Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
POR lead MEM lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
MEM 2P — 3P —
POR 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 178 attempts

MEM MEM Shot-making Δ

Prosper Hard 3/13 -6.0
Wells Hard 5/11 +0.7
Clayton Jr. 5/11 -1.2
Spencer Hard 7/8 +8.2
Small 5/8 +2.7
Jackson Hard 4/8 +2.5
Coward 5/8 +2.2
Pippen Jr. 4/8 +0.6
Hendricks 2/7 -2.6
Mashack 2/6 -1.5

POR POR Shot-making Δ

Grant 8/15 +1.9
Holiday Hard 6/12 +1.2
Camara Hard 6/11 +3.3
Henderson Hard 4/10 -0.2
Clingan Open 6/10 -0.9
Rupert Hard 4/6 +5.7
Williams III Open 6/6 +5.1
Krejčí Hard 3/6 +1.7
Cissoko 3/6 -0.1
Wesley Open 2/4 -1.3
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
MEM
POR
42/88 Field Goals 49/90
47.7% Field Goal % 54.4%
15/41 3-Pointers 17/42
36.6% 3-Point % 40.5%
16/21 Free Throws 20/21
76.2% Free Throw % 95.2%
59.1% True Shooting % 68.0%
45 Total Rebounds 49
10 Offensive 12
27 Defensive 34
28 Assists 31
1.75 Assist/TO Ratio 1.72
16 Turnovers 18
12 Steals 9
3 Blocks 7
18 Fouls 17
40 Points in Paint 60
17 Fast Break Pts 21
19 Points off TOs 23
11 Second Chance Pts 13
50 Bench Points 62
15 Largest Lead 30
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Cam Spencer
18 PTS · 0 REB · 5 AST · 26.0 MIN
+22.43
2
Jrue Holiday
20 PTS · 5 REB · 7 AST · 24.9 MIN
+22.14
3
Jerami Grant
23 PTS · 2 REB · 2 AST · 28.0 MIN
+19.34
4
Robert Williams III
13 PTS · 7 REB · 2 AST · 19.1 MIN
+16.29
5
GG Jackson
15 PTS · 3 REB · 2 AST · 27.1 MIN
+16.01
6
Donovan Clingan
13 PTS · 17 REB · 0 AST · 25.4 MIN
+15.29
7
Toumani Camara
15 PTS · 4 REB · 3 AST · 29.6 MIN
+13.02
8
Sidy Cissoko
9 PTS · 1 REB · 2 AST · 24.9 MIN
+12.82
9
Cedric Coward
11 PTS · 8 REB · 1 AST · 25.0 MIN
+10.68
10
Scotty Pippen Jr.
13 PTS · 3 REB · 6 AST · 22.0 MIN
+10.04
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:21 J. Mashack 26' 3PT (5 PTS) (J. Small 3 AST) 115–135
Q4 0:35 G. Jackson STEAL (1 STL) 112–135
Q4 0:35 B. Wesley lost ball TURNOVER (1 TO) 112–135
Q4 0:55 J. Small 26' 3PT step back (11 PTS) (C. Spencer 5 AST) 112–135
Q4 1:05 W. Clayton Jr. REBOUND (Off:0 Def:3) 109–135
Q4 1:10 MISS Yang 26' 3PT 109–135
Q4 1:31 C. Spencer Free Throw 2 of 2 (18 PTS) 109–135
Q4 1:31 C. Spencer Free Throw 1 of 2 (17 PTS) 108–135
Q4 1:31 Yang personal FOUL (1 PF) (Spencer 2 FT) 107–135
Q4 1:42 W. Clayton Jr. REBOUND (Off:0 Def:2) 107–135
Q4 1:45 MISS R. Rupert 12' step back Shot 107–135
Q4 2:01 Yang REBOUND (Off:0 Def:1) 107–135
Q4 2:05 MISS G. Jackson 26' running 3PT 107–135
Q4 2:11 J. Mashack STEAL (3 STL) 107–135
Q4 2:11 Yang lost ball TURNOVER (2 TO) 107–135

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

POR Portland Trail Blazers
S Toumani Camara 29.6m
15
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+4.9

Generated massive value through relentless energy plays, leading the team in hustle metrics by diving for loose balls and keeping possessions alive. His timely weak-side cuts perfectly complemented the primary ball-handlers.

Shooting
FG 6/11 (54.5%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 68.2%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg +18.1
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.6m
Scoring +10.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +4.4
Hustle +1.2
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jerami Grant 28.0m
23
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+12.4

Carried the half-court offense by isolating effectively at the elbows and drawing fouls on over-aggressive defenders. The scoring volume was highly efficient, though a lack of secondary playmaking kept his ceiling slightly capped.

Shooting
FG 8/15 (53.3%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.6%
USG% 23.6%
Net Rtg +22.2
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.0m
Scoring +18.3
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +4.2
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
S Donovan Clingan 25.4m
13
pts
17
reb
0
ast
Impact
+17.3

Absolutely dominated the painted area, swallowing up defensive rebounds to terminate opponent possessions. His massive frame deterred countless drives at the rim, anchoring a dominant defensive stretch that swung the game.

Shooting
FG 6/10 (60.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.3%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg +19.8
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.4m
Scoring +9.9
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +21.6
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 36.8%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Jrue Holiday 24.9m
20
pts
5
reb
7
ast
Impact
+14.9

Masterfully dictated the game's tempo by threading the needle on pick-and-roll feeds and hounding ball-handlers full court. His elite two-way processing turned defensive stops into immediate high-value scoring chances.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.3%
USG% 26.2%
Net Rtg +24.1
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.9m
Scoring +15.7
Creation +3.6
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +2.5
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Shaedon Sharpe 13.9m
2
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-11.2

Looked completely disengaged during his brief stint on the floor, failing to pressure the rim or create separation. The offense stagnated heavily with him operating as a secondary creator.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 34.7%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg -17.0
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.9m
Scoring +0.6
Creation +1.1
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
Sidy Cissoko 24.9m
9
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.0

Capitalized on rare rotation minutes by aggressively filling the lanes in transition. His physical point-of-attack defense disrupted the opponent's timing, allowing him to carve out a slight positive impact.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.4%
USG% 11.9%
Net Rtg +9.4
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.9m
Scoring +7.0
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +1.3
Defense +3.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
11
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.7

Provided steady, low-mistake connective tissue for the second unit. He made the right extra pass against rotating defenses, though his overall impact remained neutral due to a lack of aggressive rim pressure.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 75.1%
USG% 11.9%
Net Rtg +28.7
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.1m
Scoring +8.8
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
11
pts
5
reb
9
ast
Impact
-13.6

Wild shot selection from the perimeter severely undermined his playmaking efforts. Opponents sagged off him to clog the passing lanes, exposing his inability to consistently punish drop coverage.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.6%
USG% 30.8%
Net Rtg +43.3
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.3m
Scoring +6.0
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +1.5
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -12.6
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 5
13
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+8.4

Capitalized on every touch around the basket with flawless finishing as a lob threat. His vertical spacing warped the opposing defense, while his weak-side shot blocking erased multiple defensive breakdowns.

Shooting
FG 6/6 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 108.3%
USG% 17.0%
Net Rtg +46.3
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.1m
Scoring +13.0
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +8.9
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 2
Blake Wesley 14.7m
4
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
-7.3

Frenetic pacing led to rushed decisions and blown spacing in the half-court. Despite active hands in the passing lanes, his inability to organize the offense resulted in a net-negative stint.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +3.2
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.7m
Scoring +2.3
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +0.3
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Rayan Rupert 11.6m
12
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.6

Punished the defense for leaving him in the corners, providing a sudden and lethal burst of floor spacing. His red-hot catch-and-shoot execution forced the opposition to abandon their zone scheme.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 4/5 (80.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 30.8%
Net Rtg +15.6
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.6m
Scoring +10.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +0.3
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-14.4

Looked overwhelmed by the speed of the game during a brief cameo. Late rotations and poor positioning in the pick-and-roll allowed a quick flurry of uncontested layups.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 57.1%
Net Rtg -142.9
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.5m
Scoring +1.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +0.3
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
13
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
-1.4

A brutal regression to the mean snapped his hot shooting streak, as he forced contested jumpers early in the shot clock. The high volume of empty possessions severely dragged down his net rating despite active rebounding on the margins.

Shooting
FG 3/13 (23.1%)
3PT 2/9 (22.2%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 41.6%
USG% 25.4%
Net Rtg -19.7
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.8m
Scoring +4.9
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +2.0
Hustle +5.7
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 64.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jaylen Wells 27.4m
13
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-2.7

Impact cratered due to poor perimeter shot selection. Brick after brick from deep stalled the half-court offense, negating a solid defensive effort on the wing.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 1/5 (20.0%)
Advanced
TS% 49.2%
USG% 22.6%
Net Rtg -26.2
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.4m
Scoring +6.3
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S GG Jackson 27.1m
15
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+8.1

Maintained his steady scoring rhythm by attacking closeouts and finishing through contact. His positive impact was driven by efficient shot creation, though occasional defensive lapses kept his total score from entering elite territory.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 76.8%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +11.5
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.1m
Scoring +12.1
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +3.8
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
S Cedric Coward 25.0m
11
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+2.9

Anchored the second unit with exceptional defensive rotations and high-motor closeouts. His elite hustle metrics completely offset a low-usage offensive role, proving his value lies entirely in doing the dirty work.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 68.8%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg -5.7
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.0m
Scoring +8.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +5.3
Defense +6.8
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 4
13
pts
3
reb
6
ast
Impact
-2.4

Kept the offense humming with sharp dribble penetration and crisp kick-outs to shooters. However, his overall impact was muted by getting targeted on defensive switches against bigger guards.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.6%
USG% 23.1%
Net Rtg +2.9
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.0m
Scoring +10.2
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +1.9
Defense -2.6
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
Cam Spencer 26.0m
18
pts
0
reb
5
ast
Impact
+16.2

Exploded out of a recent slump by finding soft spots in the zone and punishing late rotations. His near-perfect shooting efficiency combined with disruptive perimeter defense to generate a massive positive swing.

Shooting
FG 7/8 (87.5%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 101.4%
USG% 15.9%
Net Rtg -30.5
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.0m
Scoring +17.2
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +4.6
Hustle +0.0
Defense +4.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
11
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-7.5

Blew several defensive assignments in transition, allowing uncontested layups that quickly erased his offensive contributions. His inability to secure long rebounds also gave the opponent crucial second-chance opportunities.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 26.4%
Net Rtg -21.5
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.0m
Scoring +6.6
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -6.6
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
Javon Small 21.6m
11
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+1.4

Efficient scoring numbers masked a highly passive defensive performance. He routinely died on screens at the point of attack, allowing straight-line drives that compromised the team's defensive shell.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 68.8%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -26.1
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.6m
Scoring +8.9
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +5.4
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.3

Struggled to find any rhythm offensively, forcing clunky floaters in traffic that led to easy transition run-outs for the opponent. A lack of physical engagement on the glass further tanked his overall impact score.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 35.7%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg -65.1
+/- -27
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.9m
Scoring +1.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +4.4
Defense -0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.3

Offensive hesitancy plagued his minutes, as he passed up open looks and bogged down the spacing. While his point-of-attack defense remained stout, the complete lack of scoring gravity made him a net negative.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -18.2
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.2m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +1.3
Defense +5.2
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 77.8%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1