Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
LAC lead BKN lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
BKN 2P — 3P —
LAC 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 163 attempts

BKN BKN Shot-making Δ

Wolf 3/13 -7.3
Dëmin Hard 3/11 -1.6
Porter Jr. 3/11 -5.3
Wilson Hard 3/8 -1.3
Martin Hard 1/7 -4.8
Mann 3/6 +1.2
Claxton 3/6 +0.6
Williams 2/6 -2.5
Powell Hard 1/6 -2.9
Sharpe Open 3/5 +0.1

LAC LAC Shot-making Δ

Leonard Hard 9/17 +3.4
Collins 7/14 +1.5
Miller Open 7/10 +2.1
Harden Hard 3/8 +1.2
Sanders Hard 4/7 +1.9
Zubac Open 4/5 +1.8
Baldwin Jr. Hard 3/3 +5.0
Lopez Hard 1/3 +0.1
Dunn 1/3 -1.1
Brown Open 1/3 -1.6
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
BKN
LAC
29/85 Field Goals 44/78
34.1% Field Goal % 56.4%
9/43 3-Pointers 12/25
20.9% 3-Point % 48.0%
22/25 Free Throws 26/29
88.0% Free Throw % 89.7%
46.4% True Shooting % 69.4%
41 Total Rebounds 55
9 Offensive 7
27 Defensive 44
23 Assists 20
1.35 Assist/TO Ratio 1.05
16 Turnovers 19
14 Steals 12
4 Blocks 5
19 Fouls 15
38 Points in Paint 58
11 Fast Break Pts 17
22 Points off TOs 18
5 Second Chance Pts 6
49 Bench Points 48
2 Largest Lead 40
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Kawhi Leonard
28 PTS · 5 REB · 2 AST · 25.3 MIN
+24.99
2
John Collins
18 PTS · 5 REB · 1 AST · 26.3 MIN
+18.44
3
Jordan Miller
16 PTS · 7 REB · 0 AST · 23.4 MIN
+18.29
4
Day'Ron Sharpe
8 PTS · 6 REB · 2 AST · 20.4 MIN
+14.11
5
James Harden
19 PTS · 6 REB · 8 AST · 31.2 MIN
+13.4
6
Ivica Zubac
11 PTS · 10 REB · 1 AST · 23.2 MIN
+11.78
7
Danny Wolf
14 PTS · 7 REB · 4 AST · 25.9 MIN
+11.38
8
Terance Mann
8 PTS · 3 REB · 2 AST · 19.6 MIN
+8.37
9
Nic Claxton
6 PTS · 6 REB · 1 AST · 23.8 MIN
+7.46
10
Egor Dëmin
12 PTS · 2 REB · 5 AST · 28.6 MIN
+7.05
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:09 D. Wolf Free Throw 2 of 2 (14 PTS) 89–126
Q4 0:09 D. Wolf Free Throw 1 of 2 (13 PTS) 88–126
Q4 0:09 P. Baldwin Jr. personal FOUL (1 PF) (Wolf 2 FT) 87–126
Q4 0:20 P. Baldwin Jr. turnaround Hook (8 PTS) 87–126
Q4 0:32 E. Liddell 3PT (3 PTS) (D. Powell 2 AST) 87–124
Q4 0:37 K. Brown running DUNK (2 PTS) 84–124
Q4 0:43 K. Brown STEAL (1 STL) 84–122
Q4 0:43 D. Powell bad pass TURNOVER (4 TO) 84–122
Q4 0:50 P. Baldwin Jr. 28' 3PT (6 PTS) (K. Brown 1 AST) 84–122
Q4 1:09 K. Sanders REBOUND (Off:0 Def:4) 84–119
Q4 1:13 MISS E. Dëmin running 3PT 84–119
Q4 1:18 E. Liddell STEAL (1 STL) 84–119
Q4 1:18 K. Sanders bad pass TURNOVER (4 TO) 84–119
Q4 1:30 K. Sanders REBOUND (Off:0 Def:3) 84–119
Q4 1:33 MISS D. Wolf running reverse Layup 84–119

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

LAC LA Clippers
S James Harden 31.2m
19
pts
6
reb
8
ast
Impact
+8.5

A string of careless live-ball turnovers actively undermined what was otherwise a masterful playmaking display. Although his perimeter shot-making and surprisingly stout post defense generated positive value, the sheer cost of giving away possessions dragged his final score slightly below neutral.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 10/10 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 76.6%
USG% 23.6%
Net Rtg +33.8
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.2m
Scoring +15.2
Creation +4.2
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +1.8
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -11.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 35.3%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 5
S John Collins 26.3m
18
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+13.4

Capitalizing on pick-and-pop mismatches allowed him to sustain a recent hot streak of highly efficient offensive execution. Beyond his reliable finishing, exceptional weak-side rim protection heavily inflated his defensive metrics and drove a stellar overall impact.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 60.5%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +3.5
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.3m
Scoring +12.7
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +1.5
Defense +5.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
S Kawhi Leonard 25.3m
28
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+25.7

Surgical isolation scoring against mismatched defenders drove a remarkably high box score rating. His ability to consistently draw contact and generate high-quality looks from the midrange completely overwhelmed the opposition, cementing a dominant two-way performance.

Shooting
FG 9/17 (52.9%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 8/9 (88.9%)
Advanced
TS% 66.8%
USG% 36.1%
Net Rtg +23.5
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.3m
Scoring +20.8
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +5.4
Hustle +2.5
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
S Ivica Zubac 23.2m
11
pts
10
reb
1
ast
Impact
+10.7

Relentless positioning on the interior generated crucial second-chance opportunities and fueled a strong hustle rating. Even with a lower usage rate than usual, his highly efficient finishing around the basket and disciplined drop coverage ensured a sturdy positive impact.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.4%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +6.1
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.2m
Scoring +9.8
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +1.2
Hustle +9.8
Defense -2.3
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Kris Dunn 12.9m
2
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.1

Tenacious ball pressure at the point of attack defined his brief appearance, disrupting the opponent's initiation sequences. While he was largely a non-factor on the offensive end, his gritty screen navigation and defensive activity kept his overall rating in the green.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 12.1%
Net Rtg +53.3
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.9m
Scoring +0.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +3.8
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Kobe Sanders 30.3m
9
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-11.5

Bleeding points during his extended minutes, a severe lack of off-ball defensive awareness allowed opponents to feast on backdoor cuts. Despite converting his own attempts at a decent clip, his inability to orchestrate the offense or stop the bleeding in transition resulted in a catastrophic net rating.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 16.9%
Net Rtg +31.0
+/- +23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.3m
Scoring +6.2
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +1.2
Defense -2.6
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
16
pts
7
reb
0
ast
Impact
+15.8

Slashing to the rim with absolute conviction, his highly efficient shot selection tore apart the opposing defensive shell. This offensive surge was perfectly matched by aggressive closeouts and passing lane disruption, cementing a breakout two-way performance.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 73.5%
USG% 24.5%
Net Rtg +50.0
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.4m
Scoring +13.7
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +6.0
Defense +4.7
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
Brook Lopez 17.9m
3
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.7

Elite shot-contesting and verticality at the rim drove his defensive metrics, but his offensive passivity proved detrimental. Spending most of his shifts floating on the perimeter without drawing defensive attention caused the half-court spacing to stagnate, resulting in a mildly negative overall impact.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +81.2
+/- +31
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.9m
Scoring +1.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
3
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.8

Veteran positioning and flawless defensive rotations defined his stabilizing presence on the floor. He didn't force a single offensive action, instead relying on high-IQ connective passing and timely spacing to quietly elevate the lineup's overall efficiency.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 3.0%
Net Rtg +101.7
+/- +32
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.8m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.9
Defense +1.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
Cam Christie 13.9m
3
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-10.1

Struggling to find the pace of the game, his overall impact cratered due to a complete lack of offensive assertiveness. While he held up adequately in isolation defense, failing to generate any rim pressure or creation for others left the unit playing essentially four-on-five.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg +36.0
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.9m
Scoring +2.4
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
8
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.4

A sudden burst of flawless perimeter marksmanship instantly stretched the opposing defense during his short time on the hardwood. Although his defensive rotations were slightly a step behind, the sheer efficiency of his spot-up shooting easily pushed his net score into the green.

Shooting
FG 3/3 (100.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 133.3%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +13.3
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.9m
Scoring +8.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +0.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
4
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.7

Maximizing a brief rotational window, decisive finishing around the basket provided a quick jolt to the team's offensive rating. He managed to avoid any glaring mistakes during his stint, keeping the floor balanced and securing a tidy positive impact.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg +13.3
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.9m
Scoring +4.0
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +1.6
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Kobe Brown 6.9m
2
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-6.5

Active hands and physical on-ball defense set the tone for his brief but effective cameo. Even with a couple of forced attempts near the rim dragging down his efficiency, his commitment to shutting down driving lanes yielded a solid positive return.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg +13.3
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.9m
Scoring +0.5
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
BKN Brooklyn Nets
S Egor Dëmin 28.6m
12
pts
2
reb
5
ast
Impact
-0.8

Falling in love with the deep ball proved costly, as a barrage of contested perimeter misses actively hindered the team's offensive rhythm. He managed to generate some positive momentum through secondary playmaking, but the inefficient shot profile ultimately dragged his net score down.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 3/10 (30.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 48.7%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg -17.9
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.6m
Scoring +5.8
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 70.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Drake Powell 24.6m
5
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-10.1

A severe lack of shot creation doomed his overall rating, with forced looks from beyond the arc consistently stalling the half-court offense. Even though he battled hard defensively to disrupt passing lanes, the sheer weight of empty possessions and poor shot selection resulted in a massive net-negative performance.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 36.3%
USG% 19.3%
Net Rtg -30.1
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.6m
Scoring +1.2
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +2.8
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
S Nic Claxton 23.8m
6
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.2

Rim deterrence served as the anchor for his positive rating, completely shutting down interior driving lanes throughout his shifts. While his offensive aggression dipped significantly compared to recent trends, relentless activity on the glass and altered shots ensured he remained a net positive.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 13.2%
Net Rtg -49.1
+/- -28
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.8m
Scoring +3.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +2.8
Defense +1.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
9
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-6.9

Perimeter struggles defined this outing, as a steady diet of clanked three-pointers cratered his overall offensive value. Despite solid defensive rotations and active hustle keeping him somewhat afloat, the sheer volume of wasted possessions dragged his net impact firmly into the red.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 36.5%
USG% 27.7%
Net Rtg -48.9
+/- -25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.6m
Scoring +3.3
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +0.8
Hustle +0.6
Defense -3.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Terance Mann 19.6m
8
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.2

Breaking out of a recent offensive slump, timely shot-making provided a much-needed spark to his overall profile. His value was primarily buoyed by aggressive point-of-attack defense, though a relatively low usage rate kept his total impact marginally positive rather than dominant.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 18.6%
Net Rtg -32.6
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.6m
Scoring +5.7
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +1.9
Defense +3.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
Danny Wolf 25.9m
14
pts
7
reb
4
ast
Impact
+8.0

Defensive anchoring and elite rebounding positioning salvaged a night where his jump shot completely abandoned him. Despite clanking a high volume of perimeter looks, his ability to generate second-chance opportunities and protect the paint kept his net rating afloat.

Shooting
FG 3/13 (23.1%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 42.4%
USG% 25.8%
Net Rtg -39.3
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.9m
Scoring +5.0
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +7.9
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
7
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.1

High-energy loose ball recoveries and transition hustle were completely undone by stagnant half-court execution. Settling for heavily contested jumpers rather than attacking the paint caused a sharp drop in his usual scoring efficiency, leaving a noticeable dent in his overall impact.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.8%
USG% 15.7%
Net Rtg -57.4
+/- -23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.5m
Scoring +3.9
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +2.8
Defense -4.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
8
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+9.5

Utter dominance in the painted area defined this stint, as he built an impenetrable wall that completely neutralized interior drives. His massive defensive rating was perfectly complemented by physical screen-setting and efficient finishing, resulting in a stellar overall impact score.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 63.3%
USG% 15.1%
Net Rtg -19.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.4m
Scoring +6.3
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +7.6
Defense +8.1
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 4
BLK 1
TO 2
Jalen Wilson 19.7m
9
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+2.7

Active closeouts and disciplined weak-side rotations provided just enough defensive value to survive a rough shooting night. His tendency to settle for contested above-the-break threes suppressed his offensive ceiling, keeping his final impact score hovering just above neutral.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 48.3%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg +22.4
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.7m
Scoring +4.7
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Ben Saraf 17.2m
6
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.4

An inability to secure the basketball effectively tanked his value, with sloppy decision-making leading to costly transition opportunities for the opponent. While he converted the few looks he took near the rim, his overall passivity and negative floor spacing created a severe drag on the lineup.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 20.9%
Net Rtg -66.9
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.2m
Scoring +4.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -8.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
2
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-9.0

Forcing the issue against set defenses resulted in a string of errant jumpers that killed the team's offensive momentum. The sheer volume of empty trips and poor shot selection completely overshadowed his minor hustle contributions, plummeting his net rating.

Shooting
FG 1/7 (14.3%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 14.3%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg -53.7
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.3m
Scoring -2.5
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.3

Making the absolute most of a brief rotation cameo, flawless execution on a spot-up opportunity instantly boosted his offensive metrics. He seamlessly fit into the defensive scheme during his short stint, yielding a highly efficient net positive rating before returning to the bench.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg -20.0
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.8m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0