GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

WAS Washington Wizards
S Alex Sarr 28.3m
16
pts
6
reb
5
ast
Impact
+4.7

Altered the geometry of the court with elite rim protection, forcing opposing guards to completely abandon their drives. Showed excellent fluidity diving to the rim out of screens, capitalizing on the defensive attention drawn by the ball handlers.

Shooting
FG 8/14 (57.1%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 20.8%
Net Rtg -50.0
+/- -30
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.3m
Offense +16.0
Hustle +2.8
Defense +4.7
Raw total +23.5
Avg player in 28.3m -18.8
Impact +4.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Kyshawn George 27.1m
15
pts
3
reb
6
ast
Impact
-7.1

Shot selection cratered his overall impact, as he repeatedly forced heavily contested looks over length instead of moving the ball. Kept the defense honest with active hands, but the empty offensive possessions fueled opponent fast breaks.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.5%
USG% 26.1%
Net Rtg -23.9
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.1m
Offense +3.8
Hustle +1.6
Defense +5.4
Raw total +10.8
Avg player in 27.1m -17.9
Impact -7.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 4
S Bub Carrington 25.5m
15
pts
3
reb
6
ast
Impact
-6.2

Over-dribbling against set defenses led to stalled possessions and late-clock grenades for teammates. While he hit some tough perimeter shots, an inability to dictate the tempo allowed the opposition to dictate the terms of engagement.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.6%
USG% 23.5%
Net Rtg -47.5
+/- -28
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.5m
Offense +4.5
Hustle +1.3
Defense +4.9
Raw total +10.7
Avg player in 25.5m -16.9
Impact -6.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 5
S Bilal Coulibaly 24.2m
7
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.1

Tremendous hustle and disruption in the passing lanes were entirely undone by a disastrous shooting night. Opponents blatantly sagged off him in the half-court, completely clogging the driving lanes for the primary creators.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 29.5%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg -43.4
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.2m
Offense +1.8
Hustle +5.8
Defense +1.2
Raw total +8.8
Avg player in 24.2m -15.9
Impact -7.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
9
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.6

Settled for contested perimeter looks early in the shot clock, short-circuiting the team's offensive rhythm. Despite finding some success scoring, poor transition defense allowed easy run-outs that negated his offensive output.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 11.9%
Net Rtg -51.9
+/- -27
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.7m
Offense +9.0
Hustle +0.8
Defense +0.2
Raw total +10.0
Avg player in 23.7m -15.6
Impact -5.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
8
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
-12.4

A brutal combination of forced drives into traffic and missed rotations off the ball tanked his overall rating. High defensive activity metrics masked how often he gambled himself out of position, compromising the weak-side shell.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 36.4%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -19.7
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.8m
Offense +2.1
Hustle +3.2
Defense +5.3
Raw total +10.6
Avg player in 34.8m -23.0
Impact -12.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
Will Riley 24.9m
13
pts
2
reb
5
ast
Impact
+2.3

Overcame a highly inefficient shooting performance by transforming into a defensive menace on the perimeter. Relentless ball pressure disrupted the opponent's offensive initiation, generating enough deflections to swing the momentum in his team's favor.

Shooting
FG 5/15 (33.3%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 43.3%
USG% 26.2%
Net Rtg -6.9
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.9m
Offense +5.9
Hustle +4.0
Defense +8.8
Raw total +18.7
Avg player in 24.9m -16.4
Impact +2.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 83.3%
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 2
17
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.7

Scorching hot shooting was completely offset by a revolving door of defensive breakdowns at the point of attack. Opposing guards targeted him mercilessly in isolation, easily blowing past his initial resistance to collapse the defense.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 86.0%
USG% 21.8%
Net Rtg -6.8
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.7m
Offense +9.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.5
Raw total +9.7
Avg player in 21.7m -14.4
Impact -4.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Anthony Gill 17.1m
9
pts
10
reb
0
ast
Impact
+7.8

Dominated the dirty work by establishing deep post position and sealing his man out of rebounding scrums. Fundamental box-outs and timely cuts along the baseline provided a stabilizing, low-mistake presence for the second unit.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 82.7%
USG% 12.8%
Net Rtg +11.4
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.1m
Offense +13.1
Hustle +3.1
Defense +2.8
Raw total +19.0
Avg player in 17.1m -11.2
Impact +7.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
2
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-6.2

Struggled mightily to finish over length, repeatedly getting swallowed up on drives to the basket. While he pushed the pace admirably, an inability to bend the defense in the half-court resulted in empty, perimeter-oriented possessions.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg -33.6
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.8m
Offense -1.4
Hustle +3.4
Defense +0.2
Raw total +2.2
Avg player in 12.8m -8.4
Impact -6.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
LAL Los Angeles Lakers
S Luka Dončić 30.5m
37
pts
11
reb
13
ast
Impact
+18.4

Picked apart blitzes with surgical precision, constantly finding the roll man or weak-side shooter before the rotation could arrive. Defensive engagement was surprisingly robust, using his size to blow up dribble hand-offs and secure long rebounds to ignite the break.

Shooting
FG 13/21 (61.9%)
3PT 6/13 (46.2%)
FT 5/7 (71.4%)
Advanced
TS% 76.8%
USG% 36.7%
Net Rtg +30.0
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.5m
Offense +25.4
Hustle +3.0
Defense +10.2
Raw total +38.6
Avg player in 30.5m -20.2
Impact +18.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 5
S LeBron James 29.6m
20
pts
3
reb
6
ast
Impact
-1.1

High-usage creation came at the cost of transition defense, as he frequently lingered in the backcourt arguing non-calls. While he manipulated switches effectively in the pick-and-roll, a string of live-ball turnovers late in the shot clock ultimately pulled his net rating into the red.

Shooting
FG 8/16 (50.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.2%
USG% 27.0%
Net Rtg +34.9
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.6m
Offense +10.8
Hustle +2.3
Defense +5.4
Raw total +18.5
Avg player in 29.6m -19.6
Impact -1.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
S Deandre Ayton 28.9m
28
pts
13
reb
3
ast
Impact
+26.5

Absolutely dominated the interior by sealing early in transition and punishing mismatches in the post. His disciplined drop coverage deterred drives all night, anchoring a massive positive swing whenever he was on the floor.

Shooting
FG 12/14 (85.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 88.8%
USG% 23.9%
Net Rtg +46.0
+/- +30
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.9m
Offense +32.9
Hustle +2.8
Defense +9.9
Raw total +45.6
Avg player in 28.9m -19.1
Impact +26.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 53.3%
STL 1
BLK 3
TO 1
S Marcus Smart 26.5m
3
pts
1
reb
4
ast
Impact
-15.8

Over-aggression on the perimeter led to crucial foul trouble and compromised the team's defensive shell. Offensively, he bogged down possessions by forcing ill-advised early-clock jumpers instead of initiating the offense, resulting in a disastrous net rating.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 9.2%
Net Rtg +34.5
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.5m
Offense -3.1
Hustle +1.9
Defense +2.9
Raw total +1.7
Avg player in 26.5m -17.5
Impact -15.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
S Jake LaRavia 25.1m
3
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.2

Exceptional point-of-attack defense kept his value afloat despite a vanishing act on offense. Passed up open looks on the perimeter to force contested drives, stalling the half-court flow and dragging his overall impact into the negative.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 38.7%
USG% 6.2%
Net Rtg +41.4
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.1m
Offense +2.9
Hustle +2.4
Defense +9.2
Raw total +14.5
Avg player in 25.1m -16.7
Impact -2.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 0
Gabe Vincent 18.2m
6
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-2.8

Struggled to navigate ball screens defensively, frequently dying on picks and forcing emergency rotations. Hit a couple of timely perimeter shots, but an inability to organize the second unit's offense resulted in stagnant, isolation-heavy possessions.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 10.6%
Net Rtg +4.3
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.2m
Offense +4.4
Hustle +1.1
Defense +3.8
Raw total +9.3
Avg player in 18.2m -12.1
Impact -2.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
11
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-5.4

Defensive apathy was the main culprit here, consistently losing his man on baseline cuts and offering little resistance at the rim. Efficient scoring bursts couldn't compensate for the structural damage caused by his late closeouts on shooters.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 3/6 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 72.0%
USG% 19.6%
Net Rtg -2.1
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.7m
Offense +5.4
Hustle +1.1
Defense -0.1
Raw total +6.4
Avg player in 17.7m -11.8
Impact -5.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Drew Timme 17.1m
4
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
-7.6

Foot speed was a glaring issue as opponents relentlessly targeted him in high pick-and-rolls. Unable to protect the rim or stay in front of guards on switches, defensive liabilities far outweighed his modest contributions as a short-roll playmaker.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.4%
USG% 10.5%
Net Rtg +48.6
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.1m
Offense +2.7
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.8
Raw total +3.7
Avg player in 17.1m -11.3
Impact -7.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
8
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
+10.6

Wreaked havoc as a free safety on defense, blowing up passing lanes and generating extra possessions through sheer willpower. Relentless offensive rebounding punished a smaller frontline and created crucial second-chance opportunities during a stagnant offensive stretch.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.0%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +9.4
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.2m
Offense +8.6
Hustle +3.9
Defense +8.8
Raw total +21.3
Avg player in 16.2m -10.7
Impact +10.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 0
Jaxson Hayes 13.6m
10
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+8.5

Provided a massive vertical spacing threat that completely warped the opponent's weak-side rotations. Activity as a rim-runner created open corner looks for teammates, while a quick second jump kept possessions alive on the offensive glass.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 85.0%
USG% 16.2%
Net Rtg -12.6
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.6m
Offense +11.0
Hustle +1.6
Defense +4.9
Raw total +17.5
Avg player in 13.6m -9.0
Impact +8.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.5

Blended into the background during his brief stint, showing hesitation to attack closeouts. Failed to make an imprint on either end of the floor, largely deferring to veterans and playing overly cautious perimeter defense.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 46.3%
USG% 30.8%
Net Rtg +36.4
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.5m
Offense +2.1
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total +2.1
Avg player in 5.5m -3.6
Impact -1.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.4

Executed his role perfectly by spacing the floor from the trail spot and making quick, decisive reads against closeouts. Held up admirably on an island against quicker wings, ensuring the defensive integrity remained intact during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg +36.4
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.5m
Offense +7.6
Hustle +0.2
Defense +1.2
Raw total +9.0
Avg player in 5.5m -3.6
Impact +5.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+1.4

Injected immediate energy with hard basket cuts that scrambled the opponent's zone defense. Stayed disciplined on closeouts, funneling drivers toward the rim protection rather than gambling for steals.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.4%
USG% 30.8%
Net Rtg +36.4
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.5m
Offense +1.2
Hustle +1.2
Defense +2.6
Raw total +5.0
Avg player in 5.5m -3.6
Impact +1.4
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1