GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

NYK New York Knicks
S Jalen Brunson 36.7m
12
pts
7
reb
13
ast
Impact
+0.8

Elite playmaking and surprisingly stout defensive metrics barely kept his head above water during a horrific shooting performance. His inability to finish in the paint was heavily masked by his knack for generating open looks for teammates.

Shooting
FG 4/15 (26.7%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 37.8%
USG% 20.2%
Net Rtg +15.5
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.7m
Offense +9.1
Hustle +5.0
Defense +5.9
Raw total +20.0
Avg player in 36.7m -19.2
Impact +0.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Josh Hart 36.3m
20
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.8

Phenomenal shot selection and transition finishing maximized his offensive value. He capitalized on every chaotic sequence, turning broken plays into high-percentage conversions that kept the team's momentum surging.

Shooting
FG 8/11 (72.7%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 87.4%
USG% 13.4%
Net Rtg +8.5
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.3m
Offense +18.9
Hustle +2.0
Defense +3.0
Raw total +23.9
Avg player in 36.3m -19.1
Impact +4.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 47.4%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
S OG Anunoby 33.8m
25
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
+17.1

A masterclass in two-way dominance, pairing lethal catch-and-shoot efficiency with suffocating perimeter defense. He completely erased his primary assignment while punishing defensive rotations, driving an elite overall performance.

Shooting
FG 9/15 (60.0%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 74.6%
USG% 22.5%
Net Rtg +30.9
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.8m
Offense +22.3
Hustle +4.3
Defense +8.2
Raw total +34.8
Avg player in 33.8m -17.7
Impact +17.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
11
pts
13
reb
4
ast
Impact
+2.3

An unusually quiet scoring night was salvaged by surprisingly robust interior defense and relentless board-crashing. He adapted to a sluggish offensive rhythm by doing the dirty work in the paint to maintain a positive net rating.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.3%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +34.8
+/- +23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.0m
Offense +8.5
Hustle +4.6
Defense +6.0
Raw total +19.1
Avg player in 32.0m -16.8
Impact +2.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
S Mikal Bridges 30.1m
10
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-6.5

A brutal shooting slump from beyond the arc completely neutralized his otherwise solid defensive contributions. Forcing up flat perimeter jumpers stalled out multiple possessions and dragged his total impact deep into the negatives.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 0/6 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 18.5%
Net Rtg +5.2
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.1m
Offense +5.2
Hustle +2.5
Defense +1.6
Raw total +9.3
Avg player in 30.1m -15.8
Impact -6.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
23
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+11.5

Catching absolute fire from the perimeter fueled a massive spike in his overall impact. His off-ball gravity warped the opposing defense, allowing him to shatter his recent scoring averages with lethal efficiency.

Shooting
FG 8/13 (61.5%)
3PT 6/10 (60.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 82.9%
USG% 21.9%
Net Rtg -4.0
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.4m
Offense +19.5
Hustle +2.9
Defense +3.0
Raw total +25.4
Avg player in 26.4m -13.9
Impact +11.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 12
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.6

A complete lack of offensive involvement cratered his value despite holding his own defensively. Failing to establish any lob-threat gravity allowed the opposing frontcourt to cheat off him and clog the driving lanes.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 3.7%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.3m
Offense +2.2
Hustle +1.5
Defense +3.0
Raw total +6.7
Avg player in 23.3m -12.3
Impact -5.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
Tyler Kolek 13.6m
8
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-1.0

Poor shot selection as a primary ball-handler dragged down an otherwise energetic performance. While he doubled his usual scoring output, the sheer volume of wasted possessions outweighed his playmaking flashes.

Shooting
FG 3/10 (30.0%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg +14.0
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.6m
Offense +4.2
Hustle +1.2
Defense +0.8
Raw total +6.2
Avg player in 13.6m -7.2
Impact -1.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.4

Despite perfect shooting in a brief stint, defensive breakdowns completely erased his offensive output. He was repeatedly targeted on switches, bleeding points faster than he could generate them.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg -33.3
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.4m
Offense +1.1
Hustle +0.7
Defense -2.2
Raw total -0.4
Avg player in 5.4m -3.0
Impact -3.4
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.9

A blown assignment and a rushed miss at the rim defined a disastrous microscopic stint. He looked completely out of sync with the game's pace during his brief time on the floor.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg -50.0
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 0.8m
Offense -0.8
Hustle 0.0
Defense -0.8
Raw total -1.6
Avg player in 0.8m -0.3
Impact -1.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+1.8

Maximized a fleeting end-of-game appearance by securing crucial loose balls to seal out possessions. His immediate physicality on the glass generated a surprisingly strong positive blip.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -50.0
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 0.8m
Offense +1.3
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.3
Raw total +2.2
Avg player in 0.8m -0.4
Impact +1.8
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.2

Forcing a bad shot in garbage time resulted in a quick negative dent to his rating. He failed to process the defensive rotation before putting the ball on the deck.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg -50.0
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 0.8m
Offense -0.8
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total -0.8
Avg player in 0.8m -0.4
Impact -1.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
LAL Los Angeles Lakers
S Luka Dončić 36.9m
30
pts
15
reb
8
ast
Impact
+2.4

Massive usage and defensive rebounding masked the damage of a highly inefficient shooting night from deep. The sheer volume of missed perimeter shots dragged his overall net rating down, though his defensive reads kept his head above water.

Shooting
FG 10/23 (43.5%)
3PT 5/14 (35.7%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 58.5%
USG% 36.7%
Net Rtg -13.3
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.9m
Offense +16.6
Hustle +0.8
Defense +4.3
Raw total +21.7
Avg player in 36.9m -19.3
Impact +2.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 42.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S LeBron James 34.6m
22
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
+3.1

A highly efficient offensive outing drove a strong positive impact, with his shot selection proving far superior to his recent five-game stretch. His defensive engagement anchored the floor, allowing him to dictate the game's pace without forcing unnecessary attempts.

Shooting
FG 9/15 (60.0%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 2/6 (33.3%)
Advanced
TS% 62.4%
USG% 24.7%
Net Rtg -25.4
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.6m
Offense +15.2
Hustle +1.9
Defense +4.1
Raw total +21.2
Avg player in 34.6m -18.1
Impact +3.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Deandre Ayton 32.1m
13
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+6.6

Absolute flawless finishing around the rim fueled a massive box-score impact. He continues a dominant streak of high-percentage interior play, punishing mismatches inside without wasting a single possession.

Shooting
FG 6/6 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 100.9%
USG% 8.5%
Net Rtg -19.4
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.1m
Offense +19.8
Hustle +2.0
Defense +1.6
Raw total +23.4
Avg player in 32.1m -16.8
Impact +6.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Marcus Smart 30.2m
7
pts
0
reb
3
ast
Impact
-6.5

Elite point-of-attack defense and relentless hustle were entirely undone by abysmal offensive execution. His inability to convert open looks turned him into an offensive liability, stalling out half-court sets whenever he touched the ball.

Shooting
FG 2/9 (22.2%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 35.4%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -32.2
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.2m
Offense -0.6
Hustle +5.8
Defense +4.1
Raw total +9.3
Avg player in 30.2m -15.8
Impact -6.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Jake LaRavia 23.3m
5
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.4

Despite generating excellent hustle metrics, his overall impact plummeted due to a barrage of bricked perimeter looks. Settling for low-quality threes completely erased the value he brought through sheer energy and off-ball movement.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 35.7%
USG% 19.1%
Net Rtg -39.6
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.3m
Offense -2.3
Hustle +4.2
Defense +1.9
Raw total +3.8
Avg player in 23.3m -12.2
Impact -8.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
11
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.0

Forced perimeter attempts derailed what could have been a solid two-way performance. While his defensive metrics showed strong resistance on the wing, clanking multiple threes killed offensive momentum and tanked his overall rating.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 18.5%
Net Rtg -1.7
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.0m
Offense +4.8
Hustle +2.3
Defense +3.1
Raw total +10.2
Avg player in 29.0m -15.2
Impact -5.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
1
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.4

Offensive zeroes across the board created a severe handicap for the lineup whenever he was on the floor. Even his trademark high-motor play couldn't salvage a disastrous stint defined by bricked corner threes and spacing issues.

Shooting
FG 0/4 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 10.2%
USG% 10.4%
Net Rtg +17.0
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.8m
Offense -1.8
Hustle +3.0
Defense +1.9
Raw total +3.1
Avg player in 19.8m -10.5
Impact -7.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Gabe Vincent 17.9m
8
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.3

An unexpected scoring punch provided a temporary offensive lift compared to his recent slump. However, subtle defensive lapses and poor rotational positioning kept his overall net impact in the red despite the improved shooting splits.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 80.0%
USG% 14.6%
Net Rtg +24.3
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.9m
Offense +4.3
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.2
Raw total +7.0
Avg player in 17.9m -9.3
Impact -2.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Jaxson Hayes 12.3m
2
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.7

A stark departure from his recent high-scoring tear, he transitioned into a purely connective role in limited minutes. His positive impact stemmed entirely from disciplined rim protection rather than offensive usage.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 7.1%
Net Rtg +15.1
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.3m
Offense +3.7
Hustle +1.1
Defense +2.5
Raw total +7.3
Avg player in 12.3m -6.6
Impact +0.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.3

Brief garbage-time minutes provided zero opportunity to influence the game in either direction. He simply occupied space on the floor during the final sequence.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +50.0
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.0m
Offense 0.0
Hustle +0.2
Defense 0.0
Raw total +0.2
Avg player in 1.0m -0.5
Impact -0.3
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
-1.3

A rushed, missed shot during a fleeting end-of-game appearance resulted in a slight negative dent. There was not enough court time to establish any meaningful rhythm or defensive presence.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg +50.0
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.0m
Offense -0.8
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total -0.8
Avg player in 1.0m -0.5
Impact -1.3
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
1
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.1

Managed to squeeze out a marginal positive impact through a quick trip to the foul line in the closing seconds. His defensive positioning during the final possession ensured no easy looks for the opponent.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.8%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg +50.0
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.0m
Offense 0.0
Hustle 0.0
Defense +0.6
Raw total +0.6
Avg player in 1.0m -0.5
Impact +0.1
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Drew Timme 1.0m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.4

A blown opportunity around the basket in garbage time accounted for his mildly negative score. He failed to capitalize on his lone touch before the final buzzer sounded.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg +50.0
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.0m
Offense -0.8
Hustle 0.0
Defense +0.9
Raw total +0.1
Avg player in 1.0m -0.5
Impact -0.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0