GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

LAC LA Clippers
S John Collins 27.1m
19
pts
7
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.8

Dominating the interior with decisive cuts and explosive finishes, he punished the defense's lack of weak-side awareness. His ability to seal defenders early in the shot clock created high-percentage looks that anchored the offense. This ruthless interior efficiency drove a highly productive shift.

Shooting
FG 8/11 (72.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 77.1%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg -60.6
+/- -33
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.1m
Offense +17.1
Hustle +1.9
Defense +2.0
Raw total +21.0
Avg player in 27.1m -15.2
Impact +5.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Kawhi Leonard 26.6m
25
pts
7
reb
4
ast
Impact
+0.4

Heavy isolation usage yielded individual production but caused the broader offense to stagnate. A lack of off-ball movement and zero hustle-play generation allowed the defense to set up comfortably. Consequently, his scoring volume was almost entirely neutralized by the resulting sluggish team pace.

Shooting
FG 10/20 (50.0%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.6%
USG% 41.0%
Net Rtg -9.6
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.6m
Offense +11.0
Hustle +0.2
Defense +4.1
Raw total +15.3
Avg player in 26.6m -14.9
Impact +0.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
S Brook Lopez 23.1m
5
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.4

Dropped coverages and a lack of foot speed on the perimeter allowed opponents to walk into open jumpers. While he contested well at the rim, his inability to step out and challenge shooters proved fatal to the defensive scheme. Compounding the issue, his errant outside shooting failed to punish the defense on the other end.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg -37.3
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.1m
Offense +3.7
Hustle +3.1
Defense +3.7
Raw total +10.5
Avg player in 23.1m -12.9
Impact -2.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Kris Dunn 20.5m
2
pts
3
reb
6
ast
Impact
-6.0

Despite hounding ball handlers and generating deflections, his offensive limitations severely handicapped the lineup. Defenders completely ignored him on the perimeter, packing the paint and suffocating his teammates' driving lanes. The resulting spacing nightmare far outweighed his gritty defensive contributions.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg -57.1
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.5m
Offense -2.0
Hustle +3.0
Defense +4.5
Raw total +5.5
Avg player in 20.5m -11.5
Impact -6.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Kobe Sanders 20.0m
4
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-11.8

A brutal regression to the mean saw him hemorrhage value through forced shots and stalled possessions. Without his usual rhythm, he pressed the issue offensively, leading to empty trips that ignited opponent fast breaks. His inability to adjust to physical perimeter defense completely derailed his minutes.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 17.8%
Net Rtg -17.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.0m
Offense -2.1
Hustle +0.8
Defense +0.7
Raw total -0.6
Avg player in 20.0m -11.2
Impact -11.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
5
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
-13.1

Catastrophic shot selection cratered his overall impact, as he repeatedly forced contested looks early in the clock. These empty possessions acted as live-ball turnovers, consistently putting the defense in disadvantageous transition scenarios. Even his solid rotational defense couldn't patch the holes created by his offensive recklessness.

Shooting
FG 2/10 (20.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -42.3
+/- -25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.7m
Offense -2.7
Hustle +1.6
Defense +4.6
Raw total +3.5
Avg player in 29.7m -16.6
Impact -13.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
10
pts
8
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.4

Flawless finishing around the basket masked a severely flawed defensive performance. He routinely bit on pump fakes and found himself out of position, forcing teammates into impossible rotation scenarios. The hidden cost of these defensive breakdowns ultimately dragged his net impact into the red.

Shooting
FG 4/4 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 102.5%
USG% 13.8%
Net Rtg -30.8
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.9m
Offense +5.7
Hustle +1.0
Defense +3.9
Raw total +10.6
Avg player in 24.9m -14.0
Impact -3.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 3
7
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.0

While he found more success offensively than in recent outings, undisciplined closeouts and poor spatial awareness negated those gains. He consistently lost his man off the ball, surrendering easy back-door cuts that deflated the team's momentum. The erratic defensive focus overshadowed his scoring uptick.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 45.1%
USG% 13.2%
Net Rtg -24.0
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.4m
Offense +4.0
Hustle +1.4
Defense +2.6
Raw total +8.0
Avg player in 21.4m -12.0
Impact -4.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 70.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Cam Christie 12.0m
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.7

Continuing a brutal shooting slump, his offensive hesitancy allowed defenders to sag off and clog the paint. However, he salvaged his minutes by digging in defensively, utilizing his length to disrupt passing lanes. This relentless defensive effort prevented his offensive woes from becoming a total liability.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -24.2
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.0m
Offense -1.6
Hustle +2.5
Defense +5.1
Raw total +6.0
Avg player in 12.0m -6.7
Impact -0.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
2
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.9

An absolute zero on the offensive end, his inability to find the mark crippled the second unit's spacing. He was repeatedly targeted in pick-and-roll actions, failing to fight through screens and compromising the defensive shell. This two-way futility resulted in a massive negative swing during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -64.0
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.9m
Offense -5.9
Hustle +1.6
Defense +1.0
Raw total -3.3
Avg player in 11.9m -6.6
Impact -9.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
Kobe Brown 8.9m
10
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.4

A complete lack of rebounding and defensive resistance completely undermined a highly efficient scoring burst. By failing to secure the glass or contest at the rim, he essentially traded baskets with the opposition. His one-dimensional playstyle ultimately bled more value than it created.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 44.4%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.9m
Offense +3.3
Hustle 0.0
Defense -0.8
Raw total +2.5
Avg player in 8.9m -4.9
Impact -2.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
0
pts
0
reb
3
ast
Impact
-5.9

Passive decision-making and a lack of off-ball movement stalled the offense entirely during his shift. His inability to bend the defense or generate any hustle plays left the unit completely stagnant. Continuing a severe offensive slump, his presence on the floor was a glaring net negative.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -23.5
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.1m
Offense -1.3
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total -1.3
Avg player in 8.1m -4.6
Impact -5.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.2

Completely invisible during his brief stint, he provided zero resistance defensively and zero gravity offensively. A complete lack of hustle or weak-side activity allowed the opposition to operate without friction. His minutes were essentially dead weight, forcing the rest of the lineup to play shorthanded.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 6.3%
Net Rtg -23.7
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.8m
Offense -1.9
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total -1.9
Avg player in 5.8m -3.3
Impact -5.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
CLE Cleveland Cavaliers
29
pts
5
reb
9
ast
Impact
+20.4

A masterclass in offensive orchestration and point-of-attack aggression drove an astronomical net rating. He relentlessly pressured the rim to collapse the defense, while simultaneously blowing up opponent sets with active hands on the perimeter. This two-way clinic completely overwhelmed the opposing backcourt.

Shooting
FG 10/19 (52.6%)
3PT 3/9 (33.3%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.0%
USG% 33.8%
Net Rtg +38.8
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.1m
Offense +22.2
Hustle +4.0
Defense +11.0
Raw total +37.2
Avg player in 30.1m -16.8
Impact +20.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 2
S Jaylon Tyson 24.5m
17
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.7

Elite perimeter shot-making fueled a strong offensive rating, but his overall impact was severely muted. Defensive lapses and likely live-ball turnovers bled value back to the opponent, preventing a dominant statistical showing from translating to winning margins. A pattern of trading baskets kept his net influence marginal.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 3/3 (100.0%)
FT 0/3 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 75.1%
USG% 22.0%
Net Rtg +41.0
+/- +20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.5m
Offense +11.0
Hustle +1.0
Defense +3.5
Raw total +15.5
Avg player in 24.5m -13.8
Impact +1.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Jarrett Allen 23.4m
10
pts
11
reb
3
ast
Impact
+10.2

Absolute dominance in the painted area anchored this highly positive performance. He consistently erased opponent drives at the rim while maintaining flawless shot selection on the other end, continuing a multi-game streak of hyper-efficient finishing. His vertical spacing and rim protection dictated the terms of engagement all night.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.3%
USG% 14.5%
Net Rtg +43.5
+/- +20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.4m
Offense +11.2
Hustle +2.7
Defense +9.3
Raw total +23.2
Avg player in 23.4m -13.0
Impact +10.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
S Sam Merrill 21.1m
11
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.8

Breaking out of a recent shooting slump, his perimeter gravity stretched the floor effectively. However, his net impact remained flat due to being targeted on the defensive end. Opponents repeatedly hunted him in pick-and-roll actions, offsetting the value of his timely floor-spacing.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 91.7%
USG% 14.0%
Net Rtg +47.7
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.1m
Offense +8.6
Hustle +2.4
Defense +1.6
Raw total +12.6
Avg player in 21.1m -11.8
Impact +0.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Dean Wade 19.6m
5
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
-0.8

Despite active hands in the passing lanes and solid rotational defense, his overall footprint skewed negative. Hesitancy on the perimeter bogged down half-court possessions, essentially allowing the defense to play five-on-four. His inability to punish closeouts completely negated the value of his hustle plays.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg +27.0
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.6m
Offense +4.3
Hustle +2.8
Defense +3.1
Raw total +10.2
Avg player in 19.6m -11.0
Impact -0.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
7
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.5

A massive surge in offensive confidence breathed life into the second unit, highlighted by relentless drives to the paint. Despite the scoring punch and excellent loose-ball recovery, defensive miscommunications and likely transition fouls capped his overall ceiling. The aggressive mindset paid off, though it came with a slight cost in half-court stability.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 70.0%
USG% 7.9%
Net Rtg +19.0
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.8m
Offense +7.9
Hustle +4.9
Defense +2.7
Raw total +15.5
Avg player in 24.8m -14.0
Impact +1.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-2.7

Constant activity on the defensive end couldn't salvage a disastrous offensive stint. Forced attempts and broken plays completely derailed the team's spacing, turning his minutes into a glaring net negative. His high-energy closeouts were overshadowed by offensive possessions that consistently ended in empty trips.

Shooting
FG 1/7 (14.3%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.4%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg +34.4
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.3m
Offense +0.2
Hustle +3.8
Defense +4.6
Raw total +8.6
Avg player in 20.3m -11.3
Impact -2.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 0
11
pts
2
reb
6
ast
Impact
+2.5

Tenacious on-ball pressure defined this outing, completely disrupting the opponent's offensive initiation. While his own shot selection was highly questionable and bogged down the offense, his ability to blow up screens and force late-clock situations kept his overall impact in the green. He essentially won his minutes purely through defensive grit.

Shooting
FG 5/14 (35.7%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 39.3%
USG% 35.4%
Net Rtg +39.4
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.2m
Offense +1.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense +10.3
Raw total +13.2
Avg player in 19.2m -10.7
Impact +2.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 3
Keon Ellis 18.5m
6
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+1.6

Pushing through an uncharacteristic scoring drought, he found ways to contribute without the ball in his hands. Elite screen navigation and disruptive deflections short-circuited several opponent sets. He proved his worth as a glue guy by leaning entirely into his defensive fundamentals when his jumper abandoned him.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg +4.9
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.5m
Offense +1.5
Hustle +4.5
Defense +6.0
Raw total +12.0
Avg player in 18.5m -10.4
Impact +1.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
8
pts
8
reb
0
ast
Impact
+12.1

Capitalizing on every opportunity around the basket, he provided a massive jolt of energy in limited action. His physical screen-setting freed up ball handlers, while his sturdy interior defense deterred multiple drives. This was a textbook example of maximizing backup center minutes through sheer force and discipline.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 15.0%
Net Rtg +22.9
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.5m
Offense +10.4
Hustle +1.8
Defense +9.1
Raw total +21.3
Avg player in 16.5m -9.2
Impact +12.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
8
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.2

Instant offense and pristine shot selection highlighted a highly productive micro-shift. He exploited mismatches in the post and capitalized on broken coverages, generating immense value in just a handful of possessions. His veteran savvy stabilized the frontcourt rotation during a crucial stretch.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 19.0%
Net Rtg +23.5
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.1m
Offense +7.6
Hustle +1.5
Defense +0.7
Raw total +9.8
Avg player in 8.1m -4.6
Impact +5.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+3.3

Clean execution and mistake-free basketball defined this brief appearance. He stayed within his role, making the right extra passes and maintaining proper spacing to keep the offense flowing. A lack of forced actions allowed the unit to thrive while he was on the floor.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg +28.0
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.0m
Offense +5.8
Hustle +0.8
Defense +0.6
Raw total +7.2
Avg player in 7.0m -3.9
Impact +3.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
6
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.7

Continuing a trend of highly efficient decision-making, he seamlessly operated the offense during his short stint. Aggressive drives collapsed the defense, while active hands generated key transition opportunities. He maximized every second of floor time by dictating the tempo perfectly.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 42.9%
USG% 41.2%
Net Rtg +28.0
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.0m
Offense +3.7
Hustle +3.4
Defense +2.6
Raw total +9.7
Avg player in 7.0m -4.0
Impact +5.7
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0