Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
HOU lead UTA lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
UTA 2P — 3P —
HOU 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 184 attempts

UTA UTA Shot-making Δ

Markkanen 10/23 -4.2
Collier 4/16 -9.9
Sensabaugh 10/15 +7.5
Filipowski 4/10 -2.3
Bailey 2/9 -5.5
Love Hard 2/8 -3.3
Konchar Hard 2/4 +0.8
Williams Jr. Hard 0/4 -4.3
Williams Open 1/3 -1.4
Mykhailiuk 1/3 -1.4

HOU HOU Shot-making Δ

Smith Jr. Hard 12/17 +11.9
Durant Hard 7/13 +5.3
Sengun 7/12 +0.8
Eason 5/12 -2.6
Sheppard Hard 5/9 +6.2
Thompson Open 8/9 +5.6
Finney-Smith Hard 1/4 -1.4
Okogie 1/4 -2.3
Capela 1/3 -1.2
Holiday Hard 2/2 +3.1
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
UTA
HOU
36/98 Field Goals 49/86
36.7% Field Goal % 57.0%
8/44 3-Pointers 18/40
18.2% 3-Point % 45.0%
25/30 Free Throws 9/11
83.3% Free Throw % 81.8%
47.2% True Shooting % 68.8%
48 Total Rebounds 59
13 Offensive 10
23 Defensive 43
23 Assists 34
1.92 Assist/TO Ratio 1.26
11 Turnovers 26
17 Steals 10
3 Blocks 8
10 Fouls 20
52 Points in Paint 54
30 Fast Break Pts 29
34 Points off TOs 8
15 Second Chance Pts 14
40 Bench Points 29
3 Largest Lead 33
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Jabari Smith Jr.
31 PTS · 9 REB · 0 AST · 33.0 MIN
+28.84
2
Lauri Markkanen
29 PTS · 3 REB · 2 AST · 32.2 MIN
+22.53
3
Brice Sensabaugh
26 PTS · 3 REB · 1 AST · 31.7 MIN
+21.28
4
Kevin Durant
18 PTS · 5 REB · 12 AST · 34.1 MIN
+17.94
5
Alperen Sengun
16 PTS · 9 REB · 9 AST · 35.6 MIN
+17.12
6
Amen Thompson
20 PTS · 7 REB · 3 AST · 29.1 MIN
+14.12
7
John Konchar
5 PTS · 4 REB · 2 AST · 24.4 MIN
+12.33
8
Isaiah Collier
17 PTS · 1 REB · 3 AST · 29.9 MIN
+10.29
9
Kyle Filipowski
13 PTS · 5 REB · 4 AST · 23.6 MIN
+9.33
10
Reed Sheppard
15 PTS · 3 REB · 4 AST · 23.5 MIN
+8.82
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:02 HOU shot clock Team TURNOVER 105–125
Q4 0:27 A. Holiday REBOUND (Off:0 Def:2) 105–125
Q4 0:28 MISS A. Bailey 24' step back 3PT 105–125
Q4 0:39 A. Holiday 25' 3PT step back (7 PTS) 105–125
Q4 0:57 I. Collier Free Throw 2 of 2 (17 PTS) 105–122
Q4 0:57 I. Collier Free Throw 1 of 2 (16 PTS) 104–122
Q4 0:57 J. Okogie personal FOUL (2 PF) (Collier 2 FT) 103–122
Q4 1:04 A. Holiday Free Throw 2 of 2 (4 PTS) 103–122
Q4 1:04 A. Holiday Free Throw 1 of 2 (3 PTS) 103–121
Q4 1:04 K. Filipowski shooting personal FOUL (4 PF) (Holiday 2 FT) 103–120
Q4 1:11 K. Filipowski personal FOUL (3 PF) 103–120
Q4 1:19 K. Filipowski cutting DUNK (13 PTS) (B. Sensabaugh 1 AST) 103–120
Q4 1:28 K. Filipowski REBOUND (Off:2 Def:3) 101–120
Q4 1:28 MISS J. Green 26' running pullup 3PT 101–120
Q4 1:35 A. Holiday REBOUND (Off:0 Def:1) 101–120

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

HOU Houston Rockets
S Alperen Sengun 35.6m
16
pts
9
reb
9
ast
Impact
+12.3

Operating as the offensive hub from the high post, his precise interior passing consistently punished defensive over-reactions. He maintained his recent streak of highly efficient finishing by patiently utilizing up-fakes against aggressive rim protectors. Solid positional rebounding and active hands in the passing lanes rounded out a highly productive shift.

Shooting
FG 7/12 (58.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.1%
USG% 17.8%
Net Rtg +3.7
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.6m
Scoring +12.6
Creation +2.1
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +8.5
Defense -0.1
Turnovers -4.6
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 3
S Kevin Durant 34.1m
18
pts
5
reb
12
ast
Impact
+12.8

Shifting seamlessly into a primary playmaking role, his elite court vision tore apart defensive double-teams. Rather than forcing his own offense, he manipulated the weak-side rotations to generate a barrage of open looks for teammates. A surprisingly robust effort in weak-side rim protection further elevated his overall value.

Shooting
FG 7/13 (53.8%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 69.2%
USG% 19.8%
Net Rtg +36.9
+/- +28
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.1m
Scoring +13.4
Creation +3.7
Shot Making +5.6
Hustle +4.4
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 18.2%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 4
31
pts
9
reb
0
ast
Impact
+27.2

A masterclass in two-way dominance, combining lethal perimeter shot-making with suffocating switch defense. He completely neutralized opposing wings while simultaneously catching fire on pick-and-pop actions to stretch the floor. This explosive breakout performance was defined by his flawless shot selection and relentless weak-side help.

Shooting
FG 12/17 (70.6%)
3PT 6/11 (54.5%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 86.7%
USG% 27.5%
Net Rtg +39.4
+/- +28
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.0m
Scoring +26.6
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +7.6
Hustle +6.6
Defense +3.9
Turnovers -8.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 27.8%
STL 3
BLK 3
TO 4
S Tari Eason 31.6m
11
pts
10
reb
4
ast
Impact
-2.3

A barrage of clanked perimeter jumpers ultimately dragged his net rating into the red despite phenomenal defensive metrics. His relentless ball-denial and switchability blew up several offensive sets, but he gave that value right back by short-circuiting possessions with rushed shots. The inability to capitalize on open spot-up opportunities defined his frustrating night.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 45.8%
USG% 20.3%
Net Rtg +17.4
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.6m
Scoring +6.0
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +5.9
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 18.2%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 3
S Amen Thompson 29.1m
20
pts
7
reb
3
ast
Impact
+6.3

Relentless downhill attacks and hyper-efficient finishing at the rim fueled a massive positive impact. He completely overwhelmed perimeter defenders with his first step, refusing to settle for outside jumpers. Coupling that offensive rim pressure with suffocating on-ball defense made this a spectacular two-way showing.

Shooting
FG 8/9 (88.9%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 89.3%
USG% 22.1%
Net Rtg +24.6
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.1m
Scoring +18.8
Creation +2.9
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +2.1
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -13.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 6
15
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-2.7

Blistering perimeter marksmanship wasn't quite enough to overcome defensive vulnerabilities that bled points on the other end. While his catch-and-shoot gravity bent the defense, he was consistently targeted and blown by in isolation matchups. The scoring punch was undeniable, but the inability to stay in front of his man kept his net impact slightly negative.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 5/9 (55.6%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 19.7%
Net Rtg +7.4
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.5m
Scoring +11.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +4.8
Hustle +1.9
Defense -3.9
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
3
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-13.8

An absolute cratering of team performance occurred during his minutes, driven by blown defensive assignments and bricked open looks. His inability to knock down corner threes allowed the defense to aggressively cheat off him and swarm the ball-handlers. Getting consistently beat on back-door cuts highlighted a disastrous two-way showing.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 9.4%
Net Rtg -10.6
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.2m
Scoring +0.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +1.2
Defense -5.0
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Josh Okogie 12.8m
2
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-11.3

Offensive spacing issues severely handicapped the team during his brief rotation stint. By completely ignoring him on the perimeter, the opposing defense was able to freely pack the paint and stifle driving lanes. A lack of disruptive hustle plays, usually his calling card, left him with a deeply negative overall score.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 18.5%
Net Rtg +14.8
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.8m
Scoring -0.1
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +0.3
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Clint Capela 10.2m
2
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.6

Failing to establish deep post position or finish through contact rendered his short stint largely ineffective. He struggled to anchor the drop coverage, allowing guards to easily turn the corner on pick-and-rolls. A lack of vertical spacing and missed bunnies around the rim ultimately sank his rating.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg +35.7
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.2m
Scoring +0.3
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +3.8
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
7
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.5

A flawless burst of instant offense completely flipped the momentum during his brief time on the hardwood. He maximized every second of his run by attacking closeouts decisively and knocking down every look he took. This hyper-efficient micro-shift provided a crucial scoring jolt to the second unit.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 121.5%
USG% 27.3%
Net Rtg +18.2
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.9m
Scoring +7.0
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Jeff Green 1.9m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.3

Barely breaking a sweat in a fleeting appearance, his impact was dragged down by a single forced perimeter miss. He didn't log enough floor time to establish any defensive rhythm or offensive flow. The negative rating is purely a byproduct of an empty possession in garbage time.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +60.0
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.9m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.2

Relegated to pure cardio duty at the end of the rotation, he failed to record a single meaningful statistic. His slightly negative grade stems entirely from being on the floor during an opponent's late scoring sequence. He simply served as a warm body to run out the clock.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +60.0
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.9m
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
UTA Utah Jazz
S Lauri Markkanen 32.2m
29
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+18.6

Despite a brutal night spacing the floor from beyond the arc, his relentless interior attacks and ability to draw contact kept his offensive value afloat. He compensated for the perimeter brick-laying by anchoring the defensive glass and altering shots inside. This performance was defined by his sheer volume and physical mismatch hunting rather than pure efficiency.

Shooting
FG 10/23 (43.5%)
3PT 1/10 (10.0%)
FT 8/8 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.7%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg -20.5
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.2m
Scoring +19.1
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +3.7
Hustle +3.8
Defense +4.7
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S Isaiah Collier 29.9m
17
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
+0.4

Tunnel vision and a barrage of clanked perimeter jumpers severely damaged his net rating. He consistently settled for low-quality, off-the-dribble looks rather than initiating offensive flow, wasting valuable possessions. Although he generated some defensive pressure, his inefficient chucking ultimately stalled the team's momentum.

Shooting
FG 4/16 (25.0%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 9/10 (90.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 27.6%
Net Rtg -45.2
+/- -30
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.9m
Scoring +7.0
Creation +2.8
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
S Ace Bailey 27.0m
4
pts
8
reb
0
ast
Impact
+1.1

Forcing contested jumpers early in the shot clock completely cratered his offensive impact. While his length provided a massive boost in passing lanes and on-ball defensive assignments, the sheer volume of wasted possessions outweighed the stops. A severe lack of offensive rhythm defined his night, breaking his recent string of steady production.

Shooting
FG 2/9 (22.2%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 22.2%
USG% 12.3%
Net Rtg -43.9
+/- -26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.0m
Scoring -1.1
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +8.2
Defense +4.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
S Kyle Filipowski 23.6m
13
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
+3.7

Elite rim-protection metrics nearly salvaged a rough regression game on the offensive end. After a scorching five-game stretch of hyper-efficient finishing, his touch around the basket evaporated against physical interior defense. The defensive positioning was flawless, but clanking several highly contested looks in the paint kept his overall rating neutral.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 51.4%
USG% 31.1%
Net Rtg -43.6
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.6m
Scoring +7.6
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +6.3
Defense +9.9
Turnovers -13.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 5
BLK 1
TO 6
S Cody Williams 14.2m
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.3

A stark drop in offensive aggression compared to his recent scoring tear severely limited his overall value. His passivity on the perimeter dragged his impact into the negative, even though he held up reasonably well in defensive rotations. The complete disappearance of his usual rim pressure left the second unit stagnant.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 7.9%
Net Rtg -45.7
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.2m
Scoring +0.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
26
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+17.3

Elite shot-making from all three levels fueled a massive offensive impact score. He consistently punished defensive mismatches in isolation, generating high-quality looks without forcing the issue. This surgical scoring display perfectly sustained his recent hot streak and carried the half-court offense.

Shooting
FG 10/15 (66.7%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 79.7%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -4.4
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.7m
Scoring +20.9
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +6.2
Hustle +3.8
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
Kevin Love 24.4m
5
pts
9
reb
5
ast
Impact
+4.6

Clanking a high volume of pick-and-pop threes prevented him from posting a positive overall rating. However, his elite outlet passing and positional rebounding mitigated the damage from his cold shooting touch. The veteran's savvy defensive communication anchored the second unit, even as his jumper betrayed him.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 31.3%
USG% 12.3%
Net Rtg +7.4
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.4m
Scoring +0.4
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +11.4
Defense +0.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
John Konchar 24.4m
5
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.3

Outstanding defensive instincts and relentless activity on 50/50 balls drove a highly positive overall rating. He perfectly executed his role as a low-usage connector, making timely cuts and avoiding costly mistakes. His ability to blow up opposing dribble hand-offs on the perimeter defined his highly impactful stint.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 7.7%
Net Rtg +7.4
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.4m
Scoring +3.4
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +5.1
Defense +7.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
4
ast
Impact
-7.9

Tremendous point-of-attack defense and high-energy hustle plays nearly balanced out a completely barren offensive showing. He was a total non-threat with the ball in his hands, allowing defenders to sag off and clog passing lanes. His relentless ball pressure was the only thing keeping his net impact near neutral.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 8.1%
Net Rtg +28.1
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.4m
Scoring -2.4
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +3.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.5

Failing to find open space on the perimeter rendered his brief stint largely ineffective. Without his usual catch-and-shoot gravity pulling defenders out of the paint, the offense bogged down during his minutes. A couple of forced, heavily contested long-range attempts highlighted a disjointed rotation sequence.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 43.6%
USG% 10.7%
Net Rtg -19.8
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.5m
Scoring +1.4
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
1
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-10.4

A disastrous shooting stint where he failed to connect on a single look from deep actively harmed the spacing. His inability to punish closeouts allowed the defense to aggressively pack the paint during his short time on the floor. Even a few solid defensive rotations couldn't mask the offensive dead weight he provided.

Shooting
FG 0/4 (0.0%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 10.2%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -18.9
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.8m
Scoring -2.7
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +2.8
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1