GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

PHX Phoenix Suns
S Devin Booker 32.5m
19
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
-0.5

Uncharacteristic struggles against aggressive blitzing schemes suppressed his usual superstar output. Forcing tough, contested mid-range fadeaways rather than trusting the release valve led to a surprisingly flat overall impact. The defense successfully sped up his internal clock, disrupting his typical methodical rhythm.

Shooting
FG 7/16 (43.8%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 54.8%
USG% 24.1%
Net Rtg -1.3
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.5m
Offense +9.5
Hustle +3.6
Defense +3.1
Raw total +16.2
Avg player in 32.5m -16.7
Impact -0.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 64.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
S Dillon Brooks 31.4m
23
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-6.8

Disastrous shot selection from beyond the arc actively torpedoed the team's offensive efficiency. Hijacking possessions with early-clock, contested jumpers completely neutralized the value of his interior scoring. His refusal to defer to better shooters ultimately cost the team several critical momentum swings.

Shooting
FG 11/26 (42.3%)
3PT 1/10 (10.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 44.2%
USG% 34.6%
Net Rtg +1.6
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.4m
Offense +9.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.7
Raw total +9.5
Avg player in 31.4m -16.3
Impact -6.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 42.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
5
pts
8
reb
8
ast
Impact
0.0

An astronomical hustle score entirely offset a miserable perimeter shooting display. Diving for loose balls and disrupting passing lanes kept the possession battle heavily tilted in his team's favor. His relentless motor masked the glaring lack of half-court scoring punch.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 35.7%
USG% 12.7%
Net Rtg +37.3
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.5m
Offense +0.7
Hustle +11.4
Defense +3.6
Raw total +15.7
Avg player in 30.5m -15.7
Impact 0.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 11.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Mark Williams 24.7m
13
pts
9
reb
1
ast
Impact
+11.2

Complete dominance of the restricted area on both ends anchored a massive positive box score metric. Swallowing up drivers as a primary rim protector seamlessly transitioned into high-percentage lob finishes on the other end. His vertical gravity dictated the geometry of the entire game.

Shooting
FG 6/7 (85.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 82.5%
USG% 12.3%
Net Rtg -16.1
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.7m
Offense +17.1
Hustle +1.6
Defense +5.3
Raw total +24.0
Avg player in 24.7m -12.8
Impact +11.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
S Royce O'Neale 22.8m
12
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.7

Deadly spot-up shooting combined with elite rotational awareness fueled a highly productive two-way performance. Punishing defensive rotations with immediate trigger-pulls from deep stretched the floor perfectly for the primary creators. Adding immense value through timely deflections cemented his status as the ultimate glue guy tonight.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 4/7 (57.1%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg -4.0
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.8m
Offense +10.0
Hustle +4.7
Defense +2.8
Raw total +17.5
Avg player in 22.8m -11.8
Impact +5.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
8
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
-3.2

Tenacious point-of-attack defense couldn't overcome the offensive handicap created by his bricked floaters and missed layups. Opponents aggressively went under every screen, daring him to shoot and bogging down the pick-and-roll attack. His defensive grit is undeniable, but the offensive limitations were glaring.

Shooting
FG 3/10 (30.0%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg +16.0
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.7m
Offense +4.7
Hustle +1.1
Defense +3.8
Raw total +9.6
Avg player in 24.7m -12.8
Impact -3.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
Oso Ighodaro 23.3m
10
pts
10
reb
4
ast
Impact
+15.0

Surgical precision as a short-roll playmaker and finisher generated a spectacular overall impact. He consistently dismantled traps by making the right read in 4-on-3 situations, punishing the defense with floaters or dump-offs. This flawless execution of the offensive system highlighted a breakout interior performance.

Shooting
FG 5/6 (83.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +34.7
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.3m
Offense +20.0
Hustle +2.9
Defense +4.2
Raw total +27.1
Avg player in 23.3m -12.1
Impact +15.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
Jalen Green 20.4m
12
pts
1
reb
4
ast
Impact
-5.7

Settling for deep, unassisted triples against set defenses severely damaged his offensive efficiency. The inability to consistently breach the first line of defense resulted in empty possessions and long rebounds. Without downhill pressure to collapse the paint, his isolation-heavy approach actively hurt the unit.

Shooting
FG 5/14 (35.7%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 42.9%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg -12.8
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.4m
Offense +3.4
Hustle +0.7
Defense +0.9
Raw total +5.0
Avg player in 20.4m -10.7
Impact -5.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Ryan Dunn 16.6m
12
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+10.4

Wreaking absolute havoc in the passing lanes ignited a series of back-breaking transition dunks. He capitalized perfectly on the defensive attention drawn by stars, cutting baseline for highly efficient finishes. A masterclass in maximizing low-usage minutes through sheer athletic intensity.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 102.0%
USG% 16.3%
Net Rtg +21.4
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.6m
Offense +11.9
Hustle +5.8
Defense +1.2
Raw total +18.9
Avg player in 16.6m -8.5
Impact +10.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Amir Coffey 13.1m
6
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.8

Opportunistic cutting and relentless closeout attacks yielded a perfectly solid, mistake-free shift. Generating extra possessions via timely offensive rebounds kept the chains moving during a stagnant second-quarter stretch. He executed the exact gritty, low-maintenance role required of a deep rotation wing.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 77.3%
USG% 16.1%
Net Rtg +9.4
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.1m
Offense +3.9
Hustle +4.0
Defense -0.4
Raw total +7.5
Avg player in 13.1m -6.7
Impact +0.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
DAL Dallas Mavericks
S Cooper Flagg 35.7m
27
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.2

Despite a heavy offensive workload, inefficient isolation attempts and a barrage of missed mid-range pull-ups capped his overall influence. His defensive rotations remained crisp, generating a strong defensive impact that kept him in the positive. The sheer volume of clanked jumpers prevented a dominant showing.

Shooting
FG 8/20 (40.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 11/14 (78.6%)
Advanced
TS% 51.6%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg +10.1
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.7m
Offense +10.9
Hustle +3.5
Defense +6.3
Raw total +20.7
Avg player in 35.7m -18.5
Impact +2.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 24
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Max Christie 31.5m
5
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
-4.1

Elite perimeter ball pressure was entirely negated by a frigid shooting night from the corners. Clanking multiple wide-open threes allowed the defense to aggressively pack the paint against primary drivers. His two-way value plummets when opponents can freely ignore him on the weak side.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 29.6%
USG% 10.8%
Net Rtg +2.9
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.5m
Offense +1.8
Hustle +2.4
Defense +7.9
Raw total +12.1
Avg player in 31.5m -16.2
Impact -4.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 0
S P.J. Washington 26.1m
13
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
-6.2

Perimeter hesitation resulted in a negative overall output despite decent underlying defensive metrics. Passing up open catch-and-shoot opportunities disrupted the half-court flow and led to late-clock bailout attempts. His inability to punish closeouts ultimately dragged down the starting unit's spacing.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.0%
USG% 21.0%
Net Rtg -15.9
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.1m
Offense +3.6
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.9
Raw total +7.4
Avg player in 26.1m -13.6
Impact -6.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Daniel Gafford 17.0m
4
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.6

Foul trouble or matchup issues severely limited his floor time, cratering his usual offensive production. While he converted his few looks around the rim, the lack of sustained rim-running presence allowed the opposing frontcourt to dominate the paint. A stark departure from his recent streak of hyper-efficient paint finishes.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 15.0%
Net Rtg -44.1
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.0m
Offense -2.2
Hustle +1.2
Defense +3.2
Raw total +2.2
Avg player in 17.0m -8.8
Impact -6.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 61.5%
STL 1
BLK 3
TO 4
S Tyus Jones 15.4m
2
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
-4.9

Passive offensive initiation severely hampered the second unit's rhythm during his brief stint. Failing to probe the paint or collapse the defense resulted in a stagnant perimeter attack. His usually steady hand couldn't compensate for the lack of downhill pressure.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 14.7%
Net Rtg -23.0
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.4m
Offense -1.1
Hustle +0.8
Defense +3.2
Raw total +2.9
Avg player in 15.4m -7.8
Impact -4.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
31
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+13.1

An absolute masterclass in exploiting mismatches drove a staggering positive box score impact. He consistently punished smaller defenders in the mid-post, converting highly contested looks at an unsustainable but brilliant clip. This aggressive shot diet completely shattered his usual offensive ceiling.

Shooting
FG 12/17 (70.6%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 5/7 (71.4%)
Advanced
TS% 77.2%
USG% 25.6%
Net Rtg +4.9
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.2m
Offense +23.8
Hustle +2.1
Defense +5.9
Raw total +31.8
Avg player in 36.2m -18.7
Impact +13.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
9
pts
8
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.3

Flawless execution on rim-runs and dump-offs yielded a highly efficient, albeit low-volume, offensive shift. He punished defensive lapses in the pick-and-roll by finishing everything through contact. Maintaining this level of vertical spacing remains his most reliable path to positive impact.

Shooting
FG 4/4 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/4 (25.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.1%
USG% 11.7%
Net Rtg +8.6
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.2m
Offense +11.0
Hustle +1.6
Defense +2.2
Raw total +14.8
Avg player in 24.2m -12.5
Impact +2.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
13
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.6

Savvy foul-drawing completely salvaged an otherwise quiet shooting night from the floor. By repeatedly baiting aggressive closeouts and living at the charity stripe, he manufactured highly efficient offense out of thin air. This veteran composure stabilized the half-court attack during a crucial second-half stretch.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 8/9 (88.9%)
Advanced
TS% 72.5%
USG% 20.4%
Net Rtg -18.9
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.6m
Offense +10.2
Hustle +1.6
Defense +1.0
Raw total +12.8
Avg player in 21.6m -11.2
Impact +1.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.7

Forced drives into heavy traffic resulted in a disastrous offensive rating for the reserve guard. His insistence on challenging rim protectors rather than kicking out to shooters stalled multiple possessions. The resulting transition opportunities for the opponent cemented a deeply negative shift.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 28.2%
USG% 24.4%
Net Rtg -4.2
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.8m
Offense -1.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.8
Raw total +1.5
Avg player in 17.8m -9.2
Impact -7.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 85.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Caleb Martin 10.8m
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.5

Pure energy and weak-side activity defined this brief rotation appearance. Generating extra possessions through relentless offensive rebounding effort provided just enough value to stay in the green. He played his role perfectly without needing a single offensive touch.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 113.6%
USG% 4.0%
Net Rtg -69.2
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.8m
Offense +2.0
Hustle +2.9
Defense +1.2
Raw total +6.1
Avg player in 10.8m -5.6
Impact +0.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.8

A blink-and-you-miss-it stint offered virtually no time to establish a rhythm on either end. He merely occupied space in the dunker spot before being quickly subbed out due to rotational adjustments. The negligible impact perfectly reflects the microscopic sample size.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg -13.9
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.5m
Offense -1.1
Hustle +0.7
Defense +1.6
Raw total +1.2
Avg player in 3.5m -2.0
Impact -0.8
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
AJ Johnson 0.3m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
0.0

Inserted purely for end-of-quarter clock management, he registered no meaningful statistics. A single possession of garbage time yielded exactly zero impact on the game's outcome.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 0.3m
Offense 0.0
Hustle +0.2
Defense 0.0
Raw total +0.2
Avg player in 0.3m -0.2
Impact 0.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0