slightly offset by a significant drop in his usual scoring volume. He remained efficient when calling his own number, but the lack of offensive aggression kept his net impact hovering near neutral.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg +19.9
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.4m
Offense +7.8
Hustle +4.2
Defense +5.0
Raw total +17.0
Avg player in 30.4m -17.2
Impact -0.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
Malik Monk 31.7m
26
pts
1
reb
8
ast
Impact
+5.4

A blistering shooting display from beyond the arc single-handedly drove his positive impact rating. Punishing drop coverage and late closeouts, his elite perimeter execution completely warped the opposing defense.

Shooting
FG 9/15 (60.0%)
3PT 7/9 (77.8%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 84.2%
USG% 24.6%
Net Rtg +4.0
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.7m
Offense +21.5
Hustle +1.1
Defense +0.7
Raw total +23.3
Avg player in 31.7m -17.9
Impact +5.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
2
pts
7
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.4

Struggling to find a rhythm offensively, his inability to finish around the rim negated his decent work on the glass. The lack of scoring gravity allowed defenders to sag off, stalling the offensive engine during his rotation.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 12.1%
Net Rtg +25.0
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.7m
Offense +2.9
Hustle +2.3
Defense -0.1
Raw total +5.1
Avg player in 16.7m -9.5
Impact -4.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.4

Failing to convert any of his looks, his offensive disappearing act resulted in a heavily negative overall rating. The complete lack of scoring punch stalled out the second unit, erasing the value of his adequate defensive positioning.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 9.4%
Net Rtg +15.0
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.4m
Offense -3.6
Hustle +1.5
Defense +1.4
Raw total -0.7
Avg player in 15.4m -8.7
Impact -9.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Keon Ellis 11.7m
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.5

Extreme passivity on the offensive end caused a sharp decline from his recent production levels. Taking only a single shot attempt in double-digit minutes rendered him an offensive non-threat, hurting the team's floor spacing.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 4.0%
Net Rtg +19.9
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.7m
Offense +3.0
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.9
Raw total +4.1
Avg player in 11.7m -6.6
Impact -2.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
LAL Los Angeles Lakers
S Luka Dončić 36.9m
42
pts
7
reb
8
ast
Impact
+26.6

Absolute surgical precision inside the arc fueled a monstrous overall rating. Even with a high volume of missed perimeter heat-checks, his relentless rim pressure and exceptional defensive engagement overwhelmed the opposition.

Shooting
FG 16/25 (64.0%)
3PT 2/9 (22.2%)
FT 8/8 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 73.6%
USG% 38.8%
Net Rtg -10.0
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.9m
Offense +33.8
Hustle +4.5
Defense +9.2
Raw total +47.5
Avg player in 36.9m -20.9
Impact +26.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 4
S LeBron James 33.2m
22
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
-4.6

Despite exceeding his recent scoring output, perimeter struggles severely dragged down his overall impact. Blanking on all attempts from beyond the arc created empty possessions that offset his otherwise solid defensive metrics.

Shooting
FG 8/17 (47.1%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.0%
USG% 30.7%
Net Rtg -8.4
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.2m
Offense +10.1
Hustle +1.0
Defense +3.0
Raw total +14.1
Avg player in 33.2m -18.7
Impact -4.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Jake LaRavia 31.0m
2
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
-8.5

Tremendous hustle metrics and active rotations were completely negated by an abysmal shooting night. Firing blanks from the perimeter killed offensive momentum, resulting in a steep drop-off from his normally efficient finishing.

Shooting
FG 1/7 (14.3%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 14.3%
USG% 9.7%
Net Rtg -10.3
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.0m
Offense -0.1
Hustle +5.8
Defense +3.3
Raw total +9.0
Avg player in 31.0m -17.5
Impact -8.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Marcus Smart 30.5m
1
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-12.2

Continuing a brutal offensive slump, his inability to convert a single field goal attempt cratered his net impact. While his point-of-attack defense remained disruptive, the completely empty offensive possessions made him a massive net negative.

Shooting
FG 0/5 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 8.5%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg -28.4
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.5m
Offense -3.2
Hustle +2.4
Defense +5.8
Raw total +5.0
Avg player in 30.5m -17.2
Impact -12.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 85.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
S Deandre Ayton 27.4m
13
pts
13
reb
1
ast
Impact
+9.7

Anchoring the paint with elite defensive positioning drove a highly positive overall rating. He continued his streak of hyper-efficient interior finishing, ensuring that his touches consistently yielded high-value looks.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 0/0
FT 5/8 (62.5%)
Advanced
TS% 61.8%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -21.1
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.4m
Offense +12.3
Hustle +3.2
Defense +9.6
Raw total +25.1
Avg player in 27.4m -15.4
Impact +9.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 2
0
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-16.8

A complete non-factor on the offensive end, he failed to register a single point while missing all his attempts. Without his usual disruptive defensive energy to compensate, his presence on the floor was severely detrimental to the team's spacing and flow.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 5.3%
Net Rtg -3.3
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.6m
Offense -2.4
Hustle +0.2
Defense -0.1
Raw total -2.3
Avg player in 25.6m -14.5
Impact -16.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Jaxson Hayes 18.7m
12
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+7.6

Elite rim-running and highly efficient finishing around the basket maximized his limited minutes. By staying strictly within his role and avoiding wasted possessions, he generated a stellar positive impact.

Shooting
FG 5/6 (83.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 77.3%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -7.5
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.7m
Offense +14.8
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.8
Raw total +18.1
Avg player in 18.7m -10.5
Impact +7.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Gabe Vincent 18.4m
9
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.4

Breaking out of a recent shooting funk, timely perimeter shot-making provided a much-needed spark off the bench. His ability to stretch the floor efficiently kept his overall impact slightly in the green despite limited minutes.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 15.0%
Net Rtg -23.4
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.4m
Offense +7.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.9
Raw total +10.8
Avg player in 18.4m -10.4
Impact +0.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
5
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.4

Forced perimeter looks and a lack of secondary hustle plays dragged his overall rating into the red. While he finally broke a recent scoreless streak, the shot selection remained too inefficient to justify the attempts.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 25.9%
Net Rtg +7.4
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.6m
Offense +0.1
Hustle 0.0
Defense +1.5
Raw total +1.6
Avg player in 12.6m -7.0
Impact -5.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
6
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
+4.9

Perfect execution during a brief cameo appearance resulted in a massive per-minute impact spike. Nailing consecutive perimeter looks provided an instant, flawless offensive injection.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 50.0%
Net Rtg +100.0
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.9m
Offense +6.0
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total +6.0
Avg player in 1.9m -1.1
Impact +4.9
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.1

Registered essentially empty cardio during a brief stint on the floor. A lack of tangible involvement on either end of the court led to a slightly negative baseline rating.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +100.0
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.9m
Offense 0.0
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total 0.0
Avg player in 1.9m -1.1
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
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.4

Another virtually invisible performance extended his recent stretch of offensive irrelevance. He logged minimal court time without attempting a shot, resulting in a negligible negative footprint.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +100.0
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.9m
Offense +0.5
Hustle +0.2
Defense 0.0
Raw total +0.7
Avg player in 1.9m -1.1
Impact -0.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0