GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

OKC Oklahoma City Thunder
S Luguentz Dort 30.8m
18
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+13.4

Delivered a two-way masterclass, combining suffocating point-of-attack defense with lethal spot-up shooting. Punished the defense for helping off him by burying corner triples at an elite clip. His ability to completely erase his primary assignment while catching fire offensively drove a massive positive impact.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 4/5 (80.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 101.4%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg +39.3
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.8m
Offense +17.4
Hustle +3.1
Defense +9.2
Raw total +29.7
Avg player in 30.8m -16.3
Impact +13.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 29.4%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
20
pts
5
reb
9
ast
Impact
+8.1

Struggled mightily to find his usual scoring efficiency, forcing heavily contested shots in isolation. However, he salvaged his overall impact through incredible hustle and by leveraging his gravity to create for others. The sheer volume of defensive attention he commanded opened up the floor, keeping his net rating strongly positive despite the clanking jumpers.

Shooting
FG 8/22 (36.4%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 42.1%
USG% 38.0%
Net Rtg +38.8
+/- +23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.8m
Offense +10.5
Hustle +7.2
Defense +5.1
Raw total +22.8
Avg player in 27.8m -14.7
Impact +8.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
S Chet Holmgren 27.1m
16
pts
10
reb
1
ast
Impact
+7.6

Dominated the interior through sheer rim protection and high-percentage finishing around the basket. Even with a completely broken outside stroke, his vertical spacing and paint deterrence overwhelmed the opposition. Controlled the flow of the game entirely from the restricted area.

Shooting
FG 7/12 (58.3%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.1%
USG% 20.6%
Net Rtg +32.8
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.1m
Offense +14.3
Hustle +2.0
Defense +5.7
Raw total +22.0
Avg player in 27.1m -14.4
Impact +7.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
12
pts
10
reb
10
ast
Impact
+7.1

Operated as an elite offensive hub from the high post, threading passes to cutters to completely dismantle the opposing scheme. His screen-setting and positional awareness generated massive value without requiring high shot volume. A brilliant display of connective playmaking that elevated the entire lineup.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 73.2%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +46.1
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.9m
Offense +13.9
Hustle +2.0
Defense +3.4
Raw total +19.3
Avg player in 22.9m -12.2
Impact +7.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S Cason Wallace 22.9m
5
pts
1
reb
5
ast
Impact
+5.2

Overcame a rough shooting night by terrorizing ball handlers and generating immense defensive pressure. His relentless pursuit of loose balls and deflections consistently disrupted the opponent's offensive sets. Proved that elite defensive intensity can drive winning basketball even when the jumper isn't falling.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 33.6%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg +46.1
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.9m
Offense +3.6
Hustle +4.7
Defense +9.1
Raw total +17.4
Avg player in 22.9m -12.2
Impact +5.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 0
Isaiah Joe 23.4m
22
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
+9.8

Warped the opposing defensive scheme entirely with a lethal barrage of perimeter shooting. His off-ball movement forced constant miscommunications, creating wide-open looks that he buried with ruthless efficiency. This elite floor-spacing gravity drove one of the highest positive impacts of the night.

Shooting
FG 8/12 (66.7%)
3PT 5/8 (62.5%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 88.4%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg +37.3
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.4m
Offense +18.8
Hustle +1.7
Defense +1.7
Raw total +22.2
Avg player in 23.4m -12.4
Impact +9.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Alex Caruso 18.9m
6
pts
0
reb
3
ast
Impact
-2.3

Surprisingly bled value during his minutes despite posting decent individual defensive metrics. The offensive flow stalled when he was on the floor, as his reluctance to shoot allowed defenders to aggressively pack the passing lanes. A rare instance where his connective tissue didn't translate to lineup success.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 61.5%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg +36.7
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.9m
Offense +4.0
Hustle +1.1
Defense +2.6
Raw total +7.7
Avg player in 18.9m -10.0
Impact -2.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
9
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.6

Highly efficient scoring was entirely offset by poor defensive execution and a lack of physical engagement. He failed to generate any disruptive plays or secure loose balls, allowing the opposition to score too easily on his assignments. The defensive bleed ultimately outweighed his tidy offensive output.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 92.2%
USG% 13.6%
Net Rtg +44.5
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.7m
Offense +6.2
Hustle +0.4
Defense -0.2
Raw total +6.4
Avg player in 18.7m -10.0
Impact -3.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
11
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+8.9

Capitalized on a sudden offensive resurgence by making quick, decisive reads and punishing defensive lapses. His flawless shot selection maximized every touch, providing a massive efficiency boost to the bench unit. This unexpected scoring punch completely shifted the momentum of the game.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 93.5%
USG% 13.6%
Net Rtg +30.6
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.9m
Offense +14.8
Hustle +0.8
Defense +2.8
Raw total +18.4
Avg player in 17.9m -9.5
Impact +8.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
5
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.0

Failed to anchor the second unit effectively, struggling with defensive positioning against quicker frontcourt matchups. His inability to stretch the floor or punish switches bogged down the half-court execution. The negative impact stemmed directly from a lack of offensive versatility and slow defensive rotations.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/3 (33.3%)
Advanced
TS% 39.6%
USG% 15.9%
Net Rtg +29.2
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.1m
Offense +2.0
Hustle +1.2
Defense +1.8
Raw total +5.0
Avg player in 17.1m -9.0
Impact -4.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.1

Looked completely out of sync during a brief appearance, rushing shots and failing to read the defensive shell. His drastic drop in scoring production stalled the second-unit offense and led to empty possessions. The lack of offensive poise directly resulted in a negative stint.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 31.3%
Net Rtg -7.7
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.3m
Offense -2.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense +1.6
Raw total +0.2
Avg player in 6.3m -3.3
Impact -3.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.8

Struggled to adjust to the game's pace, forcing poor looks against set defenses. While he showed flashes of defensive competence, his offensive inefficiency prevented the lineup from gaining any traction. Ultimately, his inability to convert quality chances kept his overall impact slightly in the red.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 31.3%
Net Rtg -7.7
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.3m
Offense -1.2
Hustle +1.4
Defense +2.3
Raw total +2.5
Avg player in 6.3m -3.3
Impact -0.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
ORL Orlando Magic
S Paolo Banchero 33.0m
17
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-7.8

Brutal shooting efficiency cratered his overall impact despite solid raw production. He forced too many contested mid-range jumpers, stalling the half-court offense during crucial stretches. The heavy volume of empty possessions ultimately resulted in a steep negative net score.

Shooting
FG 6/17 (35.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 45.3%
USG% 28.8%
Net Rtg -38.2
+/- -29
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.0m
Offense +7.8
Hustle +1.4
Defense +0.5
Raw total +9.7
Avg player in 33.0m -17.5
Impact -7.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 58.8%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Anthony Black 28.4m
10
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
-6.0

Perimeter shooting woes severely handicapped the team's spacing, as defenders completely sagged off him behind the arc. While his point-of-attack defense was exceptional, throwing up a barrage of missed triples killed offensive momentum. The inability to punish drop coverage negated his elite defensive contributions.

Shooting
FG 5/16 (31.2%)
3PT 0/6 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 31.3%
USG% 27.7%
Net Rtg -35.2
+/- -21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.4m
Offense +1.0
Hustle +2.1
Defense +6.0
Raw total +9.1
Avg player in 28.4m -15.1
Impact -6.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 2
S Jalen Suggs 24.6m
20
pts
3
reb
6
ast
Impact
+3.3

Capitalized on defensive breakdowns with lethal perimeter execution to spark a massive offensive surge. His shot selection was pristine, punishing late closeouts and keeping the spacing wide open. This scoring explosion directly translated to a positive overall margin.

Shooting
FG 7/11 (63.6%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 84.2%
USG% 24.2%
Net Rtg -5.5
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.6m
Offense +13.7
Hustle +1.1
Defense +1.6
Raw total +16.4
Avg player in 24.6m -13.1
Impact +3.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
9
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.0

Anchored the interior with a massive defensive presence that deterred drives into the paint. Even with a reduced scoring role compared to his recent hot streak, his screen-setting and positional discipline generated high-quality looks for teammates. A textbook example of impacting winning without needing offensive volume.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 17.0%
Net Rtg -25.0
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.4m
Offense +8.5
Hustle +2.0
Defense +6.0
Raw total +16.5
Avg player in 23.4m -12.5
Impact +4.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Desmond Bane 21.5m
7
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.6

Offensive rhythm completely vanished, leading to a stark drop in his usual scoring gravity. Despite strong perimeter defensive metrics, his inability to generate clean looks dragged down the overall net rating. The lack of shot volume ultimately doomed his impact.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -21.4
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.5m
Offense +1.1
Hustle +2.1
Defense +3.7
Raw total +6.9
Avg player in 21.5m -11.5
Impact -4.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 2
3
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-14.0

A complete offensive disappearing act resulted in a devastating negative impact. Clanking open spot-up opportunities allowed the defense to ignore him and pack the paint against primary creators. Despite decent hustle metrics, his inability to convert basic reads proved fatal to the unit's spacing.

Shooting
FG 1/7 (14.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 21.4%
USG% 13.1%
Net Rtg -42.9
+/- -21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.6m
Offense -2.9
Hustle +2.5
Defense 0.0
Raw total -0.4
Avg player in 25.6m -13.6
Impact -14.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Noah Penda 24.4m
11
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-9.4

Surprising offensive aggression yielded a massive scoring spike compared to his season averages, but it came at a steep efficiency cost. Poor defensive rotations and forced attempts in traffic bled points on the other end. The raw production was an illusion masking a deeply negative floor impact.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 48.1%
USG% 23.2%
Net Rtg -47.9
+/- -23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.4m
Offense +3.4
Hustle +0.8
Defense -0.7
Raw total +3.5
Avg player in 24.4m -12.9
Impact -9.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.7

Completely invisible on the offensive end, functioning as a zero-gravity spacer that allowed help defenders to roam freely. While his length disrupted some passing lanes, it wasn't enough to compensate for playing four-on-five offensively. The lack of tangible involvement dragged down the lineup's net rating.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 5.6%
Net Rtg -20.0
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.1m
Offense 0.0
Hustle +0.8
Defense +2.0
Raw total +2.8
Avg player in 14.1m -7.5
Impact -4.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Jett Howard 13.6m
7
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.9

Found soft spots in the defensive shell to deliver highly efficient scoring bursts. He didn't force the issue, taking only what the scheme conceded to keep the offense flowing smoothly. This disciplined shot profile resulted in a steady, positive contribution.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 87.5%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg -27.5
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.6m
Offense +5.5
Hustle +0.8
Defense +1.8
Raw total +8.1
Avg player in 13.6m -7.2
Impact +0.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
8
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
+4.5

Provided a massive jolt of energy off the bench, converting every perimeter look to stretch the opposing frontcourt. His relentless motor on loose balls created crucial extra possessions during a pivotal second-half stretch. Maximized a short stint through perfect shot selection and high-intensity effort.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 103.1%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg -80.2
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.2m
Offense +7.8
Hustle +2.8
Defense +0.9
Raw total +11.5
Avg player in 13.2m -7.0
Impact +4.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.4

Looked entirely overmatched offensively, rushing looks and failing to bend the defense. His scoreless outing completely derailed the second unit's momentum, leading to a sharp negative swing in the plus-minus. Hustle plays couldn't salvage a stint defined by offensive impotence.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 10.3%
Net Rtg -57.7
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.9m
Offense -2.3
Hustle +1.2
Defense +0.6
Raw total -0.5
Avg player in 12.9m -6.9
Impact -7.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Tyus Jones 5.4m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.5

Failed to establish any offensive rhythm during a brief rotational stint. The offense stagnated with him at the helm, as he passed up marginal advantages instead of forcing the issue. A completely forgettable shift that slightly bled value due to passive playmaking.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg -78.0
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.4m
Offense -0.9
Hustle +0.8
Defense +0.3
Raw total +0.2
Avg player in 5.4m -2.7
Impact -2.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0