GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

BKN Brooklyn Nets
S Noah Clowney 42.8m
15
pts
9
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.7

A massive spike in offensive usage came at the cost of severe inefficiency from beyond the arc. The sheer number of clanked threes fueled opponent transition opportunities, plunging his net score deep into the red.

Shooting
FG 5/14 (35.7%)
3PT 3/10 (30.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.4%
USG% 18.6%
Net Rtg -6.2
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 42.8m
Offense +5.8
Hustle +3.7
Defense +1.0
Raw total +10.5
Avg player in 42.8m -20.2
Impact -9.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
30
pts
8
reb
4
ast
Impact
+3.0

High-volume perimeter chucking yielded mixed results, keeping his overall impact surprisingly modest given the heavy usage. Consistent defensive engagement (+2.2) prevented his missed triples from becoming a larger liability.

Shooting
FG 9/19 (47.4%)
3PT 4/12 (33.3%)
FT 8/9 (88.9%)
Advanced
TS% 65.3%
USG% 27.2%
Net Rtg -1.5
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 42.0m
Offense +19.8
Hustle +0.8
Defense +2.2
Raw total +22.8
Avg player in 42.0m -19.8
Impact +3.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S Nic Claxton 38.8m
18
pts
9
reb
4
ast
Impact
+10.9

Dominated the paint with highly efficient finishing and relentless rim-running. Paired his interior scoring surge with excellent defensive anchoring (+3.1) to completely control the frontcourt matchup.

Shooting
FG 8/13 (61.5%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.8%
USG% 16.1%
Net Rtg -4.3
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.8m
Offense +22.6
Hustle +3.5
Defense +3.1
Raw total +29.2
Avg player in 38.8m -18.3
Impact +10.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 21
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 38.1%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
S Egor Dëmin 21.1m
6
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.3

Despite decent shooting splits, his overall impact slipped significantly into the negative. Likely bled value through unseen mistakes or poor transition defense during his time on the floor.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -25.7
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.1m
Offense +3.0
Hustle +1.1
Defense +1.6
Raw total +5.7
Avg player in 21.1m -10.0
Impact -4.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Drake Powell 19.7m
6
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+3.5

Picked his spots perfectly to break out of a recent shooting slump. Strong defensive rotations (+4.5) and disciplined decision-making made him a clear positive during his rotation stint.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 87.2%
USG% 7.3%
Net Rtg -25.0
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.7m
Offense +5.6
Hustle +2.8
Defense +4.5
Raw total +12.9
Avg player in 19.7m -9.4
Impact +3.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
Nolan Traore 36.9m
21
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.8

Broke out of a shooting slump with an aggressive, downhill attacking style that punished the defense. Elite perimeter pressure (+6.9) compounded his breakout offensive performance to drive a stellar net rating.

Shooting
FG 7/13 (53.8%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 67.1%
USG% 19.8%
Net Rtg +9.7
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.9m
Offense +12.5
Hustle +4.8
Defense +6.9
Raw total +24.2
Avg player in 36.9m -17.4
Impact +6.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 35.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 2
14
pts
8
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.0

Shot his team out of several possessions with a disastrous performance from beyond the arc. His active hustle (+3.5) on the glass was completely negated by the long rebounds generated from his own bricked jumpers.

Shooting
FG 4/15 (26.7%)
3PT 1/11 (9.1%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 39.7%
USG% 24.1%
Net Rtg +7.7
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.7m
Offense +0.8
Hustle +3.5
Defense +2.1
Raw total +6.4
Avg player in 32.7m -15.4
Impact -9.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 31.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
5
pts
8
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.5

Controlled the glass with high-end hustle (+4.4) but struggled to finish through contact inside. His lack of offensive punch left his overall impact hovering right around neutral.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.5%
USG% 16.3%
Net Rtg -17.6
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.2m
Offense +3.8
Hustle +4.4
Defense +0.3
Raw total +8.5
Avg player in 19.2m -9.0
Impact -0.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
Cam Thomas 19.0m
7
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-10.3

Forced contested looks and failed to find a rhythm, leading to a steep drop in his typical production. A complete lack of defensive resistance (-0.1) compounded the damage from his empty offensive trips.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 35.9%
USG% 28.9%
Net Rtg -2.9
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.0m
Offense -1.5
Hustle +0.2
Defense -0.1
Raw total -1.4
Avg player in 19.0m -8.9
Impact -10.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
Danny Wolf 17.9m
4
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.8

Provided steady, low-mistake minutes off the bench despite a dip in his usual scoring volume. Solid defensive positioning (+2.4) kept his stint firmly in the black.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 7.0%
Net Rtg -8.7
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.9m
Offense +5.8
Hustle +2.0
Defense +2.4
Raw total +10.2
Avg player in 17.9m -8.4
Impact +1.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
BOS Boston Celtics
S Jaylen Brown 45.6m
27
pts
10
reb
12
ast
Impact
-1.5

A staggering 18 missed field goals completely tanked his net impact despite heavy offensive usage. Elite defensive metrics (+6.5) and active hands kept the game close, but the sheer volume of empty possessions was too much to overcome.

Shooting
FG 9/27 (33.3%)
3PT 4/10 (40.0%)
FT 5/10 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 43.0%
USG% 32.4%
Net Rtg +13.9
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 45.6m
Offense +11.8
Hustle +1.8
Defense +6.5
Raw total +20.1
Avg player in 45.6m -21.6
Impact -1.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 43.8%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
32
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
+9.2

Aggressive perimeter shot creation fueled a massive offensive explosion that overwhelmed the opposing backcourt. While his defensive impact was negligible, his sheer scoring gravity and ability to hit contested jumpers drove a dominant box score rating.

Shooting
FG 13/24 (54.2%)
3PT 6/11 (54.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 27.5%
Net Rtg -8.3
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 40.3m
Offense +24.8
Hustle +3.5
Defense -0.1
Raw total +28.2
Avg player in 40.3m -19.0
Impact +9.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Sam Hauser 39.4m
19
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+9.0

Elite perimeter spacing and high-end hustle (+5.5) stretched the opposing defense to its breaking point. Capitalized on defensive breakdowns to generate a massive positive swing whenever he was on the floor.

Shooting
FG 7/12 (58.3%)
3PT 5/10 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 79.2%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg -6.8
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.4m
Offense +17.9
Hustle +5.5
Defense +4.2
Raw total +27.6
Avg player in 39.4m -18.6
Impact +9.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
6
pts
7
reb
4
ast
Impact
+1.8

Overcame a rough shooting night by leaning heavily into his off-ball utility. Exceptional defensive positioning (+7.5) and relentless hustle (+5.9) allowed him to positively influence the game without needing to score.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 10.7%
Net Rtg -1.2
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.8m
Offense +4.3
Hustle +5.9
Defense +7.5
Raw total +17.7
Avg player in 33.8m -15.9
Impact +1.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
S Neemias Queta 28.4m
6
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+5.2

Maintained his streak of highly efficient interior play by strictly taking high-percentage looks around the basket. His defensive anchoring (+5.1) and disciplined shot selection maximized his value in a limited role.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 77.3%
USG% 7.9%
Net Rtg +7.7
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.4m
Offense +9.2
Hustle +4.3
Defense +5.1
Raw total +18.6
Avg player in 28.4m -13.4
Impact +5.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 41.2%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
10
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-13.6

A brutal perimeter shooting slump generated a wave of empty possessions that cratered his overall value. Even a strong effort in the hustle categories (+5.6) couldn't salvage the damage done by his forced jumpers.

Shooting
FG 4/16 (25.0%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 29.6%
USG% 24.7%
Net Rtg +7.2
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.9m
Offense -5.3
Hustle +5.6
Defense +3.5
Raw total +3.8
Avg player in 36.9m -17.4
Impact -13.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
Luka Garza 20.5m
12
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
-0.3

Continued his streak of efficient interior scoring by bullying his way to the rim. However, defensive liabilities (-2.1) in the pick-and-roll wiped out nearly all of his offensive contributions.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.6%
USG% 23.8%
Net Rtg -2.7
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.5m
Offense +9.6
Hustle +1.9
Defense -2.1
Raw total +9.4
Avg player in 20.5m -9.7
Impact -0.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
10
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+10.3

Flawless execution on offense maximized his brief rotation stint. Combined perfect shooting with excellent defensive rotations (+5.4) to provide a massive spark off the bench.

Shooting
FG 4/4 (100.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 125.0%
USG% 9.3%
Net Rtg +13.4
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.6m
Offense +11.8
Hustle +1.9
Defense +5.4
Raw total +19.1
Avg player in 18.6m -8.8
Impact +10.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
Jordan Walsh 14.9m
5
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.3

Provided quiet but effective spot minutes by staying within his role. Active hustle (+3.6) and timely cuts compensated for a slight negative rating on the defensive end.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 8.6%
Net Rtg -25.0
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.9m
Offense +5.1
Hustle +3.5
Defense -0.4
Raw total +8.2
Avg player in 14.9m -6.9
Impact +1.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.2

An empty offensive shift dragged down his brief appearance on the court. Failed to generate any meaningful defensive or hustle metrics to offset the missed opportunities.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg +53.8
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.7m
Offense -1.8
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.5
Raw total -1.1
Avg player in 6.7m -3.1
Impact -4.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.3

Made the absolute most of a five-minute cameo with decisive, mistake-free execution. Solid defensive activity (+2.6) ensured his short stint was a clear net positive.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 104.2%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg +63.5
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.1m
Offense +3.5
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.6
Raw total +6.7
Avg player in 5.1m -2.4
Impact +4.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0