GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

BKN Brooklyn Nets
23
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
+4.3

Heavy volume from beyond the arc yielded mixed results, but his sheer gravity opened up the floor for teammates. Solid positional rebounding and active closeouts (+3.1 Hustle) ensured his impact stayed positive despite the streaky deep ball. He consistently punished late rotations during transition sequences.

Shooting
FG 8/16 (50.0%)
3PT 3/10 (30.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.8%
USG% 30.4%
Net Rtg -14.9
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.5m
Offense +14.8
Hustle +3.1
Defense +2.5
Raw total +20.4
Avg player in 30.5m -16.1
Impact +4.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Nic Claxton 28.4m
11
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
-0.7

A surprisingly negative overall impact stems from a lack of high-motor plays (+1.2 Hustle) and likely hidden turnover costs. Though he maintained his usual hyper-efficient interior finishing, he struggled to anchor the drop coverage against quick guards. The raw production masked a step slow in defensive rotations.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/6 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.7%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg -24.7
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.4m
Offense +10.5
Hustle +1.2
Defense +2.7
Raw total +14.4
Avg player in 28.4m -15.1
Impact -0.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Noah Clowney 27.2m
18
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.4

Breaking out of a miserable four-game slump, his sudden perimeter explosion stretched the opposing frontcourt to its breaking point. The threat of his pick-and-pop jumper fundamentally altered the defensive geometry. While his rim protection was merely average (+1.9 Def), the offensive spacing he provided was invaluable.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 71.2%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg -29.0
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.2m
Offense +12.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.9
Raw total +15.8
Avg player in 27.2m -14.4
Impact +1.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 69.2%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
S Egor Dëmin 25.5m
4
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-10.2

Forcing up bricked triples completely tanked his offensive value and fueled opponent transition opportunities. He managed to salvage some dignity on the other end by fighting over screens (+3.4 Def), but the shot selection was disastrous. The offense routinely bogged down when he initiated the pick-and-roll.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 15.0%
Net Rtg -23.1
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.5m
Offense -2.1
Hustle +2.0
Defense +3.4
Raw total +3.3
Avg player in 25.5m -13.5
Impact -10.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
S Nolan Traore 23.6m
15
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
+1.3

A massive leap in shot quality cured his recent efficiency woes, resulting in near-perfect execution from the floor. Unfortunately, a porous defensive showing (-1.4 Def) gave back almost everything he generated on offense. Opposing wings blew past his initial containment all night, limiting his overall net positive.

Shooting
FG 6/7 (85.7%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 100.8%
USG% 15.1%
Net Rtg -37.5
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.6m
Offense +14.2
Hustle +1.0
Defense -1.4
Raw total +13.8
Avg player in 23.6m -12.5
Impact +1.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Ben Saraf 24.4m
10
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
+0.7

Smothering point-of-attack defense (+5.3 Def) single-handedly kept his impact in the green. He continues to struggle with finishing through contact, dragging down his offensive efficiency. His ability to navigate screens and blow up dribble hand-offs proved to be his defining contribution.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.9%
USG% 17.7%
Net Rtg +61.5
+/- +32
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.4m
Offense +6.4
Hustle +1.9
Defense +5.3
Raw total +13.6
Avg player in 24.4m -12.9
Impact +0.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
Drake Powell 22.5m
5
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.7

Clanking open spot-up looks severely damaged the half-court spacing, leading to a negative overall rating. He provided excellent weak-side rim protection (+3.5 Def), but the offensive dead weight was too heavy to carry. Defenders completely ignored him on the perimeter during the second half.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 35.7%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg +52.2
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.5m
Offense +2.1
Hustle +1.6
Defense +3.5
Raw total +7.2
Avg player in 22.5m -11.9
Impact -4.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
19
pts
9
reb
4
ast
Impact
+16.7

Absolute dominance in the painted area resulted in a staggering +16.7 net impact in under 20 minutes. He bullied opposing bigs for deep post position, converting nearly every look while anchoring a stout interior defense (+4.5 Def). His relentless energy on 50/50 balls (+3.4 Hustle) completely overwhelmed the second unit.

Shooting
FG 9/11 (81.8%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 83.0%
USG% 28.0%
Net Rtg +66.9
+/- +26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.6m
Offense +19.2
Hustle +3.4
Defense +4.5
Raw total +27.1
Avg player in 19.6m -10.4
Impact +16.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
Danny Wolf 19.6m
16
pts
7
reb
6
ast
Impact
+11.1

Capitalizing on a massive surge in offensive confidence, he shredded drop coverages with a lethal mix of rolls and pops. His +11.1 impact was driven by pristine shot selection and an ability to punish late closeouts. He completely flipped the momentum of the game during a dominant second-quarter stint.

Shooting
FG 7/11 (63.6%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 72.7%
USG% 22.0%
Net Rtg +58.5
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.6m
Offense +18.2
Hustle +1.0
Defense +2.3
Raw total +21.5
Avg player in 19.6m -10.4
Impact +11.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Terance Mann 18.7m
6
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
-0.8

Low usage and an inability to generate secondary hustle stats kept him from making a meaningful dent in the game. While he converted his limited looks efficiently, he was too passive hunting his own offense. Solid defensive positioning (+2.9 Def) wasn't enough to overcome his offensive invisibility.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +68.5
+/- +26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.7m
Offense +4.8
Hustle +1.4
Defense +2.9
Raw total +9.1
Avg player in 18.7m -9.9
Impact -0.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
WAS Washington Wizards
S Will Riley 45.2m
27
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.8

Heavy minutes didn't drain his two-way effectiveness, as a stellar +6.5 defensive rating anchored his positive overall impact. He punished defensive rotations from the perimeter all night, knocking down high-leverage outside shots to stretch the floor. Despite carrying a massive offensive load, his consistent hustle (+3.1) kept the opposing wings out of rhythm.

Shooting
FG 10/19 (52.6%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.0%
USG% 20.2%
Net Rtg -11.5
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 45.2m
Offense +19.1
Hustle +3.1
Defense +6.5
Raw total +28.7
Avg player in 45.2m -23.9
Impact +4.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 55.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jamir Watkins 45.2m
13
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-10.8

A brutal -10.8 total impact reflects the steep cost of poor perimeter shot selection over a massive minute load. While his high-motor hustle plays (+4.6) and defensive engagement were bright spots, they couldn't offset the empty offensive possessions. The scoring bump was entirely volume-driven, severely damaging the team's half-court efficiency.

Shooting
FG 4/12 (33.3%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.2%
USG% 14.4%
Net Rtg -11.5
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 45.2m
Offense +4.8
Hustle +4.6
Defense +3.7
Raw total +13.1
Avg player in 45.2m -23.9
Impact -10.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 22
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
21
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
+11.8

Elite shot selection continues to be his calling card, extending his streak of highly efficient shooting to three straight games. His massive +11.8 overall impact was driven by capitalizing on offensive mismatches and providing stout perimeter resistance (+5.1 Def). He maximized his brief floor time by refusing to force bad looks.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 10/10 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 84.7%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg +8.3
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.1m
Offense +17.5
Hustle +1.0
Defense +5.1
Raw total +23.6
Avg player in 22.1m -11.8
Impact +11.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 3
S Bub Carrington 22.1m
11
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-8.8

Marginal defensive resistance (+0.6) and a lack of secondary hustle stats dragged his overall impact deep into the red. Settling for heavily contested mid-range jumpers stalled the offensive flow during his shifts. He simply didn't generate enough high-quality looks or defensive stops to justify his usage rate.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.7%
USG% 23.2%
Net Rtg +8.3
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.1m
Offense +2.2
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.6
Raw total +3.0
Avg player in 22.1m -11.8
Impact -8.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
14
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.1

Interior finishing buoyed his positive impact despite a cold night from beyond the arc. He found ways to contribute defensively (+3.0) when his outside shot wasn't falling, contesting effectively in the paint. Operating primarily as a pick-and-pop threat, his shot diet kept the defense honest even with the misses.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.3%
USG% 28.3%
Net Rtg +0.9
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.4m
Offense +8.1
Hustle +1.9
Defense +3.0
Raw total +13.0
Avg player in 20.4m -10.9
Impact +2.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
14
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
-2.1

Highly efficient scoring bursts were completely undone by defensive liabilities at the point of attack (+0.3 Def). Opposing guards consistently targeted him in isolation, erasing the value of his excellent shot selection. Even a strong showing in 50/50 balls (+3.1 Hustle) couldn't rescue a negative overall rating.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.8%
USG% 18.3%
Net Rtg -32.8
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.7m
Offense +9.7
Hustle +3.1
Defense +0.3
Raw total +13.1
Avg player in 28.7m -15.2
Impact -2.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
4
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-13.8

Complete offensive invisibility cratered his net impact to a team-worst -13.8. Refusing to look at the rim allowed defenders to aggressively sag off and clog the passing lanes. He salvaged a shred of utility through gritty defensive rotations, but the offensive zeros were too costly.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.2%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg -32.8
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.7m
Offense -4.5
Hustle +3.1
Defense +2.8
Raw total +1.4
Avg player in 28.7m -15.2
Impact -13.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 4
Anthony Gill 27.6m
9
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.3

Snapping a five-game streak of elite efficiency, his perimeter misses severely capped his offensive ceiling. However, relentless activity on the glass and in passing lanes (+4.8 Hustle) kept his head just above water. He morphed into a pure energy big down the stretch to compensate for the broken jumper.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.1%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg -23.0
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.6m
Offense +6.6
Hustle +4.8
Defense +3.6
Raw total +15.0
Avg player in 27.6m -14.7
Impact +0.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 77.8%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0