Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
DET lead SAS lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
SAS 2P — 3P —
DET 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 207 attempts

SAS SAS Shot-making Δ

Fox 4/17 -9.0
Castle 7/16 -1.5
Wembanyama 6/16 -3.4
Vassell Hard 10/14 +14.2
Champagnie Hard 6/12 +4.2
Johnson 4/11 -2.5
Harper 2/7 -3.7
Barnes Hard 1/4 -1.1
Kornet 1/3 -0.9
Bryant Hard 1/1 +1.9

DET DET Shot-making Δ

Cunningham Hard 5/26 -13.2
Robinson Hard 5/15 -1.7
Duren Open 10/13 +5.0
Holland II 5/13 -2.6
Jenkins 3/10 -5.2
Reed 5/8 +1.1
Thompson 4/6 +1.7
Harris 1/6 -3.9
Green Hard 0/5 -5.0
LeVert Hard 2/4 +0.9
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
SAS
DET
42/101 Field Goals 40/106
41.6% Field Goal % 37.7%
18/40 3-Pointers 7/36
45.0% 3-Point % 19.4%
12/19 Free Throws 16/19
63.2% Free Throw % 84.2%
52.1% True Shooting % 45.0%
67 Total Rebounds 69
16 Offensive 20
34 Defensive 35
32 Assists 21
2.00 Assist/TO Ratio 1.31
12 Turnovers 15
8 Steals 7
11 Blocks 8
22 Fouls 19
44 Points in Paint 62
13 Fast Break Pts 16
21 Points off TOs 13
15 Second Chance Pts 22
22 Bench Points 37
15 Largest Lead 6
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Jalen Duren
25 PTS · 14 REB · 1 AST · 29.3 MIN
+28.85
2
Victor Wembanyama
21 PTS · 17 REB · 4 AST · 35.6 MIN
+25.55
3
Devin Vassell
28 PTS · 2 REB · 4 AST · 36.3 MIN
+24.52
4
Ronald Holland II
15 PTS · 11 REB · 0 AST · 26.3 MIN
+16.92
5
Julian Champagnie
17 PTS · 6 REB · 1 AST · 36.4 MIN
+14.23
6
Paul Reed
10 PTS · 5 REB · 0 AST · 19.8 MIN
+11.64
7
Duncan Robinson
13 PTS · 3 REB · 5 AST · 26.7 MIN
+8.05
8
Stephon Castle
16 PTS · 4 REB · 11 AST · 30.1 MIN
+7.54
9
Keldon Johnson
9 PTS · 4 REB · 0 AST · 22.1 MIN
+7.38
10
Luke Kornet
2 PTS · 4 REB · 0 AST · 8.7 MIN
+5.32
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:17 SAS shot clock Team TURNOVER 114–103
Q4 0:40 S. Castle REBOUND (Off:0 Def:4) 114–103
Q4 0:41 MISS J. Duren 16' pullup Shot 114–103
Q4 0:56 J. Champagnie DUNK (17 PTS) (S. Castle 11 AST) 114–103
Q4 1:02 J. Duren Free Throw 1 of 1 (25 PTS) 112–103
Q4 1:02 J. Champagnie shooting personal FOUL (3 PF) (Duren 1 FT) 112–102
Q4 1:02 J. Duren Layup (24 PTS) (D. Robinson 5 AST) 112–102
Q4 1:11 V. Wembanyama Free Throw 2 of 2 (21 PTS) 112–100
Q4 1:11 V. Wembanyama Free Throw 1 of 2 (20 PTS) 111–100
Q4 1:11 P. Reed personal FOUL (2 PF) (Wembanyama 2 FT) 110–100
Q4 1:12 J. Duren tip Layup (22 PTS) 110–100
Q4 1:13 J. Duren REBOUND (Off:7 Def:7) 110–98
Q4 1:14 MISS C. Cunningham 26' 3PT 110–98
Q4 1:23 C. Cunningham technical Free Throw 1 of 1 (16 PTS) 110–98
Q4 1:23 TEAM foul technical 110–97

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

DET Detroit Pistons
S Cade Cunningham 34.8m
16
pts
6
reb
10
ast
Impact
-3.6

A catastrophic shooting performance completely tanked his net rating despite elite defensive and hustle metrics. He forced the issue repeatedly against set defenses, bleeding value through wasted possessions and highly questionable shot selection.

Shooting
FG 5/26 (19.2%)
3PT 2/9 (22.2%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 28.4%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg -22.4
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.8m
Scoring +0.4
Creation +2.1
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +3.7
Defense +2.5
Turnovers -7.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 31.6%
STL 2
BLK 3
TO 3
S Tobias Harris 29.9m
4
pts
8
reb
2
ast
Impact
-3.4

A severe lack of scoring punch and bricked mid-range jumpers caused his overall impact to plummet. While he tried to compensate with solid defensive positioning, the sheer volume of empty offensive possessions proved far too costly.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 29.1%
USG% 10.2%
Net Rtg +3.1
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.9m
Scoring +0.5
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +9.2
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Jalen Duren 29.3m
25
pts
14
reb
1
ast
Impact
+32.2

Utter dominance in the paint drove a massive positive score, extending a streak of elite offensive efficiency. He completely overwhelmed his matchups with relentless rim-running and putbacks, generating huge value across all hustle and box metrics.

Shooting
FG 10/13 (76.9%)
3PT 0/0
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 79.9%
USG% 21.0%
Net Rtg -18.8
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.3m
Scoring +22.6
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +17.8
Defense +2.3
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
S Duncan Robinson 26.7m
13
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
+2.2

High-volume misfires from beyond the arc suppressed his overall impact despite decent hustle numbers. The defense respected his perimeter gravity, but clanking wide-open catch-and-shoot looks ultimately stalled out several crucial offensive sets.

Shooting
FG 5/15 (33.3%)
3PT 3/11 (27.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 43.3%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -5.4
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.7m
Scoring +5.1
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +4.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
S Ausar Thompson 17.7m
8
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.5

Highly efficient interior finishing was ultimately undone by hidden off-ball costs and a lack of defensive disruption. Despite converting his looks around the rim, his overall shifts bled points due to poor weak-side rotations.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 17.0%
Net Rtg -8.1
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.7m
Scoring +6.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +5.1
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 31.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
15
pts
11
reb
0
ast
Impact
+10.6

A massive surge in aggressive transition play drove a highly positive impact, easily masking his perimeter shooting woes. He weaponized his raw athleticism to generate defensive stops and turn them into immediate fast-break value.

Shooting
FG 5/13 (38.5%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.8%
USG% 20.3%
Net Rtg -8.9
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.3m
Scoring +8.9
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +8.2
Defense +1.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
7
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.9

A sharp drop in scoring efficiency and noticeable defensive lapses dragged his impact deep into the red. He struggled to navigate screens at the point of attack, compounding the damage from his forced, contested looks on the other end.

Shooting
FG 3/10 (30.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 32.2%
USG% 16.9%
Net Rtg -6.5
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.4m
Scoring +0.6
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +2.8
Defense -3.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Caris LeVert 21.1m
5
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-10.9

A glaring lack of offensive assertiveness and poor spacing drastically hurt his net score. He deferred too often on the perimeter, allowing the defense to clog the driving lanes and disrupt the team's half-court rhythm.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 12.9%
Net Rtg -11.1
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.1m
Scoring +3.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +1.3
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -7.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 4
Paul Reed 19.8m
10
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
+4.7

Excellent two-way energy and highly efficient interior finishing fueled a strong positive showing. His relentless motor on the glass and switchability on defense perfectly complemented the primary rotation.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 16.4%
Net Rtg -4.9
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.8m
Scoring +7.7
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +4.4
Defense +2.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 26.3%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-14.7

A completely scoreless outing defined by bricked perimeter looks severely cratered his overall value. His inability to convert wide-open corner threes made him an offensive liability that his marginal defensive effort couldn't fix.

Shooting
FG 0/5 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg -32.1
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.0m
Scoring -3.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
SAS San Antonio Spurs
17
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+6.4

Despite highly efficient catch-and-shoot execution from the perimeter, his overall impact slipped into the red. Strong hustle metrics couldn't fully mask the hidden costs of defensive breakdowns during his extended shifts.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 5/8 (62.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 70.8%
USG% 14.4%
Net Rtg +12.8
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.4m
Scoring +12.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +4.8
Hustle +1.8
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
S Devin Vassell 36.3m
28
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
+21.3

Elite perimeter shot-making drove a massive positive impact, shattering his recent offensive baselines. He hunted high-value looks from deep, punishing defensive rotations with hyper-efficient volume.

Shooting
FG 10/14 (71.4%)
3PT 7/11 (63.6%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 94.1%
USG% 17.0%
Net Rtg +12.2
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.3m
Scoring +24.4
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +8.4
Hustle +1.6
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
21
pts
17
reb
4
ast
Impact
+23.0

Defensive anchoring and immense interior gravity drove a stellar impact score despite a noticeable dip in his usual scoring efficiency. His sheer size completely disrupted opponent driving lanes, generating massive defensive value that easily offset the clanked jumpers.

Shooting
FG 6/16 (37.5%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 53.8%
USG% 25.8%
Net Rtg +17.9
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.6m
Scoring +13.1
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +20.6
Defense -0.9
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 23
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 39.1%
STL 1
BLK 6
TO 3
S De'Aaron Fox 33.4m
10
pts
7
reb
7
ast
Impact
-4.4

An ice-cold shooting stretch from the perimeter completely cratered his overall impact. While he remained engaged defensively, the sheer volume of forced, missed jumpers stalled out the offensive engine.

Shooting
FG 4/17 (23.5%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 26.7%
USG% 23.6%
Net Rtg +19.4
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.4m
Scoring -0.5
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +2.1
Defense +4.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S Stephon Castle 30.1m
16
pts
4
reb
11
ast
Impact
+1.1

High-level orchestration and solid point-of-attack defense were nearly neutralized by inefficient finishing inside the arc. His ability to dictate the offensive flow kept his hustle metrics high, but empty possessions in traffic dragged his net rating to neutral.

Shooting
FG 7/16 (43.8%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 1/3 (33.3%)
Advanced
TS% 46.2%
USG% 26.6%
Net Rtg +5.7
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.1m
Scoring +9.7
Creation +3.4
Shot Making +3.6
Hustle +1.2
Defense +2.3
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 27.8%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 4
9
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.5

A sharp drop from his usual scoring output was salvaged by physical defensive effort and timely rotations. Poor shot selection from deep limited his ceiling, but he avoided catastrophic mistakes to keep his head barely above water.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.9%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +14.2
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.1m
Scoring +3.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +5.1
Defense -0.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Dylan Harper 17.9m
5
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
-5.7

A sudden regression in finishing efficiency snapped a hot streak and dragged his overall impact into the negative. He struggled to adjust to the physicality of his perimeter matchups, leading to forced looks that derailed offensive momentum.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 31.7%
USG% 15.7%
Net Rtg +7.2
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.9m
Scoring +1.0
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +1.6
Defense +0.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.3

Passive offensive involvement and missed spot-up opportunities resulted in a noticeably negative net score. His inability to punish closeouts allowed the defense to sag off, shrinking the floor for the rest of the rotation.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 8.7%
Net Rtg +11.8
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.5m
Scoring +0.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 22.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.5

This brief but effective stint was defined by vertical spacing and strict positional discipline. He didn't see his usual finishing opportunities, but his sturdy screen-setting and rim deterrence kept the second unit functioning smoothly.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 10.7%
Net Rtg -33.3
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.7m
Scoring +0.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +5.1
Defense -0.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-10.3

This brief cameo was highlighted by capitalizing on his lone perimeter look. However, minor defensive lapses in transition prevented him from posting a positive net rating during the short run.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -26.4
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.0m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.1
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1