Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
SAC lead LAC lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
LAC 2P — 3P —
SAC 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 163 attempts

LAC LAC Shot-making Δ

Leonard Hard 9/19 +0.7
Collins 8/12 +5.4
Lopez Hard 5/12 +0.4
Dunn Hard 4/7 +3.4
Jones Jr. 5/7 +2.8
Sanders Hard 0/5 -4.7
Miller 3/4 +1.3
Batum Hard 1/2 +1.0
Christie 1/2 +0.8
Niederhäuser Open 1/1 +0.6

SAC SAC Shot-making Δ

Carter 6/14 -3.8
Monk Hard 6/13 +5.1
Clifford Hard 5/12 -0.1
Cardwell Open 7/11 +1.6
Raynaud 6/8 +4.6
Westbrook Hard 2/8 -4.3
Hunter Hard 1/8 -6.1
LaVine 2/6 -2.4
Plowden 3/5 +2.4
Achiuwa 2/4 -0.6
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
LAC
SAC
37/71 Field Goals 41/92
52.1% Field Goal % 44.6%
9/21 3-Pointers 10/37
42.9% 3-Point % 27.0%
31/36 Free Throws 19/22
86.1% Free Throw % 86.4%
65.6% True Shooting % 54.6%
46 Total Rebounds 49
5 Offensive 12
35 Defensive 30
22 Assists 22
1.38 Assist/TO Ratio 2.00
15 Turnovers 11
6 Steals 10
7 Blocks 6
18 Fouls 22
42 Points in Paint 52
12 Fast Break Pts 18
13 Points off TOs 16
14 Second Chance Pts 17
18 Bench Points 76
12 Largest Lead 10
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Kawhi Leonard
31 PTS · 9 REB · 7 AST · 35.7 MIN
+28.95
2
Dylan Cardwell
14 PTS · 14 REB · 1 AST · 31.0 MIN
+22.73
3
John Collins
22 PTS · 7 REB · 1 AST · 34.4 MIN
+19.49
4
Maxime Raynaud
12 PTS · 5 REB · 2 AST · 26.1 MIN
+15.19
5
Brook Lopez
15 PTS · 9 REB · 2 AST · 36.3 MIN
+14.64
6
Malik Monk
18 PTS · 2 REB · 2 AST · 22.4 MIN
+12.69
7
Nique Clifford
16 PTS · 2 REB · 2 AST · 33.3 MIN
+11.64
8
Derrick Jones Jr.
13 PTS · 3 REB · 0 AST · 27.5 MIN
+11.64
9
DeMar DeRozan
5 PTS · 5 REB · 1 AST · 20.4 MIN
+8.2
10
Precious Achiuwa
6 PTS · 4 REB · 1 AST · 8.1 MIN
+8.03
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:01 D. Carter running DUNK (14 PTS) (M. Raynaud 2 AST) 114–111
Q4 0:06 M. Raynaud REBOUND (Off:0 Def:5) 114–109
Q4 0:07 MISS K. Sanders Free Throw 2 of 2 114–109
Q4 0:07 K. Sanders Free Throw 1 of 2 (1 PTS) 114–109
Q4 0:07 D. Plowden take personal FOUL (3 PF) (Sanders 2 FT) 113–109
Q4 0:08 D. Plowden running Layup (8 PTS) 113–109
Q4 0:12 M. Raynaud REBOUND (Off:0 Def:4) 113–107
Q4 0:15 MISS K. Dunn Free Throw 2 of 2 113–107
Q4 0:15 K. Dunn Free Throw 1 of 2 (15 PTS) 113–107
Q4 0:15 D. Carter personal FOUL (3 PF) (Dunn 2 FT) 112–107
Q4 0:16 N. Clifford 3PT (16 PTS) (D. Carter 4 AST) 112–107
Q4 0:24 K. Dunn Free Throw 2 of 2 (14 PTS) 112–104
Q4 0:24 K. Dunn Free Throw 1 of 2 (13 PTS) 111–104
Q4 0:24 N. Clifford take personal FOUL (5 PF) (Dunn 2 FT) 110–104
Q4 0:35 J. Collins REBOUND (Off:2 Def:5) 110–104

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

SAC Sacramento Kings
S Maxime Raynaud 26.1m
12
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.7

Bullying smaller defenders in the paint allowed him to maintain his highly efficient scoring streak. His physical interior presence (+5.6 Def) stabilized the frontcourt and consistently punished defensive switches.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 13.1%
Net Rtg -7.1
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.1m
Scoring +10.4
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +3.3
Hustle +1.5
Defense +0.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
S De'Andre Hunter 24.6m
6
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-13.4

Settling for heavily contested perimeter looks cratered his offensive value and fueled opponent run-outs. Even a commendable effort on loose balls (+5.8 Hustle) couldn't salvage a disastrous shooting performance.

Shooting
FG 1/8 (12.5%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 30.7%
USG% 21.7%
Net Rtg +11.8
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.6m
Scoring +1.1
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +1.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S DeMar DeRozan 20.4m
5
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+3.4

Uncharacteristic offensive passivity limited his usual gravitational pull on opposing defenses. However, highly engaged point-of-attack defense (+6.3 Def) kept his overall impact hovering right around neutral.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.5%
USG% 12.8%
Net Rtg -10.3
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.4m
Scoring +3.2
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +6.3
Defense +3.7
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
6
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
-13.5

Reckless shot selection and a complete inability to connect from deep severely damaged offensive spacing. The resulting long rebounds and disjointed possessions drove a catastrophic -11.9 overall impact score.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 32.2%
USG% 23.9%
Net Rtg -25.6
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Scoring +0.9
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.9
Defense -2.2
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Zach LaVine 18.3m
6
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-3.8

Clanking multiple attempts from beyond the arc suppressed his offensive ceiling. Fortunately, active hands in passing lanes and solid defensive positioning (+4.2 Def) kept his head above water.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 43.6%
USG% 15.9%
Net Rtg -25.2
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.3m
Scoring +2.8
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense +1.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
16
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.4

Elevated scoring volume was offset by forced perimeter attempts that bailed out the defense. Despite decent activity levels, the inefficiency of his shot profile dragged his net rating into the negative.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.1%
USG% 18.3%
Net Rtg +6.2
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.3m
Scoring +10.9
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 87.5%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
14
pts
14
reb
1
ast
Impact
+20.8

Absolutely dominated the interior to generate a massive +14.7 total impact. His relentless motor (+3.9 Hustle) and suffocating rim protection (+8.6 Def) completely neutralized the opposing frontcourt.

Shooting
FG 7/11 (63.6%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 63.6%
USG% 16.9%
Net Rtg +15.3
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.0m
Scoring +10.7
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +17.8
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -2.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 53.3%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 2
Malik Monk 22.4m
18
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.9

A lethal perimeter barrage single-handedly stretched the opposing defense to its breaking point. Catching fire from the corners forced aggressive closeouts, opening up the floor for the entire unit.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 6/9 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 69.2%
USG% 28.0%
Net Rtg +5.3
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.4m
Scoring +13.1
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +6.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Devin Carter 21.9m
14
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
-2.1

Elite hustle (+5.7) and relentless rim-running salvaged a night where his outside shot completely abandoned him. By crashing the glass and fighting through screens, he managed to stay net-positive despite his perimeter struggles.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 45.7%
USG% 29.6%
Net Rtg -15.2
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.9m
Scoring +7.0
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.2
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
8
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.6

Efficient offensive execution was completely undermined by a porous defensive showing (-2.2 Def). Opponents consistently targeted him in isolation, turning his productive scoring stretches into a net negative.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 80.0%
USG% 14.7%
Net Rtg +7.9
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.1m
Scoring +6.3
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +0.0
Defense -2.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
6
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.1

Maintained his streak of efficient shooting during a highly condensed rotational stint. Quick, decisive moves in the post maximized his value before returning to the bench.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 61.5%
USG% 27.8%
Net Rtg +41.0
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.1m
Scoring +4.4
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +4.1
Defense -1.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
LAC LA Clippers
S Brook Lopez 36.3m
15
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
+13.1

Defensive anchoring defined this outing, with his elite rim protection (+11.4 Def) completely deterring opponents from attacking the paint. Coupling that deterrence with exceptional hustle (+6.7) allowed him to control the game's flow without requiring high offensive usage.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.5%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg +14.8
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.3m
Scoring +10.2
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +9.5
Defense +2.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 58.8%
STL 1
BLK 3
TO 1
S Kawhi Leonard 35.7m
31
pts
9
reb
7
ast
Impact
+24.6

Elite two-way impact was driven by relentless rim pressure and suffocating perimeter defense (+7.6). His willingness to hunt mismatches in isolation masked a subpar night shooting from the outside.

Shooting
FG 9/19 (47.4%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 12/12 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.8%
USG% 33.8%
Net Rtg +23.8
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.7m
Scoring +23.6
Creation +3.8
Shot Making +4.5
Hustle +2.7
Defense +3.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S John Collins 34.4m
22
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+16.4

A massive offensive surge fueled his positive rating, as he consistently capitalized on interior mismatches to finish efficiently around the basket. Extending his streak of highly accurate shooting nights, he provided a reliable release valve whenever half-court sets bogged down.

Shooting
FG 8/12 (66.7%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 77.5%
USG% 19.2%
Net Rtg +3.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.4m
Scoring +19.5
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +4.4
Hustle +7.9
Defense -4.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
S Kris Dunn 33.1m
15
pts
1
reb
5
ast
Impact
+0.3

A shocking offensive explosion was entirely undone by defensive lapses and ball-security issues that tanked his total rating (-5.2). The scoring volume proved to be empty calories as opponents consistently exploited his defensive rotations on the other end.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 5/7 (71.4%)
Advanced
TS% 74.4%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +29.8
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.1m
Scoring +11.7
Creation +2.2
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 36.8%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
13
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+3.3

Despite a highly efficient scoring burst that far exceeded his recent averages, hidden costs in transition defense dragged his overall impact into the negative. His inability to string together stops on the wing negated the value of his opportunistic baseline cuts.

Shooting
FG 5/7 (71.4%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 78.1%
USG% 16.1%
Net Rtg +40.4
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.5m
Scoring +11.0
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +2.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
7
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.1

Pristine shot selection yielded high-efficiency looks, yet his overall impact slipped into the red. The underlying metrics suggest defensive rotations were a step slow, bleeding points that erased his tidy offensive contributions.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.8%
USG% 10.5%
Net Rtg -21.7
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.0m
Scoring +6.2
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +3.8
Defense -0.8
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 35.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
Kobe Sanders 18.2m
1
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
-19.5

Total offensive paralysis (-12.9 Total) stemmed from a complete inability to find the bottom of the net. Forcing bad shots early in the shot clock disrupted the team's rhythm and allowed the defense to leak out for easy transition points.

Shooting
FG 0/5 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 8.5%
USG% 19.6%
Net Rtg -40.3
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.2m
Scoring -3.1
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +4.4
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -8.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 3
3
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-10.9

Passive offensive involvement limited his ability to positively influence the game during his brief stint. A lack of aggressiveness on the perimeter allowed defenders to sag off and clog the driving lanes for his teammates.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 9.5%
Net Rtg -38.5
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.8m
Scoring +2.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
5
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.6

Capitalized on a brief window of playing time by confidently knocking down a perimeter look to boost his rating. This quick-strike capability provided a much-needed jolt of spacing during a stagnant offensive stretch.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 86.8%
USG% 15.0%
Net Rtg -111.1
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.2m
Scoring +4.2
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 85.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.8

Barely saw the floor long enough to establish any sort of rhythm. A quick interior finish provided a momentary spark, but his overall footprint remained negligible.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -16.0
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.8m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1