GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

DET Detroit Pistons
S Cade Cunningham 38.1m
29
pts
4
reb
13
ast
Impact
+12.3

Masterful offensive orchestration and hyper-efficient shot-making anchored a stellar two-way performance. Picking apart the pick-and-roll coverage with precision passing generated high-quality looks all night. His engaged point-of-attack defense completely disrupted the opponent's primary actions.

Shooting
FG 11/16 (68.8%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.6%
USG% 27.4%
Net Rtg +22.3
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.1m
Offense +16.9
Hustle +5.0
Defense +12.2
Raw total +34.1
Avg player in 38.1m -21.8
Impact +12.3
How is this calculated?
STL 3
BLK 3
TO 8
S Jalen Duren 31.3m
29
pts
15
reb
2
ast
Impact
+21.4

Absolute dominance in the painted area fueled a monstrous overall impact score. Converting a massive volume of high-percentage looks at the rim and controlling the interior completely overwhelmed the opposing frontcourt. His physical presence dictated the terms of engagement on both ends of the floor.

Shooting
FG 12/17 (70.6%)
3PT 0/0
FT 5/7 (71.4%)
Advanced
TS% 72.2%
USG% 25.6%
Net Rtg +19.5
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.3m
Offense +32.2
Hustle +2.2
Defense +4.8
Raw total +39.2
Avg player in 31.3m -17.8
Impact +21.4
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
S Duncan Robinson 30.3m
16
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
-0.3

Cold shooting from deep neutralized his primary utility, resulting in a perfectly flat net impact. Clanking the vast majority of his outside shots allowed the defense to stay home and limit driving lanes for teammates. While his defensive rotations were surprisingly sharp, the lack of scoring gravity kept him from moving the needle.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 3/9 (33.3%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 60.6%
USG% 17.1%
Net Rtg +24.4
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.3m
Offense +10.8
Hustle +1.6
Defense +4.5
Raw total +16.9
Avg player in 30.3m -17.2
Impact -0.3
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Ausar Thompson 28.1m
11
pts
4
reb
7
ast
Impact
+7.6

Elite defensive disruption and relentless hustle plays drove a massive positive rating. Attacking the glass and generating extra possessions masked his lack of perimeter shooting. His ability to convert nearly all his interior looks punished defenders who dared to leave him open on cuts.

Shooting
FG 5/7 (71.4%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/4 (25.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.8%
USG% 17.1%
Net Rtg +28.4
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.1m
Offense +5.3
Hustle +7.1
Defense +11.2
Raw total +23.6
Avg player in 28.1m -16.0
Impact +7.6
How is this calculated?
STL 3
BLK 2
TO 3
S Tobias Harris 23.8m
4
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.7

Passive offensive involvement and missed perimeter looks tanked his overall value. Failing to assert himself in the half-court allowed the defense to key in on primary creators. Even with decent positional defense, his inability to command defensive attention dragged down the starting unit.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg +1.6
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.8m
Offense +2.0
Hustle +1.4
Defense +2.5
Raw total +5.9
Avg player in 23.8m -13.6
Impact -7.7
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
6
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
+2.4

Opportunistic perimeter shooting and relentless hustle perfectly complemented the primary creators. Drilling his perimeter looks punished defensive over-help. His willingness to do the dirty work on the margins provided a steady, stabilizing presence.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 8.7%
Net Rtg +26.5
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.4m
Offense +5.6
Hustle +3.0
Defense +3.7
Raw total +12.3
Avg player in 17.4m -9.9
Impact +2.4
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
Caris LeVert 17.3m
9
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.8

Defensive liabilities completely overshadowed a tidy, efficient shooting night. Getting lost on switches and failing to contain dribble penetration bled points on the other end. The inability to string together stops turned his offensive contributions into empty calories.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.4%
USG% 21.4%
Net Rtg -29.4
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.3m
Offense +3.5
Hustle +2.1
Defense -1.6
Raw total +4.0
Avg player in 17.3m -9.8
Impact -5.8
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Paul Reed 16.6m
8
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
+4.9

Disruptive interior defense and high-energy rim runs drove a solid positive impact. Altering shots in the paint and fighting for position created a noticeable physical edge. Even with a few clunky offensive finishes, his motor dictated the tempo during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 45.7%
USG% 24.4%
Net Rtg -8.4
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.6m
Offense +6.3
Hustle +2.2
Defense +5.9
Raw total +14.4
Avg player in 16.6m -9.5
Impact +4.9
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 4
TO 1
8
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.9

Slashing to the rim provided a modest offensive boost, though his broken perimeter jumper limited his ceiling. Coming up empty from beyond the arc allowed defenders to pack the paint. Ultimately, his energy in transition kept his head above water despite the spacing issues.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 44.4%
USG% 25.7%
Net Rtg +4.5
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.3m
Offense +8.6
Hustle +1.1
Defense +0.6
Raw total +10.3
Avg player in 16.3m -9.4
Impact +0.9
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.8

Poor shot selection and an inability to find an offensive rhythm dragged down the second unit. Missing the bulk of his attempts stalled out possessions and fueled opponent transition opportunities. His lack of impact plays on the margins compounded a highly ineffective stint.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 17.6%
Net Rtg -28.6
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.2m
Offense +1.9
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.6
Raw total +2.7
Avg player in 13.2m -7.5
Impact -4.8
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.9

A completely invisible offensive stint severely hampered the team's spacing. Failing to convert his only attempt allowed his defender to freely roam and disrupt passing lanes. Getting targeted on defense only worsened a brutal, short-lived appearance.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 4.8%
Net Rtg -44.9
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.7m
Offense -0.6
Hustle +0.2
Defense -1.1
Raw total -1.5
Avg player in 7.7m -4.4
Impact -5.9
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
OKC Oklahoma City Thunder
S Jaylin Williams 35.5m
30
pts
11
reb
4
ast
Impact
+10.8

Elite shot selection and blistering perimeter efficiency drove a massive positive impact. Stretching the floor with a barrage of made triples completely warped the opposing defense. His constant activity on the glass and solid positional defense compounded the damage, making him a dominant two-way force in this matchup.

Shooting
FG 9/14 (64.3%)
3PT 5/10 (50.0%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 87.8%
USG% 23.0%
Net Rtg -19.7
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.5m
Offense +20.4
Hustle +4.2
Defense +6.4
Raw total +31.0
Avg player in 35.5m -20.2
Impact +10.8
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 4
S Aaron Wiggins 34.6m
20
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
-6.5

High offensive usage masked a highly inefficient shooting night that actively hurt the team's half-court flow. A barrage of missed jumpers offset the value of his aggressive drives to the rim. While he found ways to contribute through secondary playmaking, the sheer number of wasted possessions resulted in a negative overall footprint.

Shooting
FG 6/16 (37.5%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 6/7 (85.7%)
Advanced
TS% 52.4%
USG% 25.3%
Net Rtg +2.1
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.6m
Offense +9.4
Hustle +2.0
Defense +1.8
Raw total +13.2
Avg player in 34.6m -19.7
Impact -6.5
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 3
S Cason Wallace 30.1m
23
pts
2
reb
5
ast
Impact
+2.5

Aggressive rim pressure and confident outside shooting fueled a strong offensive rating, though his defensive impact remained surprisingly muted. Consistent conversion from deep kept the defense honest during key momentum swings. Ultimately, his scoring punch carried his overall value despite a lack of disruptive plays on the other end.

Shooting
FG 9/17 (52.9%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 26.0%
Net Rtg -25.0
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.1m
Offense +18.3
Hustle +1.4
Defense 0.0
Raw total +19.7
Avg player in 30.1m -17.2
Impact +2.5
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Luguentz Dort 28.4m
3
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-6.8

Severe shooting struggles cratered his overall value, as clanking the vast majority of his perimeter attempts stalled the offense. Despite strong point-of-attack coverage that boosted his defensive rating, his inability to convert open looks ultimately dragged down his net impact. The sheer volume of empty possessions outweighed his physical perimeter pressure.

Shooting
FG 1/8 (12.5%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 18.8%
USG% 10.5%
Net Rtg -25.5
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.4m
Offense +2.3
Hustle +1.9
Defense +5.2
Raw total +9.4
Avg player in 28.4m -16.2
Impact -6.8
How is this calculated?
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
S Isaiah Joe 13.8m
3
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.1

A complete lack of rhythm from beyond the arc neutralized his primary weapon and tanked his offensive value. Missing nearly all of his outside looks allowed defenders to sag off and clog the driving lanes for his teammates. Though he provided a slight defensive lift, the spacing issues created by his cold streak defined his stint.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 30.0%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg -22.2
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.8m
Offense -1.9
Hustle +0.8
Defense +1.9
Raw total +0.8
Avg player in 13.8m -7.9
Impact -7.1
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Jared McCain 29.9m
20
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.0

Hustle plays and relentless off-ball movement salvaged a highly inefficient shooting performance. A high volume of missed jumpers limited his ceiling, but his willingness to fight for loose balls kept possessions alive. The constant threat of his deep range forced defensive rotations, even if the conversion rate left points on the board.

Shooting
FG 6/16 (37.5%)
3PT 4/10 (40.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.3%
USG% 22.0%
Net Rtg +2.2
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.9m
Offense +14.4
Hustle +4.8
Defense -0.1
Raw total +19.1
Avg player in 29.9m -17.1
Impact +2.0
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
13
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.2

Defensive lapses and poor rotation timing completely erased the value of a highly efficient shooting night. While knocking down timely corner looks boosted his offensive metrics, he was consistently exploited on the other end of the floor. The inability to string together stops meant his offensive contributions were effectively canceled out.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.3%
USG% 16.4%
Net Rtg -3.7
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.0m
Offense +11.1
Hustle +0.8
Defense -1.3
Raw total +10.6
Avg player in 26.0m -14.8
Impact -4.2
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-13.0

A completely invisible offensive showing severely handicapped the second unit's spacing. Failing to convert a single shot allowed his primary defender to roam freely and muck up the paint. While he offered some resistance on the perimeter, the total lack of scoring gravity resulted in a brutal net negative.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 7.4%
Net Rtg +14.0
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.9m
Offense -4.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense +3.0
Raw total -0.5
Avg player in 21.9m -12.5
Impact -13.0
How is this calculated?
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
0
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-7.4

Passing vision couldn't compensate for a total lack of scoring threat, allowing the defense to play five-on-four. Coming up completely empty from the floor derailed the team's offensive rhythm. Despite decent effort on the margins, his inability to bend the defense doomed his overall impact.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 10.5%
Net Rtg -38.3
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.5m
Offense -1.0
Hustle +1.2
Defense +1.3
Raw total +1.5
Avg player in 15.5m -8.9
Impact -7.4
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
4
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.0

Maximized a brief cameo by executing decisively within the flow of the offense. Finishing flawlessly around the basket provided an immediate spark off the bench. His short but mistake-free stint perfectly encapsulated how to provide positive filler minutes.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 41.7%
Net Rtg +152.4
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.7m
Offense +5.4
Hustle +0.6
Defense +1.1
Raw total +7.1
Avg player in 3.7m -2.1
Impact +5.0
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.3

Logged only garbage-time seconds at the end of the game. Did not have enough runway to register any meaningful statistical footprint. Barely broke a sweat before the final buzzer sounded.

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 0.5m
Offense 0.0
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total 0.0
Avg player in 0.5m -0.3
Impact -0.3
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0