Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
PHI lead PHX lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
PHX 2P — 3P —
PHI 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 185 attempts

PHX PHX Shot-making Δ

Booker 9/23 -2.4
Brooks Hard 2/13 -8.3
Allen Hard 5/11 +3.7
Green 4/11 -3.2
Goodwin 6/9 +3.5
O'Neale Hard 3/7 +2.7
Ighodaro Open 5/7 +2.2
Gillespie Hard 3/6 +3.4
Williams Open 2/3 -0.2
Dunn 1/2 -0.2

PHI PHI Shot-making Δ

Maxey 7/25 -10.7
Edgecombe Hard 10/21 +1.6
Oubre Jr. Hard 6/15 +0.5
Drummond Open 4/10 -5.2
Grimes 3/7 -1.3
Barlow Open 3/6 -1.8
Bona Open 4/5 +1.8
Edwards Hard 2/2 +3.1
Walker Hard 0/1 -0.9
Watford Open 0/1 -1.4
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
PHX
PHI
40/92 Field Goals 39/93
43.5% Field Goal % 41.9%
16/39 3-Pointers 11/34
41.0% 3-Point % 32.4%
20/20 Free Throws 21/27
100.0% Free Throw % 77.8%
57.5% True Shooting % 52.4%
53 Total Rebounds 59
15 Offensive 18
27 Defensive 31
25 Assists 20
1.14 Assist/TO Ratio 1.05
22 Turnovers 19
5 Steals 12
2 Blocks 6
21 Fouls 22
34 Points in Paint 46
16 Fast Break Pts 18
21 Points off TOs 28
20 Second Chance Pts 26
58 Bench Points 28
17 Largest Lead 9
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Jordan Goodwin
16 PTS · 5 REB · 2 AST · 19.9 MIN
+21.75
2
Grayson Allen
16 PTS · 5 REB · 6 AST · 28.9 MIN
+18.82
3
VJ Edgecombe
25 PTS · 7 REB · 1 AST · 36.8 MIN
+15.87
4
Kelly Oubre Jr.
21 PTS · 4 REB · 1 AST · 34.0 MIN
+11.86
5
Dominick Barlow
8 PTS · 5 REB · 2 AST · 27.6 MIN
+11.05
6
Quentin Grimes
12 PTS · 4 REB · 5 AST · 26.9 MIN
+10.93
7
Tyrese Maxey
20 PTS · 2 REB · 7 AST · 42.7 MIN
+10.1
8
Adem Bona
11 PTS · 10 REB · 0 AST · 26.2 MIN
+9.54
9
Andre Drummond
8 PTS · 15 REB · 1 AST · 21.8 MIN
+9.4
10
Devin Booker
27 PTS · 3 REB · 4 AST · 33.6 MIN
+8.18
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:12 J. Goodwin REBOUND (Off:2 Def:3) 116–110
Q4 0:17 MISS Q. Grimes driving Layup 116–110
Q4 0:20 J. Green traveling TURNOVER (2 TO) 116–110
Q4 0:23 T. Maxey Free Throw 3 of 3 (20 PTS) 116–110
Q4 0:23 T. Maxey Free Throw 2 of 3 (19 PTS) 116–109
Q4 0:23 T. Maxey Free Throw 1 of 3 (18 PTS) 116–108
Q4 0:23 C. Gillespie shooting personal FOUL (3 PF) (Maxey 3 FT) 116–107
Q4 0:29 D. Brooks Free Throw 2 of 2 (6 PTS) 116–107
Q4 0:29 D. Brooks Free Throw 1 of 2 (5 PTS) 115–107
Q4 0:29 K. Oubre Jr. personal FOUL (4 PF) (Brooks 2 FT) 114–107
Q4 0:37 C. Gillespie REBOUND (Off:0 Def:4) 114–107
Q4 0:39 MISS T. Maxey running finger roll Layup 114–107
Q4 0:45 T. Maxey STEAL (3 STL) 114–107
Q4 0:45 D. Booker lost ball TURNOVER (6 TO) 114–107
Q4 0:53 TEAM defensive REBOUND 114–107

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

PHI Philadelphia 76ers
S Tyrese Maxey 42.7m
20
pts
2
reb
7
ast
Impact
+5.3

A brutal shooting slump tanked his overall value, as he repeatedly forced contested looks early in the shot clock. Despite commendable defensive effort (+6.5 Def), the sheer number of empty offensive possessions stalled the team's momentum. His inability to adjust his shot selection during the cold streak proved incredibly costly.

Shooting
FG 7/25 (28.0%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 36.8%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +1.0
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 42.7m
Scoring +5.8
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +4.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense +4.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 2
S VJ Edgecombe 36.8m
25
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+17.4

High-volume rim pressure and aggressive defensive rotations (+7.6 Def) defined a stellar two-way outing. He consistently collapsed the defense with hard drives, absorbing contact and finishing through traffic. The sheer volume of his two-way activity overwhelmed his individual matchups.

Shooting
FG 10/21 (47.6%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.9%
USG% 26.5%
Net Rtg +4.8
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.8m
Scoring +16.8
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +6.2
Hustle +6.0
Defense +3.1
Turnovers -7.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 18.2%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 4
S Kelly Oubre Jr. 34.0m
21
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+12.9

Relentless activity on the margins (+9.6 Hustle) more than made up for a streaky overall shooting night. He weaponized his athleticism to blow up passing lanes and generate crucial transition opportunities. Hitting a barrage of spot-up threes provided the necessary spacing to keep the offense humming.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 5/10 (50.0%)
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 59.5%
USG% 21.7%
Net Rtg +18.5
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.0m
Scoring +13.1
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +5.0
Hustle +4.1
Defense +3.5
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 21
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S Dominick Barlow 27.6m
8
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.6

Continued his streak of highly efficient finishing by taking exactly what the defense conceded. Strong positional awareness (+4.3 Def) and timely contests at the rim anchored a sturdy defensive stint. He operated perfectly as a low-usage, high-reliability safety valve in the half-court.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.1%
USG% 11.0%
Net Rtg -4.9
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.6m
Scoring +5.5
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +5.4
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 53.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Andre Drummond 21.8m
8
pts
15
reb
1
ast
Impact
+6.7

Total domination of the defensive glass fueled a positive impact, erasing multiple second-chance opportunities for the opponent. However, clunky finishing around the basket and a lack of overall mobility capped his ceiling. He served as a massive roadblock in the paint, even if his offensive touch was severely lacking.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 21.1%
Net Rtg -4.3
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.8m
Scoring +2.5
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +18.1
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
12
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
+4.5

Off-the-charts hustle (+10.5) and suffocating perimeter defense (+7.5 Def) drove a highly impactful performance. He didn't need a high volume of shots to dictate the flow, instead relying on deflections, loose ball recoveries, and fighting through screens. His relentless motor completely neutralized the opponent's primary perimeter threats.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 62.2%
USG% 18.3%
Net Rtg -23.9
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.9m
Scoring +8.4
Creation +2.9
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +1.2
Defense +6.8
Turnovers -6.6
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 3
Adem Bona 26.2m
11
pts
10
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.6

Elite rim protection (+8.4 Def) and hyper-efficient finishing created a massive interior advantage. He capitalized on every dump-off pass while simultaneously erasing mistakes on the defensive end. This was a masterclass in playing a defined, high-energy role to perfection.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.4%
USG% 15.1%
Net Rtg -9.9
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.2m
Scoring +9.8
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +12.7
Defense +1.0
Turnovers -9.6
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 4
5
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.0

Perfect shooting in limited minutes provided a quick, efficient spark off the bench. He stayed strictly within his lane, avoiding mistakes and executing offensive sets with precision. While the sample size was small, his mistake-free basketball kept the second unit stable.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 125.0%
USG% 6.9%
Net Rtg -60.7
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.0m
Scoring +5.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.0

A brief, ineffective stint was highlighted by slow defensive rotations (-1.1 Def) and a complete lack of offensive rhythm. He failed to inject any energy into the lineup, floating through his minutes without making a tangible mark. The quick hook was a direct result of his inability to impact the game physically.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 5.9%
Net Rtg -46.4
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.4m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.3
Defense -0.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-12.8

A disastrously short stint was marred by a complete lack of engagement (+0.0 Hustle) and defensive vulnerability. He offered zero resistance in the paint and looked entirely out of sync with the offensive flow. The negative swing happened rapidly due to his inability to match the game's intensity.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -83.3
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.6m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
PHX Phoenix Suns
S Devin Booker 33.6m
27
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
+3.1

Inefficient volume shooting suppressed what could have been a dominant statistical night. However, an exceptional commitment to effort plays (+8.0 Hustle) kept his head above water. He compensated for the cold shooting stretches by fighting through screens and generating extra possessions to keep the offense afloat.

Shooting
FG 9/23 (39.1%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.8%
USG% 36.0%
Net Rtg -12.1
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.6m
Scoring +16.6
Creation +3.0
Shot Making +5.4
Hustle +3.8
Defense -2.6
Turnovers -14.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 31.2%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 6
S Dillon Brooks 30.3m
6
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
-10.4

An abysmal shooting performance completely derailed his overall value, as he bricked his way through a high volume of perimeter attempts. While his defensive presence remained solid (+5.0 Def), the sheer number of empty trips and poor shot selection created a massive offensive deficit. His inability to find any rhythm dragged down the entire unit's half-court efficiency.

Shooting
FG 2/13 (15.4%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 21.6%
USG% 20.5%
Net Rtg -8.8
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.3m
Scoring -2.7
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +1.5
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -4.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 43.8%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
12
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
-2.1

Perimeter shot-making provided a scoring boost, but his inability to dictate the tempo or disrupt the point of attack severely limited his overall value. Minimal hustle and defensive contributions meant he gave back whatever he generated offensively. He operated more as a spot-up threat than a true floor general, leaving the offense stagnant during his shifts.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 82.0%
USG% 12.3%
Net Rtg +13.1
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.0m
Scoring +9.7
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +1.2
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 35.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Royce O'Neale 23.7m
9
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-3.2

Despite decent perimeter efficiency, his lack of off-ball activity and secondary playmaking limited his overall effectiveness. A near-invisible hustle rating (+0.2) suggests he was floating on the perimeter rather than engaging in the dirty work. The scoring output wasn't enough to offset his passive stretches on both ends of the floor.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 12.9%
Net Rtg -11.7
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.7m
Scoring +5.9
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +0.9
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Mark Williams 18.2m
4
pts
9
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.2

A sharp drop in offensive involvement left him operating primarily as a static rebounder. Defensive lapses in drop coverage (-0.5 Def) allowed opponents to exploit the paint, negating the value of his work on the glass. He failed to establish the interior dominance that usually anchors his impact.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg -9.7
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.2m
Scoring +3.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +11.4
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -12.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 5
Oso Ighodaro 29.0m
12
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
-3.7

Hyper-efficient finishing around the rim anchored a steady, if unspectacular, two-way showing. Solid rotational defense and reliable screen-setting (+4.0 Hustle) kept the offense flowing smoothly. He played perfectly within himself, taking only high-percentage looks and executing his assignments without forcing the issue.

Shooting
FG 5/7 (71.4%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 76.1%
USG% 16.4%
Net Rtg +20.8
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.0m
Scoring +10.6
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +5.4
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -10.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 4
16
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
+12.7

Elite defensive positioning (+8.4 Def) combined with timely floor-spacing to create a massive positive swing. He consistently punished defensive rotations by hitting high-leverage perimeter shots while maintaining suffocating pressure on the other end. This was a quintessential two-way role-player performance that amplified every lineup he joined.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 4/9 (44.4%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.3%
USG% 15.8%
Net Rtg +19.5
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.9m
Scoring +11.7
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +4.4
Hustle +4.4
Defense +0.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Jalen Green 19.9m
12
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
-2.9

A significant dip in scoring aggression resulted in a mostly neutral outing. While he chipped in with decent hustle metrics, his inability to consistently break down the defense or finish through contact limited his offensive ceiling. The lack of rim pressure forced the offense into late-clock, low-quality perimeter attempts.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.5%
USG% 25.9%
Net Rtg +16.6
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Scoring +5.8
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
16
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+18.8

An explosive scoring surge paired with relentless energy plays (+7.5 Hustle) drove a game-changing performance. He completely disrupted the opponent's rhythm with aggressive point-of-attack defense while capitalizing on every offensive opportunity. This high-octane two-way effort single-handedly tilted the momentum during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.0%
USG% 18.5%
Net Rtg +17.5
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Scoring +13.9
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +6.3
Defense +4.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
Ryan Dunn 8.5m
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.6

Brief minutes were marred by defensive breakdowns (-2.2 Def) that allowed easy penetration. While he showed flashes of energy, he failed to make any meaningful offensive impact to balance the scales. The short stint was defined by missed rotations rather than any positive contributions.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +48.5
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.5m
Scoring +1.2
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +1.3
Defense -3.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0