GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

NOP New Orleans Pelicans
S Herbert Jones 30.3m
8
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
-7.8

An overreliance on low-percentage three-point attempts torpedoed his overall value despite his usual defensive excellence. Bricking seven shots from deep resulted in empty possessions that killed offensive momentum. His elite perimeter defense simply could not offset the damage done by his poor shot selection.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 2/9 (22.2%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 33.7%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg +16.5
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.3m
Offense +1.7
Hustle +2.0
Defense +3.9
Raw total +7.6
Avg player in 30.3m -15.4
Impact -7.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S Trey Murphy III 28.6m
21
pts
2
reb
7
ast
Impact
+10.2

Lethal perimeter shooting and excellent ball movement created massive offensive leverage. By burying five threes, he forced the defense into constant rotations and opened up driving lanes for the rest of the roster. This dual-threat performance as a spacer and connector completely broke down the opposing scheme.

Shooting
FG 8/15 (53.3%)
3PT 5/11 (45.5%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.0%
USG% 21.4%
Net Rtg +27.0
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.6m
Offense +18.7
Hustle +4.0
Defense +2.0
Raw total +24.7
Avg player in 28.6m -14.5
Impact +10.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 47.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Zion Williamson 26.7m
18
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
+6.6

Relentless interior efficiency and excellent playmaking vision drove a highly positive rating. He consistently collapsed the defense with his driving gravity, creating high-quality looks for teammates while finishing his own chances at a high clip. Avoiding perimeter attempts entirely kept his offensive impact incredibly streamlined.

Shooting
FG 7/11 (63.6%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 70.5%
USG% 26.3%
Net Rtg +26.4
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.7m
Offense +15.8
Hustle +1.7
Defense +2.8
Raw total +20.3
Avg player in 26.7m -13.7
Impact +6.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Saddiq Bey 25.9m
12
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.6

A noticeable regression in perimeter accuracy severely limited his offensive impact and dragged down his overall score. While he found some success inside the arc, missing four threes disrupted the team's spacing and allowed defenders to pack the paint. This drop-off from his recent scoring tear stalled several key possessions.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 55.1%
USG% 23.7%
Net Rtg +30.3
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.9m
Offense +1.4
Hustle +1.0
Defense +1.3
Raw total +3.7
Avg player in 25.9m -13.3
Impact -9.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Derik Queen 23.7m
8
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+3.8

Stellar defensive anchoring and disciplined shot selection fueled a solid positive impact. He bounced back from a recent string of poor shooting by taking only high-percentage looks in the paint. His ability to protect the rim without fouling proved essential to the second unit's success.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg +28.8
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.7m
Offense +3.0
Hustle +4.4
Defense +8.5
Raw total +15.9
Avg player in 23.7m -12.1
Impact +3.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 2
20
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+8.7

Elite hustle plays and sustained scoring efficiency fueled a dominant two-way showing. He consistently generated extra possessions through sheer effort while punishing the defense with high-quality shot selection. Continuing his recent hot streak, his relentless energy dictated the tempo of the game.

Shooting
FG 8/14 (57.1%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.2%
USG% 26.9%
Net Rtg +42.6
+/- +26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.2m
Offense +12.0
Hustle +6.5
Defense +5.6
Raw total +24.1
Avg player in 30.2m -15.4
Impact +8.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 26.7%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 3
8
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
-1.6

Strong hustle metrics and efficient spot-up shooting were ultimately negated by defensive lapses. While he capitalized on his perimeter touches, his inability to contain dribble penetration gave points right back on the other end. The resulting negative rating reflects a performance where defensive leaks overshadowed offensive efficiency.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg +25.8
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.1m
Offense +6.6
Hustle +4.6
Defense -0.4
Raw total +10.8
Avg player in 24.1m -12.4
Impact -1.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Yves Missi 21.8m
7
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.5

Perfect shooting efficiency and solid rim protection were slightly offset by minor rotational mistakes, resulting in a neutral impact. He executed his role flawlessly on offense by only taking guaranteed looks around the basket. However, a few missed defensive assignments kept his overall rating from pushing into the positive.

Shooting
FG 3/3 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/3 (33.3%)
Advanced
TS% 81.0%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg +23.5
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.8m
Offense +4.4
Hustle +1.9
Defense +4.3
Raw total +10.6
Avg player in 21.8m -11.1
Impact -0.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
12
pts
9
reb
1
ast
Impact
+9.1

A surprising surge in perimeter efficiency and relentless rebounding drove a massive positive impact. Stepping out to hit multiple threes completely altered the defense's geometry, while his interior presence secured crucial extra possessions. This versatile two-way performance far exceeded his usual rotational value.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 87.2%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +42.4
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.9m
Offense +12.1
Hustle +1.0
Defense +5.6
Raw total +18.7
Avg player in 18.9m -9.6
Impact +9.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.3

A complete lack of offensive involvement rendered his brief appearance slightly negative. He failed to attempt a single shot, allowing his defender to freely roam and double-team other players. This lack of offensive gravity neutralized his modest defensive contributions.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -11.1
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.8m
Offense +0.2
Hustle 0.0
Defense +0.9
Raw total +1.1
Avg player in 4.8m -2.4
Impact -1.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
6
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
+3.1

Instant perimeter offense during a short stint provided a highly efficient spark. He maximized his limited minutes by immediately hunting and converting quality looks from beyond the arc. This quick burst of floor spacing gave the offense a much-needed jolt of energy.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg -11.1
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.8m
Offense +5.6
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total +5.6
Avg player in 4.8m -2.5
Impact +3.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
SAC Sacramento Kings
S Maxime Raynaud 38.1m
21
pts
19
reb
1
ast
Impact
+13.2

Dominant interior play and sustained offensive efficiency fueled a massive positive impact. He extended his streak of high-percentage shooting nights while simultaneously anchoring the glass to limit second-chance opportunities. This two-way paint dominance completely neutralized the opposing frontcourt.

Shooting
FG 8/14 (57.1%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 63.1%
USG% 18.4%
Net Rtg -20.3
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.1m
Offense +19.1
Hustle +3.7
Defense +9.9
Raw total +32.7
Avg player in 38.1m -19.5
Impact +13.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 21
FGM Against 13
Opp FG% 61.9%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Nique Clifford 37.3m
10
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
-12.0

Brutal perimeter shooting efficiency severely dragged down his overall rating despite decent defensive contributions. Wasting possessions on low-quality looks from deep prevented the offense from finding any rhythm during his heavy minutes. His inability to convert open jumpers allowed the defense to sag and clog the driving lanes.

Shooting
FG 4/16 (25.0%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 29.6%
USG% 21.3%
Net Rtg -22.1
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.3m
Offense -0.9
Hustle +4.2
Defense +3.8
Raw total +7.1
Avg player in 37.3m -19.1
Impact -12.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
17
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.3

A massive surge in scoring aggression yielded mixed results, as poor perimeter shot selection offset his rim-pressure value. While he doubled his recent scoring average, bricking five threes resulted in empty trips that stalled momentum. His high usage rate ultimately resulted in a neutral floor impact due to the sheer volume of missed jumpers.

Shooting
FG 7/17 (41.2%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.5%
USG% 37.0%
Net Rtg -6.7
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.9m
Offense +7.3
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.5
Raw total +10.4
Avg player in 20.9m -10.7
Impact -0.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
8
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+4.2

Elite defensive anchoring drove his positive rating despite a significant dip in his recent scoring volume. He maintained his streak of efficient finishing around the rim, but it was his rim protection and switchability that truly tilted the floor. Impacting the game without requiring offensive touches proved highly valuable.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 15.8%
Net Rtg -25.4
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.2m
Offense +4.2
Hustle +2.7
Defense +7.6
Raw total +14.5
Avg player in 20.2m -10.3
Impact +4.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 1
S DeMar DeRozan 19.6m
8
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.5

A severe drop-off in scoring efficiency cratered his overall impact, as he struggled to find his usual midrange rhythm. Missing eight field goal attempts while providing minimal defensive resistance allowed opponents to capitalize on empty possessions. The sharp decline from his recent high-scoring average left a noticeable void in the half-court offense.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 32.5%
USG% 26.5%
Net Rtg -20.4
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.6m
Offense -0.9
Hustle +2.7
Defense -0.3
Raw total +1.5
Avg player in 19.6m -10.0
Impact -8.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
6
pts
11
reb
1
ast
Impact
+8.3

Exceptional defensive positioning and elite rebounding efficiency drove a highly positive net rating. He thrived in his role by taking only high-percentage looks around the basket and focusing his energy entirely on shutting down the paint. This disciplined, low-mistake approach perfectly complemented the primary scorers.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 6.0%
Net Rtg -37.4
+/- -23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.8m
Offense +11.6
Hustle +4.2
Defense +8.9
Raw total +24.7
Avg player in 31.8m -16.4
Impact +8.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 0
Devin Carter 29.9m
12
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-4.4

A complete inability to connect from beyond the arc undermined an otherwise solid two-way effort. His perimeter misses routinely bailed out the defense, negating the value of his effective dribble-penetration and hustle plays. The lack of spacing he provided ultimately clogged the half-court sets.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.6%
USG% 20.5%
Net Rtg -36.7
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.9m
Offense +3.6
Hustle +4.0
Defense +3.3
Raw total +10.9
Avg player in 29.9m -15.3
Impact -4.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 13
Opp FG% 86.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
5
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-10.3

An abysmal shooting night from the perimeter completely tanked his overall value. Failing to replicate his recent high-scoring form, his constant misfires from deep led to long rebounds and easy transition opportunities for the opponent. The offense simply could not survive his combination of high volume and low efficiency.

Shooting
FG 2/9 (22.2%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 27.8%
USG% 13.2%
Net Rtg -31.7
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.4m
Offense +0.8
Hustle +2.9
Defense +0.5
Raw total +4.2
Avg player in 28.4m -14.5
Impact -10.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
3
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-6.0

Failing to provide his signature floor-spacing value made him a distinct liability during his short shift. Missing multiple perimeter looks meant he offered no offensive gravity to compensate for his defensive limitations. The inability to stretch the defense rendered his minutes highly unproductive.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -49.4
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.9m
Offense -1.8
Hustle +0.2
Defense -0.5
Raw total -2.1
Avg player in 7.9m -3.9
Impact -6.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
4
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+3.1

Highly efficient execution during a brief stint on the floor provided a quick positive jolt. He capitalized on his limited touches around the rim and avoided forcing bad looks. This disciplined cameo gave the rotation a reliable burst of stabilizing energy.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -25.0
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.9m
Offense +5.2
Hustle +0.7
Defense +0.3
Raw total +6.2
Avg player in 5.9m -3.1
Impact +3.1
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0