GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

SAS San Antonio Spurs
S De'Aaron Fox 33.2m
15
pts
4
reb
10
ast
Impact
+7.8

Masterfully orchestrated the offense while applying relentless ball pressure (+9.3 Def) to completely disrupt the opponent's rhythm. He bypassed his own struggling outside shot to relentlessly attack the paint and collapse the defense for kick-outs. His high hustle metrics (+5.0) highlight a night defined by diving for loose balls and pushing the pace in transition.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 59.3%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +27.0
+/- +20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.2m
Offense +12.9
Hustle +5.0
Defense +9.3
Raw total +27.2
Avg player in 33.2m -19.4
Impact +7.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 1
22
pts
14
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.9

Dominated the interior by combining elite rim protection (+8.8 Def) with highly efficient finishing around the basket. He dictated the terms of engagement in the paint, forcing opponents into heavily contested floaters while cleaning up everything on the glass. His disciplined shot selection maximized his offensive gravity without forcing unnecessary perimeter looks.

Shooting
FG 9/16 (56.2%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 3/8 (37.5%)
Advanced
TS% 56.4%
USG% 29.2%
Net Rtg +26.6
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.4m
Offense +12.9
Hustle +1.9
Defense +8.8
Raw total +23.6
Avg player in 28.4m -16.7
Impact +6.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 2
8
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
-7.9

Despite decent shooting efficiency, his lack of physicality and poor rotational awareness resulted in a deeply negative overall impact. He struggled to navigate off-ball screens, frequently losing his man and forcing the defense into scramble mode. The quiet offensive production simply couldn't offset the structural damage he caused on the other end.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg +21.0
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.4m
Offense +4.2
Hustle +1.1
Defense +2.9
Raw total +8.2
Avg player in 27.4m -16.1
Impact -7.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 22.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Stephon Castle 26.5m
14
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-0.7

A strong defensive showing at the point of attack was undone by a lack of perimeter spacing and forced drives into traffic. He guarded his yard beautifully (+7.1 Def), but his refusal to stop shooting from deep despite a cold hand killed several offensive rallies. The total impact hovered near neutral as his elite containment was perfectly canceled out by offensive inefficiency.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.0%
USG% 26.5%
Net Rtg -6.9
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.5m
Offense +5.1
Hustle +2.5
Defense +7.1
Raw total +14.7
Avg player in 26.5m -15.4
Impact -0.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 3
BLK 2
TO 3
S Devin Vassell 25.0m
5
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.4

An abysmal shooting night completely tanked his overall impact, as he repeatedly clanked open looks from the perimeter. While he managed to stay engaged defensively (+5.7 Def) by jumping passing lanes, the sheer volume of wasted offensive possessions was too much to overcome. His inability to punish closeouts allowed the defense to pack the paint against his teammates.

Shooting
FG 2/10 (20.0%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 18.6%
Net Rtg -12.1
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.0m
Offense -3.8
Hustle +1.2
Defense +5.7
Raw total +3.1
Avg player in 25.0m -14.5
Impact -11.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
9
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.2

A sluggish offensive performance characterized by settling for contested, late-clock jumpers dragged his net impact heavily into the red. He provided decent weak-side help defense (+4.4 Def), but his inability to beat closeouts or finish at the rim stalled the half-court offense. The veteran simply couldn't find a rhythm, resulting in empty possessions that fueled opponent transition runs.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 45.5%
USG% 14.5%
Net Rtg +1.4
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.6m
Offense +2.2
Hustle +1.4
Defense +4.4
Raw total +8.0
Avg player in 29.6m -17.2
Impact -9.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 2
25
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+7.7

Bully-ball drives and a hot hand from deep fueled a massive box score rating (+20.7) and a highly positive overall impact. He consistently exploited mismatches on the wing, lowering his shoulder to finish through contact and generate high-value looks. While his defense was merely passable, his sheer offensive force dictated the tempo of the second unit.

Shooting
FG 10/17 (58.8%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.9%
USG% 24.0%
Net Rtg +15.6
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.6m
Offense +20.7
Hustle +2.9
Defense +0.9
Raw total +24.5
Avg player in 28.6m -16.8
Impact +7.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Luke Kornet 15.1m
4
pts
15
reb
2
ast
Impact
+14.1

Generated a colossal positive impact entirely through elite positioning, dominating the glass and altering shots at the rim (+6.4 Def). Even with a broken touch around the basket, his relentless offensive rebounding created vital second-chance opportunities that broke the opponent's back. He proved that a center can completely control a game without scoring by simply owning the paint.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 28.6%
USG% 15.9%
Net Rtg -12.5
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.1m
Offense +13.7
Hustle +2.9
Defense +6.4
Raw total +23.0
Avg player in 15.1m -8.9
Impact +14.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 47.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
11
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.5

Provided a massive spark off the bench by confidently stepping into transition threes and stretching the floor. His defensive rotations were surprisingly crisp (+4.7 Def), allowing him to stay on the floor and capitalize on open catch-and-shoot opportunities. This short, explosive stint changed the game's momentum and showcased his value as a floor-spacer.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 61.1%
USG% 25.6%
Net Rtg +22.6
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.3m
Offense +6.6
Hustle +1.1
Defense +4.7
Raw total +12.4
Avg player in 13.3m -7.9
Impact +4.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
3
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.1

Played a low-mistake but ultimately unimpactful stint, failing to generate any real offensive pressure against the secondary unit. He maintained defensive integrity (+2.6 Def) but was too passive with the ball in his hands, allowing the defense to rest. The negative total score reflects a stretch where the team simply lost ground while he was managing the clock.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 7.7%
Net Rtg -6.9
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.9m
Offense +1.9
Hustle +0.8
Defense +2.6
Raw total +5.3
Avg player in 12.9m -7.4
Impact -2.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
OKC Oklahoma City Thunder
S Jaylin Williams 39.7m
24
pts
12
reb
4
ast
Impact
+4.2

High-volume perimeter shooting from the frontcourt stretched the opposing defense, driving a massive box score rating despite overall inefficiency from the floor. His willingness to take contested trail threes kept the spacing intact, while his positional awareness anchored a solid defensive rating (+7.4). Drawing charges and fighting for loose balls (+4.5 Hustle) helped salvage the value of his missed jumpers.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 4/11 (36.4%)
FT 8/8 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.8%
USG% 22.1%
Net Rtg -15.7
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.7m
Offense +15.6
Hustle +4.5
Defense +7.4
Raw total +27.5
Avg player in 39.7m -23.3
Impact +4.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 33
FGM Against 15
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 2
S Aaron Wiggins 37.7m
20
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
+8.4

Elite two-way impact driven by suffocating perimeter defense (+12.7 Def) and highly efficient shot selection. He consistently punished defensive rotations by hitting timely catch-and-shoot threes, extending his streak of highly efficient shooting nights. His relentless hustle metrics (+6.3) reflect a player doing all the little things to secure extra possessions.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 4/7 (57.1%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.2%
USG% 19.8%
Net Rtg -3.6
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.7m
Offense +11.4
Hustle +6.3
Defense +12.7
Raw total +30.4
Avg player in 37.7m -22.0
Impact +8.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 5
BLK 0
TO 3
S Isaiah Joe 37.1m
2
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-11.5

A complete loss of shooting rhythm cratered his offensive value, turning him into a severe net negative (-11.5 Total) on the floor. He tried to compensate by flying around screens and contesting shots (+5.8 Def), but his inability to punish drop coverages ruined the team's half-court spacing. Opponents simply ignored him on the perimeter, bogging down the entire offensive flow.

Shooting
FG 1/7 (14.3%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 14.3%
USG% 9.2%
Net Rtg +1.6
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.1m
Offense -0.8
Hustle +5.2
Defense +5.8
Raw total +10.2
Avg player in 37.1m -21.7
Impact -11.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
25
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.9

A massive offensive explosion fueled his high box score metrics, though his overall net impact was slightly muted by defensive lapses in space. He found a rhythm early by attacking closeouts and converting from deep, breaking out of a severe scoring slump. The scoring volume was crucial, but slightly offset by giving up ground on the other end of the floor.

Shooting
FG 9/18 (50.0%)
3PT 4/7 (57.1%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.3%
USG% 27.4%
Net Rtg -12.7
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.2m
Offense +14.6
Hustle +3.3
Defense +5.7
Raw total +23.6
Avg player in 35.2m -20.7
Impact +2.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 70.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Cason Wallace 34.4m
13
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
-5.3

Poor shot selection and an inability to finish through contact dragged his overall impact deeply into the negative. While his point-of-attack defense remained stingy (+7.1 Def), settling for contested mid-range pull-ups short-circuited several offensive sets. The defensive effort couldn't mathematically overcome the empty offensive trips he generated.

Shooting
FG 6/16 (37.5%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.6%
USG% 22.6%
Net Rtg -20.7
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.4m
Offense +3.3
Hustle +4.5
Defense +7.1
Raw total +14.9
Avg player in 34.4m -20.2
Impact -5.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 3
14
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
-4.8

A classic case of empty calories where high-volume perimeter shooting masked glaring defensive liabilities. He hunted his own shot relentlessly, but his complete lack of resistance at the point of attack (-0.0 Def) gave right back whatever he generated. Opponents actively targeted him in pick-and-roll actions to exploit his slow lateral slides.

Shooting
FG 5/15 (33.3%)
3PT 4/9 (44.4%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 46.7%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg -26.5
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.0m
Offense +5.9
Hustle +1.1
Defense -0.0
Raw total +7.0
Avg player in 20.0m -11.8
Impact -4.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
5
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-3.4

Struggled to find the flow of the game, forcing up heavily contested looks late in the shot clock. His defensive rotations were passable, but the lack of offensive gravity allowed defenders to cheat off him and clog the driving lanes. The negative total impact highlights a stint where he was largely a passenger on both ends.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -8.9
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Offense +2.6
Hustle +2.5
Defense +3.2
Raw total +8.3
Avg player in 19.9m -11.7
Impact -3.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
3
pts
7
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.4

Maximized a short stint by playing flawlessly within his role, setting bruising screens and protecting the rim (+6.1 Def). He didn't force any offense, taking only what the defense conceded, which resulted in a highly efficient plus-minus bump. His verticality in the paint during the second quarter completely deterred opponent drives.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 4.8%
Net Rtg +22.5
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.9m
Offense +6.9
Hustle +1.8
Defense +6.1
Raw total +14.8
Avg player in 15.9m -9.4
Impact +5.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0