Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
LAC lead PHI lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
PHI 2P — 3P —
LAC 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 172 attempts

PHI PHI Shot-making Δ

Embiid Hard 8/19 +1.0
Maxey Hard 9/18 +8.5
Barlow Open 10/16 +1.5
Oubre Jr. Hard 6/13 +1.7
Edgecombe Hard 1/11 -8.1
Grimes Hard 5/8 +3.7
Bona Open 3/4 +0.9
McCain Hard 2/2 +4.0
Watford Hard 1/2 +0.2
Walker Hard 0/1 -0.9

LAC LAC Shot-making Δ

Leonard 12/21 +3.4
Lopez Hard 5/11 +2.3
Collins 6/11 +1.9
Miller Open 9/10 +6.4
Sanders Hard 7/10 +6.2
Dunn Hard 2/6 -1.5
Zubac Open 3/3 +1.8
Christie 1/2 -0.3
Batum Hard 0/2 -2.0
Niederhäuser Open 1/1 +0.6
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
PHI
LAC
45/94 Field Goals 46/78
47.9% Field Goal % 59.0%
17/39 3-Pointers 9/26
43.6% 3-Point % 34.6%
21/22 Free Throws 12/20
95.5% Free Throw % 60.0%
61.7% True Shooting % 65.1%
48 Total Rebounds 44
14 Offensive 5
27 Defensive 31
31 Assists 24
5.17 Assist/TO Ratio 1.71
5 Turnovers 14
8 Steals 4
3 Blocks 2
22 Fouls 19
46 Points in Paint 64
12 Fast Break Pts 6
22 Points off TOs 10
28 Second Chance Pts 14
29 Bench Points 38
23 Largest Lead 0
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Dominick Barlow
26 PTS · 16 REB · 2 AST · 35.4 MIN
+39.99
2
Kawhi Leonard
29 PTS · 4 REB · 6 AST · 30.9 MIN
+28.8
3
Tyrese Maxey
29 PTS · 5 REB · 6 AST · 35.9 MIN
+27.76
4
Jordan Miller
21 PTS · 4 REB · 2 AST · 27.7 MIN
+17.78
5
Joel Embiid
24 PTS · 5 REB · 3 AST · 32.2 MIN
+15.64
6
Kobe Sanders
17 PTS · 3 REB · 3 AST · 34.2 MIN
+14.97
7
Quentin Grimes
14 PTS · 2 REB · 4 AST · 27.8 MIN
+12.48
8
Kelly Oubre Jr.
15 PTS · 3 REB · 2 AST · 34.7 MIN
+10.21
9
Adem Bona
6 PTS · 3 REB · 1 AST · 15.8 MIN
+9.06
10
Ivica Zubac
8 PTS · 9 REB · 2 AST · 33.0 MIN
+7.4
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:11 T. Watford REBOUND (Off:0 Def:1) 128–113
Q4 0:16 MISS K. Brown 3PT 128–113
Q4 0:30 Y. Niederhäuser defensive goaltending VIOLATION 128–113
Q4 0:30 Q. Grimes running Layup (14 PTS) (J. Walker 1 AST) 128–113
Q4 0:35 J. Walker REBOUND (Off:0 Def:1) 126–113
Q4 0:36 A. Bona BLOCK (2 BLK) 126–113
Q4 0:36 MISS K. Sanders driving Layup - blocked 126–113
Q4 0:51 Q. Grimes Free Throw 2 of 2 (12 PTS) 126–113
Q4 0:51 Q. Grimes Free Throw 1 of 2 (11 PTS) 125–113
Q4 0:51 Y. Niederhäuser shooting personal FOUL (3 PF) (Grimes 2 FT) 124–113
Q4 1:01 K. Sanders 14' turnaround fadeaway Jump Shot (17 PTS) 124–113
Q4 1:16 Q. Grimes 6' driving Layup (10 PTS) (J. McCain 4 AST) 124–111
Q4 1:29 J. Miller 14' step back Jump Shot (21 PTS) 122–111
Q4 1:48 Y. Niederhäuser REBOUND (Off:1 Def:2) 122–109
Q4 1:51 MISS J. Walker driving floating Shot 122–109

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 Kobe Sanders 34.2m
17
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+7.8

Capitalized on excellent shot selection to deliver a highly efficient scoring punch, yet still finished slightly in the red. His inability to generate extra possessions or disrupt the passing lanes (+1.1 Hustle) limited his overall influence on the game's momentum. He thrived as a spot-up threat but struggled to impact the margins when the ball wasn't in his hands.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.1%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg -18.1
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.2m
Scoring +14.7
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +4.6
Hustle +2.8
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Ivica Zubac 33.0m
8
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
-5.4

Despite perfect shooting from the floor and solid rim protection, his lack of offensive volume allowed the defense to ignore him in the half-court. Opponents successfully neutralized his impact by pulling him out to the perimeter, exposing his lateral quickness. The resulting breakdown in team defense led to a negative net rating despite his clean individual box score.

Shooting
FG 3/3 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 92.6%
USG% 7.0%
Net Rtg -19.0
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.0m
Scoring +7.5
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +2.7
Defense -2.6
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 25
FGM Against 13
Opp FG% 52.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S John Collins 31.9m
15
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.1

Defensive lapses severely undercut an otherwise efficient scoring night, resulting in a steep -11.1 overall impact. He was repeatedly exploited in pick-and-roll coverage, failing to contain ball handlers or recover to rollers in time. The offensive production simply couldn't mask the structural damage he caused on the defensive end.

Shooting
FG 6/11 (54.5%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 1/4 (25.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.8%
USG% 21.1%
Net Rtg -11.3
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.9m
Scoring +9.4
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +4.0
Defense -0.9
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Kawhi Leonard 30.9m
29
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
+28.3

Put on a two-way masterclass, utilizing his strength to systematically dismantle defenders in the midrange. His suffocating on-ball defense (+9.7) completely disrupted the opponent's primary actions, driving a massive +18.7 net impact. He dictated the pace of the game entirely, punishing mismatches with surgical precision.

Shooting
FG 12/21 (57.1%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 37.9%
Net Rtg -17.7
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.9m
Scoring +21.1
Creation +4.0
Shot Making +5.0
Hustle +5.1
Defense +7.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 56.2%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
S Kris Dunn 27.2m
6
pts
2
reb
6
ast
Impact
-13.7

Offensive limitations crippled his effectiveness, as defenders routinely sagged off him to clog the driving lanes for his teammates. Uncharacteristic struggles at the point of attack (-0.7 Def) compounded the spacing issues, leading to a disastrous -10.2 total impact. His playmaking vision couldn't salvage a performance marred by poor shooting and defensive breakdowns.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 43.6%
USG% 14.5%
Net Rtg -20.2
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.2m
Scoring +3.2
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
21
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+10.0

Slashed to the rim with devastating efficiency, punishing sleeping defenders with perfectly timed baseline cuts. His active defensive rotations (+3.9 Def) helped stifle transition opportunities, cementing a strong positive impact. This breakout performance was defined by relentless rim pressure and smart, opportunistic scoring.

Shooting
FG 9/10 (90.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 89.3%
USG% 26.8%
Net Rtg +3.8
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.7m
Scoring +19.8
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +4.2
Hustle +1.2
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
Brook Lopez 20.2m
13
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.5

Stretched the floor effectively with his outside stroke, but his abysmal rebounding for a center allowed costly second-chance points. Being a step slow on closeouts neutralized his typical rim-protection value, dragging his net score into the negative. The perimeter scoring was a luxury that couldn't cover for his lack of interior presence.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 59.1%
USG% 29.3%
Net Rtg -34.6
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.2m
Scoring +8.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.9
Hustle +0.3
Defense -4.8
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 35.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
0
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-15.7

A complete offensive zero whose hesitation to shoot actively derailed the team's half-court flow. Opponents effectively played five-on-four while he was on the floor, resulting in a brutal -9.1 impact score during his minutes. His veteran positioning on defense wasn't nearly enough to compensate for the dead weight on offense.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 10.3%
Net Rtg +3.0
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.5m
Scoring -1.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Cam Christie 10.2m
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.8

Looked overwhelmed by the speed of the game, failing to register a single hustle stat while bleeding points defensively. His inability to stay in front of his man forced rotational breakdowns that opposing shooters exploited. A highly passive stint that actively hurt the team's momentum.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg -42.1
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.2m
Scoring +1.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.5

Grabbed a few quick boards but was immediately targeted in pick-and-roll actions due to slow footwork. His defensive positioning (-1.6 Def) was exposed during a brief run, leading to easy layups that tanked his net rating.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +28.0
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.8m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +3.8
Defense -4.7
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Kobe Brown 4.4m
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-12.9

Failed to find the rhythm that had fueled his recent hot streak during a very brief appearance. A rushed perimeter miss and lack of overall involvement kept him from making any meaningful positive mark on the game.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg +12.5
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.4m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
PHI Philadelphia 76ers
S Tyrese Maxey 35.9m
29
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
+25.5

Lethal perimeter shot-making fueled a stellar +11.5 total impact, punishing defenders who dared to go under screens. His ability to navigate pick-and-rolls not only generated high-quality looks for himself but also kept the offense flowing rhythmically. Active hands in the passing lanes (+6.0 Def) further amplified his value on a highly productive night.

Shooting
FG 9/18 (50.0%)
3PT 7/14 (50.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 73.4%
USG% 24.4%
Net Rtg +28.0
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.9m
Scoring +22.2
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +8.2
Hustle +1.5
Defense +3.7
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
S Dominick Barlow 35.4m
26
pts
16
reb
2
ast
Impact
+40.4

Absolutely dominated the interior matchups, exploding for a massive positive total impact driven by elite finishing and relentless rebounding. His defensive presence (+7.1) anchored the paint, suffocating opponent drives while securing extra possessions. This unexpected offensive eruption showcased remarkable touch around the rim.

Shooting
FG 10/16 (62.5%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 71.4%
USG% 20.5%
Net Rtg +10.3
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.4m
Scoring +22.0
Creation +3.1
Shot Making +4.0
Hustle +19.4
Defense +3.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
S Kelly Oubre Jr. 34.7m
15
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.6

Despite solid perimeter shooting and excellent hustle metrics (+5.7), his overall impact slipped into the negative. The scoring efficiency couldn't overcome defensive lapses or empty possessions that dragged down his net rating. His high-energy closeouts were a bright spot in an otherwise uneven two-way performance.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 57.7%
USG% 17.1%
Net Rtg +16.4
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.7m
Scoring +9.7
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +4.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 61.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Joel Embiid 32.2m
24
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+8.3

Shot selection was slightly forced against double teams, leading to a high volume of missed field goals that capped his overall impact. However, his sheer gravity on the floor and steady defensive positioning (+3.4) kept his net score in the green. Drawing defensive attention opened up passing lanes, even when his own jumper wasn't falling consistently.

Shooting
FG 8/19 (42.1%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.3%
USG% 28.8%
Net Rtg +1.2
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.2m
Scoring +16.4
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +4.8
Hustle +1.5
Defense -2.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 68.8%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S VJ Edgecombe 30.5m
5
pts
3
reb
7
ast
Impact
-6.3

A brutal shooting night completely cratered his offensive value, as he bricked wide-open looks from deep to finish well below his usual efficiency. He tried to salvage his minutes through active perimeter defense (+4.6) and playmaking, but the wasted possessions were too costly. The inability to punish drop coverage severely hindered the team's half-court spacing.

Shooting
FG 1/11 (9.1%)
3PT 1/8 (12.5%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 21.0%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg +5.9
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.5m
Scoring -2.4
Creation +2.4
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
14
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
+3.7

Efficient spot-up shooting provided a reliable offensive spark, yet his overall impact flatlined at exactly neutral. Defensive struggles at the point of attack (-0.9) allowed opposing guards to easily break the paint, offsetting his scoring contributions. He capitalized on his touches but gave too much back on the other end of the floor.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.8%
USG% 13.4%
Net Rtg +7.4
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.8m
Scoring +11.6
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +3.2
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 83.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Adem Bona 15.8m
6
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.1

Maximized his limited run by finishing strongly around the basket and setting bruising screens to free up ball handlers. His high-motor hustle plays (+3.4) generated crucial second-chance opportunities that swung momentum during the second unit's shift. A highly efficient, low-mistake stint that perfectly executed his role as an energy big.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg +35.6
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.8m
Scoring +5.4
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +3.8
Defense -1.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
Jared McCain 14.3m
6
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-8.8

Perfect shooting from beyond the arc wasn't enough to prevent a negative net impact during his time on the floor. A lack of physical hustle (+0.0) and inability to disrupt opposing offensive sets left the defense vulnerable while he was out there. His minutes were defined by defensive bleeding that overshadowed his flawless offensive execution.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg +16.0
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.3m
Scoring +6.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
3
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.6

Faded into the background during his brief rotation stint, failing to assert himself on either the glass or the scoreboard. Sluggish rotations on the defensive end contributed to a -4.2 total impact, as opponents easily targeted his matchups. He struggled to find the rhythm that had made him a reliable bench piece in recent games.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.1%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg -1.0
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.1m
Scoring +1.7
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +0.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-12.6

Barely saw the floor in a garbage-time cameo that yielded negligible production. A quick missed shot and lack of overall involvement kept his impact slightly negative.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +20.0
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.3m
Scoring -0.6
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0