GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

DEN Denver Nuggets
S Christian Braun 39.1m
14
pts
7
reb
6
ast
Impact
-7.2

Highly efficient finishing was undone by a failure to generate secondary defensive events or secure contested loose balls. Played heavy minutes but struggled to influence the game's momentum, allowing opponents to exploit his side of the floor in transition.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.8%
USG% 11.7%
Net Rtg +16.2
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.1m
Offense +11.8
Hustle +1.0
Defense +1.0
Raw total +13.8
Avg player in 39.1m -21.0
Impact -7.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 21.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Nikola Jokić 33.9m
26
pts
15
reb
11
ast
Impact
-1.3

Uncharacteristic turnovers and missed bunnies around the rim sapped the efficiency from an otherwise dominant statistical profile. Despite dictating the offensive geometry and offering solid rim protection (+3.6), the wasted possessions tilted his net impact slightly negative.

Shooting
FG 8/17 (47.1%)
3PT 0/0
FT 10/14 (71.4%)
Advanced
TS% 56.1%
USG% 37.2%
Net Rtg +12.1
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.9m
Offense +11.0
Hustle +2.3
Defense +3.6
Raw total +16.9
Avg player in 33.9m -18.2
Impact -1.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 61.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 9
S Jamal Murray 33.1m
23
pts
6
reb
7
ast
Impact
+5.7

Poor shot selection and missed perimeter looks dragged down his scoring efficiency, but he compensated with relentless effort. A massive +5.7 hustle rating reflected his willingness to dive for loose balls and disrupt actions at the point of attack, keeping his overall impact highly positive.

Shooting
FG 7/18 (38.9%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 8/8 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.4%
USG% 29.3%
Net Rtg +1.6
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.1m
Offense +15.7
Hustle +5.7
Defense +2.2
Raw total +23.6
Avg player in 33.1m -17.9
Impact +5.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 55.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S Cameron Johnson 28.8m
5
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.8

A drastic departure from his recent efficient scoring, as he struggled to find space against physical perimeter defense. The lack of offensive production left a gaping hole in the rotation, resulting in a team-worst -9.8 net impact.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 35.7%
USG% 10.4%
Net Rtg -10.2
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.8m
Offense +2.2
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.6
Raw total +5.7
Avg player in 28.8m -15.5
Impact -9.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 83.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
11
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-2.2

Found his stroke after a brutal five-game slump, but defensive miscommunications and late rotations kept his overall impact in the red. While the scoring burst was a welcome sight, his inability to string together stops negated the offensive resurgence.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 61.1%
USG% 16.1%
Net Rtg -18.0
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.3m
Offense +8.6
Hustle +1.4
Defense +1.4
Raw total +11.4
Avg player in 25.3m -13.6
Impact -2.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 83.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Bruce Brown 29.1m
10
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.6

Continued his streak of hyper-efficient situational scoring while wrecking havoc as a cutter. A phenomenal +4.8 hustle score highlighted his knack for backbreaking offensive rebounds and timely deflections that kept possessions alive.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 8.7%
Net Rtg +8.6
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.1m
Offense +9.9
Hustle +4.8
Defense +1.5
Raw total +16.2
Avg player in 29.1m -15.6
Impact +0.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
21
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.4

Caught fire from the perimeter to completely shatter his recent slump and stretch the opposing defense to its breaking point. The sheer gravity of his outside shooting created driving lanes for teammates, driving a massive +19.1 box impact.

Shooting
FG 7/8 (87.5%)
3PT 4/5 (80.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 107.6%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg +22.8
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.8m
Offense +19.1
Hustle +0.4
Defense +0.9
Raw total +20.4
Avg player in 27.8m -15.0
Impact +5.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
9
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
+3.5

Bullied his way to high-percentage looks in the paint to maintain his recent streak of interior efficiency. Capitalized on drop coverage to punish smaller defenders, serving as a reliable release valve when the half-court offense bogged down.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.6%
USG% 27.6%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.2m
Offense +9.5
Hustle +0.4
Defense +1.2
Raw total +11.1
Avg player in 14.2m -7.6
Impact +3.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
3
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.1

Provided steady point-of-attack defense (+2.3) during a brief stint on the floor. Managed the game well enough to avoid costly mistakes, though his limited offensive repertoire kept his overall impact neutral.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 15.8%
Net Rtg +56.3
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.7m
Offense +1.3
Hustle +1.0
Defense +2.3
Raw total +4.6
Avg player in 8.7m -4.7
Impact -0.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
MEM Memphis Grizzlies
S GG Jackson 28.2m
21
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+8.3

Continued his recent surge with high-quality shot selection that maximized his offensive efficiency. His ability to consistently find gaps in the defense fueled a massive +17.2 box score impact, while active rotations on the other end solidified his two-way value.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 6/7 (85.7%)
Advanced
TS% 69.6%
USG% 23.5%
Net Rtg +7.2
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.2m
Offense +17.2
Hustle +2.9
Defense +3.4
Raw total +23.5
Avg player in 28.2m -15.2
Impact +8.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S Jaylen Wells 24.3m
17
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.5

An aggressive offensive approach yielded a massive scoring spike that overwhelmed his defensive lapses. Capitalized on transition opportunities and loose balls to generate a +4.3 hustle score, proving to be a spark plug when the team needed an injection of pace.

Shooting
FG 7/9 (77.8%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 90.0%
USG% 17.3%
Net Rtg +14.9
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.3m
Offense +15.3
Hustle +4.3
Defense -1.1
Raw total +18.5
Avg player in 24.3m -13.0
Impact +5.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 64.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
S Jahmai Mashack 21.8m
9
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.3

Overcame a rough shooting night through relentless defensive pressure that drove a +5.1 defensive impact. His ability to disrupt passing lanes and generate hustle plays (+2.4) kept his overall value positive despite struggling to find a rhythm offensively.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.9%
USG% 22.0%
Net Rtg +9.9
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.8m
Offense +6.6
Hustle +2.4
Defense +5.1
Raw total +14.1
Avg player in 21.8m -11.8
Impact +2.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
S Ty Jerome 21.0m
19
pts
1
reb
7
ast
Impact
+9.3

Compensated for a mediocre shooting night by relentlessly attacking the paint and drawing fouls to generate offense. His masterful orchestration of pick-and-roll coverages drove a stellar +15.9 box impact, allowing him to control the game's tempo despite missing several open looks.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 8/9 (88.9%)
Advanced
TS% 63.5%
USG% 36.6%
Net Rtg +11.3
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.0m
Offense +15.9
Hustle +2.1
Defense +2.6
Raw total +20.6
Avg player in 21.0m -11.3
Impact +9.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
S Kyle Anderson 18.5m
8
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+6.0

Broke out of a severe offensive slump by converting high-percentage looks around the basket. A tremendous +4.7 hustle rating highlighted his willingness to do the dirty work, completely flipping his recent trajectory to anchor the second unit.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 80.0%
USG% 13.5%
Net Rtg +12.5
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.5m
Offense +11.1
Hustle +4.7
Defense +0.1
Raw total +15.9
Avg player in 18.5m -9.9
Impact +6.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 70.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
5
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-5.8

Elite perimeter defense (+5.5) was completely overshadowed by an inability to convert open perimeter looks. Stalled the offense with clunky shot selection, leading to a negative overall impact despite his usual reliability in locking down his primary assignment.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 31.3%
USG% 13.1%
Net Rtg -16.5
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.2m
Offense +1.2
Hustle +1.5
Defense +5.5
Raw total +8.2
Avg player in 26.2m -14.0
Impact -5.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
14
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.1

Sustained his highly efficient finishing streak by punishing mismatches in the paint. His disciplined shot profile minimized empty possessions, allowing his offensive gravity to dictate the flow of the game.

Shooting
FG 6/7 (85.7%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 12.7%
Net Rtg -35.3
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.0m
Offense +14.4
Hustle +1.7
Defense +1.4
Raw total +17.5
Avg player in 23.0m -12.4
Impact +5.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Cam Spencer 21.9m
2
pts
2
reb
9
ast
Impact
-5.7

Elite playmaking vision was entirely undermined by a disastrous shooting performance that allowed defenders to sag into the paint. The sheer volume of bricked jumpers negated a solid +3.3 defensive impact, as his inability to space the floor cratered his overall value.

Shooting
FG 1/8 (12.5%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 12.5%
USG% 13.8%
Net Rtg -20.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.9m
Offense +1.0
Hustle +1.7
Defense +3.3
Raw total +6.0
Avg player in 21.9m -11.7
Impact -5.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
10
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.9

Showed signs of life offensively compared to his recent slump, but defensive positioning errors and costly fouls dragged down his net impact. Failed to leverage his athleticism consistently, resulting in a performance that gave back too much on the margins.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 23.3%
Net Rtg -11.9
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Offense +3.5
Hustle +1.8
Defense +1.5
Raw total +6.8
Avg player in 19.9m -10.7
Impact -3.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
8
pts
0
reb
3
ast
Impact
-7.7

Errant decision-making and forced jumpers severely damaged his offensive rating. While he showed flashes of energy with a positive hustle score, the sheer volume of wasted possessions derailed any rhythm the second unit tried to establish.

Shooting
FG 3/10 (30.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 36.8%
USG% 27.1%
Net Rtg -23.8
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.7m
Offense -1.2
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.5
Raw total +1.8
Avg player in 17.7m -9.5
Impact -7.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
3
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.2

Made his presence felt entirely through effort plays and rim deterrence during his limited minutes. A robust +3.5 hustle score reflected his commitment to setting hard screens and battling for positioning, keeping his impact marginally positive.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.1%
USG% 9.1%
Net Rtg -11.4
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.6m
Offense +2.6
Hustle +3.5
Defense +3.5
Raw total +9.6
Avg player in 17.6m -9.4
Impact +0.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1