Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
SAC lead MEM lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
MEM 2P — 3P —
SAC 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 190 attempts

MEM MEM Shot-making Δ

Jerome Hard 10/14 +10.1
Spencer Hard 7/13 +5.3
Wells Hard 6/12 +5.9
Small Hard 2/11 -5.6
Aldama Hard 4/10 -0.2
Caldwell-Pope 6/9 +4.0
Jackson Hard 6/8 +6.3
Coward 2/6 -2.0
Prosper 1/5 -3.5
Mashack Hard 1/2 +0.3

SAC SAC Shot-making Δ

Sabonis Open 10/18 -0.3
Westbrook Hard 5/14 -1.6
Carter Hard 5/12 -2.1
Hunter Hard 3/11 -2.6
DeRozan Hard 6/10 +3.8
Monk Hard 4/10 +0.6
Clifford 5/9 +2.9
LaVine Hard 3/9 -1.1
Raynaud Hard 3/5 +0.9
Cardwell Open 1/2 -0.8
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
MEM
SAC
45/90 Field Goals 45/100
50.0% Field Goal % 45.0%
18/41 3-Pointers 11/36
43.9% 3-Point % 30.6%
21/28 Free Throws 24/28
75.0% Free Throw % 85.7%
63.0% True Shooting % 55.6%
53 Total Rebounds 58
11 Offensive 14
33 Defensive 32
30 Assists 29
2.31 Assist/TO Ratio 2.23
13 Turnovers 13
8 Steals 4
4 Blocks 2
26 Fouls 21
42 Points in Paint 58
24 Fast Break Pts 14
15 Points off TOs 17
9 Second Chance Pts 22
50 Bench Points 48
8 Largest Lead 8
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Ty Jerome
28 PTS · 1 REB · 7 AST · 20.7 MIN
+29.34
2
Domantas Sabonis
24 PTS · 15 REB · 3 AST · 24.1 MIN
+28.58
3
DeMar DeRozan
20 PTS · 3 REB · 5 AST · 27.6 MIN
+16.35
4
GG Jackson
16 PTS · 7 REB · 2 AST · 27.2 MIN
+13.49
5
Cam Spencer
20 PTS · 3 REB · 5 AST · 26.9 MIN
+13.45
6
Jahmai Mashack
2 PTS · 4 REB · 5 AST · 22.9 MIN
+10.74
7
Kentavious Caldwell-Pope
15 PTS · 2 REB · 2 AST · 22.5 MIN
+10.22
8
Dylan Cardwell
5 PTS · 11 REB · 1 AST · 25.8 MIN
+9.52
9
Jaylen Wells
18 PTS · 3 REB · 1 AST · 26.0 MIN
+9.24
10
Santi Aldama
12 PTS · 6 REB · 0 AST · 24.1 MIN
+7.6
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:02 G. Jackson REBOUND (Off:0 Def:7) 129–125
Q4 0:04 MISS D. Carter 28' pullup 3PT 129–125
Q4 0:07 G. Jackson lost ball out-of-bounds TURNOVER (2 TO) 129–125
Q4 0:07 G. Jackson REBOUND (Off:0 Def:6) 129–125
Q4 0:08 MISS D. DeRozan 28' pullup 3PT 129–125
Q4 0:18 C. Spencer 28' 3PT pullup (20 PTS) 129–125
Q4 0:35 D. DeRozan 26' 3PT (20 PTS) (N. Clifford 5 AST) 126–125
Q4 0:43 C. Spencer 16' driving floating Jump Shot (17 PTS) 126–122
Q4 1:04 D. DeRozan Free Throw 2 of 2 (17 PTS) 124–122
Q4 1:04 D. DeRozan Free Throw 1 of 2 (16 PTS) 124–121
Q4 1:04 C. Coward shooting personal FOUL (4 PF) (DeRozan 2 FT) 124–120
Q4 1:17 G. Jackson 14' fadeaway Jump Shot (16 PTS) 124–120
Q4 1:37 D. DeRozan 16' Jump Shot (15 PTS) (D. Carter 5 AST) 122–120
Q4 1:49 C. Spencer bad pass out-of-bounds TURNOVER (3 TO) 122–118
Q4 1:50 C. Spencer REBOUND (Off:1 Def:2) 122–118

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

Why this game is worth arguing about
game swinger
Domantas Sabonis actually won the night
24 points, 15 boards, 3 assists was the line. The lift came from hustle (+18.1), scoring (+17.8), and shot-making (+4.6), pushing Net Impact to +25.1.
Hustle +18.1
Rebounding and extra-possession work.
Scoring +17.8
Points, shot value, and miss penalties.
Shot-making +4.6
Makes above expected shot difficulty.
Check the tape
box score lie
The box score sold Nique Clifford too hard
14 points, 3 boards, 5 assists was already a rough line. The real damage was turnovers (-9.5), pulling Net Impact down to -6.2.
Turnovers -9.5
Possessions destroyed by giveaways.
Creation +0.8
Assist credit weighted by shot quality created.
Hustle +0.9
Rebounding and extra-possession work.
Check the tape
box score lie
The box score sold Devin Carter too hard
10 points, 6 boards, 5 assists was already a rough line. The real damage was turnovers (-2.4) and defense (-0.9), pulling Net Impact down to -6.7.
Turnovers -2.4
Possessions destroyed by giveaways.
Defense -0.9
Steals, blocks, fouls, and defensive events.
Hustle +1.8
Rebounding and extra-possession work.
Check the tape
box score lie
The box score sold Cedric Coward too hard
5 points, 7 boards, 6 assists was already a rough line. The real damage was defense (-3.2) and turnovers (-1.1), pulling Net Impact down to -5.4.
Defense -3.2
Steals, blocks, fouls, and defensive events.
Turnovers -1.1
Possessions destroyed by giveaways.
Creation +0.5
Assist credit weighted by shot quality created.
Check the tape

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

SAC Sacramento Kings
S DeMar DeRozan 27.6m
20
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
+12.1

Steady, methodical isolation scoring provided a reliable offensive foundation without forcing bad looks. He manipulated defensive coverages beautifully in the mid-range, establishing a pattern of drawing fouls that ensured a positive impact.

Shooting
FG 6/10 (60.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 7/9 (77.8%)
Advanced
TS% 71.6%
USG% 22.4%
Net Rtg -7.0
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.6m
Scoring +16.2
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +3.7
Hustle +3.8
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S De'Andre Hunter 26.4m
9
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-12.3

Clanking numerous contested jumpers derailed offensive possessions and tanked his overall value. A lack of defensive resistance on the wing compounded the damage from a frustrating pattern of settling for long, inefficient twos.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 37.9%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg -12.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.4m
Scoring +2.9
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +0.6
Defense -4.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
13
pts
0
reb
5
ast
Impact
-5.1

A reckless barrage of low-percentage perimeter shots sabotaged offensive efficiency. Even though he found the bottom of the net a few times, a damaging pattern of ignoring open teammates to force contested threes heavily penalized the team.

Shooting
FG 5/14 (35.7%)
3PT 3/10 (30.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 46.4%
USG% 24.2%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.6m
Scoring +5.9
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +3.9
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
24
pts
15
reb
3
ast
Impact
+25.1

Absolute dominance in the paint and relentless rebounding dictated the flow of the game. His ability to consistently punish mismatches inside created a massive gravitational pull that opened up the entire offense during a dominant first-half stretch.

Shooting
FG 10/18 (55.6%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 60.7%
USG% 30.3%
Net Rtg -19.8
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.1m
Scoring +17.8
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +4.6
Hustle +18.1
Defense -2.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 12
Opp FG% 63.2%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Zach LaVine 22.2m
11
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.1

Poor shot quality and an inability to create separation against physical defense dragged his impact into the red. While he showed flashes of effort in transition, a pattern of stalled half-court isolations and missed jumpers proved too costly to overcome.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.1%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg -23.5
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.2m
Scoring +7.1
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +1.3
Defense -0.8
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
11
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.2

Strong work on the glass was offset by a complete lack of offensive involvement and severe spacing issues. His inability to stretch the floor allowed opposing bigs to camp in the paint, establishing a pattern of clogged driving lanes for the guards.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.5%
USG% 6.3%
Net Rtg +16.7
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.8m
Scoring +3.5
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +12.0
Defense -4.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 30.8%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
14
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
-6.2

Despite finding a solid offensive rhythm, his impact was dragged down by defensive miscommunications and late rotations. The scoring efficiency was ultimately negated by a pattern of losing his man off the ball, surrendering easy backdoor cuts.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 70.9%
USG% 21.9%
Net Rtg +16.7
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.8m
Scoring +11.1
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +3.6
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
Devin Carter 23.8m
10
pts
6
reb
5
ast
Impact
-6.7

A brutal goose egg from beyond the arc highlighted a frustrating night of poor spacing and forced attempts. While his defensive intensity remained high, a pattern of opponents daring him to shoot crippled the half-court attack.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 0/6 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg -3.2
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.8m
Scoring +4.7
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.8
Defense -0.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
6
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.8

A sudden drop in offensive assertiveness snapped a strong stretch of play, leaving the second unit searching for answers. He passed up open looks and failed to establish deep post position, a passive pattern that severely limited his influence.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 8.6%
Net Rtg -2.1
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.8m
Scoring +4.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +6.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Malik Monk 17.9m
13
pts
0
reb
4
ast
Impact
-4.3

Forcing tough shots in isolation and a noticeable lack of defensive engagement resulted in a negative overall showing. He struggled to find the balance between aggressive scoring and keeping the offense flowing, falling into a pattern of over-dribbling into traffic.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 57.4%
USG% 26.5%
Net Rtg +5.3
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.9m
Scoring +9.2
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
MEM Memphis Grizzlies
S GG Jackson 27.2m
16
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.2

Exceptional shot selection and a high conversion rate at the rim drove a solid positive impact. He maintained his steady scoring rhythm while adding significant value through a pattern of active weak-side rotations that deterred drives.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 85.8%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg +10.7
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.2m
Scoring +14.0
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +4.1
Hustle +2.1
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
S Cedric Coward 26.5m
5
pts
7
reb
6
ast
Impact
-5.4

A severe drop-off in scoring aggression and missed shots at the rim cratered his overall value. A frustrating pattern of passing up open looks and coughing up live-ball turnovers allowed defenders to dictate the offensive flow.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 36.3%
USG% 11.6%
Net Rtg +16.4
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.5m
Scoring +1.5
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +7.9
Defense -3.2
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S Jaylen Wells 26.0m
18
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+3.2

A scorching perimeter shooting display was completely wiped out by hidden negatives that dragged his overall impact into the red. A pattern of costly turnovers and defensive lapses against quicker guards allowed opponents to immediately recoup the points he generated.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 6/9 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 21.9%
Net Rtg +8.6
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.0m
Scoring +13.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +5.7
Hustle +2.8
Defense -0.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 72.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Santi Aldama 24.1m
12
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.0

Defensive anchoring and relentless hustle plays far outweighed the damage of a clunky shooting performance. A pattern of timely weak-side blocks and contested rebounds provided a crucial stabilizing presence for the frontcourt.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.0%
USG% 23.6%
Net Rtg +30.1
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.1m
Scoring +6.3
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +2.8
Defense -0.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
S Ty Jerome 20.7m
28
pts
1
reb
7
ast
Impact
+24.0

Masterful offensive execution defined this performance, as he carved up the defense with surgical precision and elite shot-making. His ability to consistently break down point-of-attack coverage during a crucial third-quarter stretch generated massive positive momentum.

Shooting
FG 10/14 (71.4%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 84.1%
USG% 31.9%
Net Rtg +24.1
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.7m
Scoring +25.0
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +7.0
Hustle +1.3
Defense +1.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Cam Spencer 26.9m
20
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
+8.6

Breaking out of a prolonged shooting slump, he provided a massive offensive spark by converting high-quality looks. Solid defensive positioning and a pattern of timely hustle plays ensured his scoring outburst translated into a net positive.

Shooting
FG 7/13 (53.8%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.8%
USG% 24.6%
Net Rtg -13.7
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.9m
Scoring +15.6
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +5.4
Hustle +3.8
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -5.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
2
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
-2.4

Completely abandoned his typical scoring role to focus entirely on lockdown defense and high-motor hustle plays. This shift in priorities proved effective, as his disruptive perimeter pressure against the opposing primary ball-handler generated enough stops to offset his lack of shots.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 3.6%
Net Rtg -10.2
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.9m
Scoring +1.5
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +4.1
Defense +3.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 0
15
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.7

Efficient scoring was largely undone by defensive lapses and costly fouls that gave away free points. He struggled to contain dribble penetration, allowing opponents to capitalize on advantageous matchups throughout the second half.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 75.9%
USG% 22.6%
Net Rtg +4.2
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.5m
Scoring +12.8
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +0.6
Defense -2.3
Turnovers -2.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
8
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.1

An abrupt end to his recent hot streak saw his impact plummet due to forced shots and clanked finishes in traffic. Although he remained engaged defensively, a pattern of driving into crowded paint areas stalled offensive momentum.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 6/8 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.9%
USG% 17.2%
Net Rtg -16.5
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.2m
Scoring +3.9
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +0.2
Hustle +6.3
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 85.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Javon Small 21.0m
5
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
-10.2

Disastrous shot selection and bricked perimeter looks severely damaged the team's offensive flow. The sheer volume of empty possessions, characterized by a pattern of early-clock contested jumpers, completely overshadowed any marginal hustle contributions.

Shooting
FG 2/11 (18.2%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 22.7%
USG% 23.5%
Net Rtg -22.5
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.0m
Scoring -1.4
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +5.7
Defense -3.1
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 30.8%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1