GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

DAL Dallas Mavericks
S Max Christie 35.8m
21
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.3

Elite hustle metrics and a willingness to let it fly from deep kept his overall impact positive despite some overall inefficiency. His constant off-ball motion and aggressive closeouts on shooters defined a high-energy, two-way performance.

Shooting
FG 7/16 (43.8%)
3PT 5/12 (41.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.2%
USG% 20.7%
Net Rtg +33.8
+/- +28
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.8m
Offense +11.7
Hustle +8.7
Defense +3.3
Raw total +23.7
Avg player in 35.8m -20.4
Impact +3.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 21
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 52.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Naji Marshall 33.7m
30
pts
7
reb
9
ast
Impact
+11.3

Surgical precision on offensive drives and near-flawless shot selection resulted in a dominant positive rating. By consistently exploiting mismatches in the mid-post, he generated high-quality looks without forcing the issue or turning the ball over.

Shooting
FG 10/12 (83.3%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 8/8 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 96.6%
USG% 24.4%
Net Rtg +23.0
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.7m
Offense +25.0
Hustle +1.4
Defense +4.0
Raw total +30.4
Avg player in 33.7m -19.1
Impact +11.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
S Cooper Flagg 30.2m
21
pts
11
reb
2
ast
Impact
-1.3

High-volume inefficiency from the floor ultimately dragged his overall impact into the red despite excellent weak-side rim protection. Settling for heavily contested mid-range jumpers against set defenses negated the value of his relentless work on the offensive glass.

Shooting
FG 8/18 (44.4%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 4/7 (57.1%)
Advanced
TS% 49.8%
USG% 32.9%
Net Rtg +34.8
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.2m
Offense +6.3
Hustle +4.8
Defense +4.8
Raw total +15.9
Avg player in 30.2m -17.2
Impact -1.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
S Dwight Powell 27.1m
10
pts
12
reb
1
ast
Impact
+2.5

Highly efficient execution as a roll man generated a steady positive impact whenever he was on the floor. His knack for sealing off defenders deep in the paint created easy passing angles and maintained excellent offensive flow.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 80.6%
USG% 7.2%
Net Rtg +37.3
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.1m
Offense +13.1
Hustle +1.4
Defense +3.3
Raw total +17.8
Avg player in 27.1m -15.3
Impact +2.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 47.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
S Caleb Martin 19.9m
0
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-13.5

An absolute offensive void, his inability to threaten the defense allowed opponents to aggressively double-team the primary ball handlers. Getting repeatedly blown by on baseline closeouts compounded his struggles, resulting in a disastrous net rating.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 7.5%
Net Rtg -52.6
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Offense -5.1
Hustle +0.4
Defense +2.5
Raw total -2.2
Avg player in 19.9m -11.3
Impact -13.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 2
19
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
-0.9

Despite excellent finishing around the basket, his overall impact slipped into the negative due to costly live-ball turnovers that fueled transition points. Over-penetrating into crowded paint areas repeatedly short-circuited otherwise promising offensive possessions.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 75.2%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +5.0
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.8m
Offense +9.7
Hustle +2.5
Defense +2.1
Raw total +14.3
Avg player in 26.8m -15.2
Impact -0.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
6
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.6

A severe lack of offensive rhythm cratered his net rating, as he struggled to find separation against aggressive perimeter defense. Forcing contested jumpers early in the shot clock repeatedly handed momentum back to the opposition.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 14.1%
Net Rtg -20.4
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.9m
Offense -3.4
Hustle +1.4
Defense +4.3
Raw total +2.3
Avg player in 22.9m -12.9
Impact -10.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
10
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
+8.9

A stellar defensive rating anchored his highly positive impact, as he consistently disrupted passing lanes and deterred rim attempts. Timely corner spacing on offense provided just enough gravity to keep the opposing defense honest.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 55.6%
USG% 16.9%
Net Rtg -24.5
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.3m
Offense +9.6
Hustle +2.7
Defense +9.3
Raw total +21.6
Avg player in 22.3m -12.7
Impact +8.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 2
BLK 3
TO 1
5
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
-1.3

Struggled to organize the second-unit offense, leading to stagnant possessions and a slightly negative overall impact. Missing multiple floaters in traffic highlighted his difficulty navigating the opponent's interior length.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 20.6%
Net Rtg +34.6
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.8m
Offense +2.6
Hustle +0.2
Defense +2.6
Raw total +5.4
Avg player in 11.8m -6.7
Impact -1.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
1
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.5

Failed to establish any interior presence during a brief stint, missing rushed attempts around the basket. His inability to secure positioning against smaller defenders severely limited his effectiveness as a roll man.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 17.4%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -46.7
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.0m
Offense -0.3
Hustle +0.8
Defense +0.5
Raw total +1.0
Avg player in 6.0m -3.5
Impact -2.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.7

A fleeting appearance was marred by a blown defensive assignment and a rushed perimeter attempt. He simply didn't have enough floor time to find the game's rhythm or contribute meaningfully.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -28.6
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.6m
Offense -0.9
Hustle +0.7
Defense 0.0
Raw total -0.2
Avg player in 2.6m -1.5
Impact -1.7
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
0
ast
Impact
-0.5

Logged less than a minute of garbage time action, resulting in a negligible impact score. The game was already decided before he crossed the scorer's table.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -150.0
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 0.9m
Offense 0.0
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total 0.0
Avg player in 0.9m -0.5
Impact -0.5
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
GSW Golden State Warriors
S Stephen Curry 34.5m
38
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+9.3

An overwhelming barrage of pull-up jumpers off high ball screens completely broke the opponent's defensive shell, driving a massive positive impact. The sheer gravity of his perimeter movement forced constant double-teams, creating a cascading advantage for the entire offensive unit.

Shooting
FG 14/27 (51.9%)
3PT 8/15 (53.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.1%
USG% 35.7%
Net Rtg -32.9
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.5m
Offense +24.6
Hustle +3.0
Defense +1.3
Raw total +28.9
Avg player in 34.5m -19.6
Impact +9.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
9
pts
4
reb
10
ast
Impact
-0.9

Relentless energy on loose balls and strong positional defense were completely undone by poor shot selection and a cold perimeter touch. Forcing contested floaters in the lane cratered his offensive efficiency, resulting in a slightly negative net impact despite his high-motor play.

Shooting
FG 4/13 (30.8%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 32.4%
USG% 19.0%
Net Rtg +15.0
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.6m
Offense +5.7
Hustle +6.1
Defense +5.8
Raw total +17.6
Avg player in 32.6m -18.5
Impact -0.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Draymond Green 23.4m
4
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
-3.1

Elite hustle metrics and constant defensive communication couldn't salvage a negative overall rating driven by offensive stagnation. He passed up open looks at the top of the key, bogging down the offensive flow and allowing defenders to sag into the paint.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 34.0%
USG% 15.8%
Net Rtg -27.5
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.4m
Offense -0.2
Hustle +6.0
Defense +4.3
Raw total +10.1
Avg player in 23.4m -13.2
Impact -3.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 3
S Moses Moody 23.2m
12
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+5.6

Despite a drop from his recent scoring tear, his impact remained highly positive due to elite perimeter spacing and stout point-of-attack defense. Hitting half his looks from deep stretched the defense, while his stellar defensive metrics highlighted his ability to contain dribble penetration.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 80.6%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -9.8
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.2m
Offense +10.9
Hustle +1.6
Defense +6.3
Raw total +18.8
Avg player in 23.2m -13.2
Impact +5.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
S Gui Santos 16.6m
5
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.4

An inability to connect from beyond the arc dragged his overall impact into the red, snapping a streak of highly efficient offensive execution. His perimeter hesitation stalled several half-court sets, negating the modest value he provided through secondary rim rotations.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 11.9%
Net Rtg -16.3
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.6m
Offense +2.4
Hustle +2.0
Defense +1.7
Raw total +6.1
Avg player in 16.6m -9.5
Impact -3.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Al Horford 26.1m
3
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
-6.3

Strong interior positioning and defensive communication were overshadowed by an inability to punish closeouts on the other end. Passing up open pick-and-pop opportunities stalled the half-court offense, leading to a severely negative overall rating.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 9.2%
Net Rtg +1.5
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.1m
Offense +0.2
Hustle +2.9
Defense +5.4
Raw total +8.5
Avg player in 26.1m -14.8
Impact -6.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 26.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
22
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+9.4

Aggressive downhill drives and suffocating point-of-attack defense fueled a massive surge in his overall effectiveness. By consistently beating his primary defender off the dribble, he collapsed the paint and generated high-value looks at the rim.

Shooting
FG 9/15 (60.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 3/6 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.4%
USG% 32.8%
Net Rtg +38.4
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.4m
Offense +13.6
Hustle +2.4
Defense +6.8
Raw total +22.8
Avg player in 23.4m -13.4
Impact +9.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
4
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.9

Failing to convert on standard baseline cuts severely limited his offensive utility and dragged his net impact down. Without his usual finishing efficiency at the rim, his defensive pressure wasn't enough to keep him out of the negative column.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -82.1
+/- -32
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.0m
Offense +1.9
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.0
Raw total +4.8
Avg player in 17.0m -9.7
Impact -4.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
Buddy Hield 14.5m
6
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.7

Cold perimeter shooting severely hampered his overall value, as he repeatedly forced contested looks early in the shot clock. His inability to punish defensive rotations from the weak side allowed the opponent to pack the paint without consequence.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.3%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg -0.2
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.5m
Offense +2.2
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.8
Raw total +5.6
Avg player in 14.5m -8.3
Impact -2.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
Will Richard 13.5m
0
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.1

Proved that scoring isn't required to influence winning, generating a solid positive rating entirely through elite off-ball defense and relentless hustle. His ability to blow up dribble handoffs on the perimeter disrupted the opponent's primary actions all night.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 2.9%
Net Rtg -11.5
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.5m
Offense +0.1
Hustle +4.3
Defense +6.3
Raw total +10.7
Avg player in 13.5m -7.6
Impact +3.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 0
10
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
+11.2

Maximized every second of his brief floor time by attacking the basket with ruthless efficiency and drawing fouls. His explosive transition finishing during the second quarter completely flipped the game's momentum and spiked his net impact.

Shooting
FG 3/3 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 105.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +80.4
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.5m
Offense +11.0
Hustle +1.1
Defense +4.5
Raw total +16.6
Avg player in 9.5m -5.4
Impact +11.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.6

A brief, ineffective stint was defined by rushed offensive execution and poor positioning on the block. Missing a pair of clean looks from the perimeter negated any spacing value he was meant to provide during his rotation.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 21.4%
Net Rtg -23.6
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.7m
Offense +0.2
Hustle +0.4
Defense -0.1
Raw total +0.5
Avg player in 5.7m -3.1
Impact -2.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0