Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
CHA lead POR lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
POR 2P — 3P —
CHA 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 177 attempts

POR POR Shot-making Δ

Grant 9/18 -0.5
Holiday 9/16 +3.7
Henderson Hard 3/12 -6.6
Camara Hard 4/10 -0.7
Clingan Open 3/6 -0.6
Krejčí Hard 1/6 -3.4
Murray 1/5 -3.8
Thybulle Hard 2/4 +0.7
Wesley 1/3 -1.6
Hansen 1/2 -0.1

CHA CHA Shot-making Δ

Miller Hard 9/19 +4.4
Ball Hard 6/19 -4.5
White 5/13 -3.7
Bridges 5/11 +0.2
Knueppel 4/11 -2.2
Diabaté Open 5/7 +1.8
Kalkbrenner Open 1/4 -3.4
Green 2/3 +1.3
James Hard 1/3 -0.1
Williams Hard 0/1 -1.1
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
POR
CHA
35/86 Field Goals 38/91
40.7% Field Goal % 41.8%
11/47 3-Pointers 16/42
23.4% 3-Point % 38.1%
12/19 Free Throws 17/25
63.2% Free Throw % 68.0%
49.3% True Shooting % 53.4%
53 Total Rebounds 66
11 Offensive 20
28 Defensive 35
22 Assists 24
1.29 Assist/TO Ratio 1.50
16 Turnovers 16
8 Steals 11
7 Blocks 0
19 Fouls 22
46 Points in Paint 42
2 Fast Break Pts 7
13 Points off TOs 21
15 Second Chance Pts 18
26 Bench Points 31
2 Largest Lead 17
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Jrue Holiday
25 PTS · 5 REB · 4 AST · 33.1 MIN
+17.06
2
Miles Bridges
14 PTS · 8 REB · 5 AST · 32.5 MIN
+16.51
3
Moussa Diabaté
13 PTS · 11 REB · 5 AST · 33.2 MIN
+15.67
4
Brandon Miller
26 PTS · 8 REB · 2 AST · 32.7 MIN
+13.86
5
LaMelo Ball
15 PTS · 4 REB · 8 AST · 29.9 MIN
+11.67
6
Matisse Thybulle
5 PTS · 3 REB · 2 AST · 12.0 MIN
+11.62
7
Jerami Grant
21 PTS · 1 REB · 2 AST · 31.8 MIN
+9.0
8
Toumani Camara
12 PTS · 6 REB · 2 AST · 32.5 MIN
+8.33
9
Donovan Clingan
7 PTS · 8 REB · 2 AST · 26.0 MIN
+8.07
10
Robert Williams III
5 PTS · 6 REB · 2 AST · 16.8 MIN
+7.24
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:16 S. James STEAL (1 STL) 93–109
Q4 0:16 B. Wesley bad pass TURNOVER (1 TO) 93–109
Q4 0:25 P. Connaughton bad pass out-of-bounds TURNOVER (1 TO) 93–109
Q4 0:43 K. Murray lost ball out-of-bounds TURNOVER (1 TO) 93–109
Q4 0:43 K. Murray REBOUND (Off:2 Def:2) 93–109
Q4 0:45 MISS Yang 26' pullup 3PT 93–109
Q4 0:59 R. Kalkbrenner alley-oop DUNK (2 PTS) (T. Mann 1 AST) 93–109
Q4 1:16 M. Diabaté defensive goaltending VIOLATION 93–107
Q4 1:16 Yang putback Layup (2 PTS) 93–107
Q4 1:16 Yang REBOUND (Off:1 Def:0) 91–107
Q4 1:17 MISS T. Camara 27' 3PT 91–107
Q4 1:34 M. Bridges tip DUNK (14 PTS) 91–107
Q4 1:34 M. Bridges REBOUND (Off:2 Def:6) 91–105
Q4 1:37 MISS C. White 25' 3PT 91–105
Q4 2:01 T. Camara putback Layup (12 PTS) 91–105

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

CHA Charlotte Hornets
S Moussa Diabaté 33.2m
13
pts
11
reb
5
ast
Impact
+17.7

Dominated the interior with relentless offensive rebounding and highly efficient finishing around the basket. He consistently won the physicality battle in the paint, generating crucial second-chance opportunities that broke the opponent's back.

Shooting
FG 5/7 (71.4%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 74.2%
USG% 13.2%
Net Rtg +35.3
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.2m
Scoring +10.7
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +14.0
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Brandon Miller 32.8m
26
pts
8
reb
2
ast
Impact
+14.8

A lethal perimeter barrage stretched the defense thin and opened up driving lanes for his teammates. He hunted mismatches effectively on the wing, though occasional defensive lapses on backdoor cuts kept his overall rating from soaring higher.

Shooting
FG 9/19 (47.4%)
3PT 6/12 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.4%
USG% 27.6%
Net Rtg -3.1
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.8m
Scoring +18.5
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +6.5
Hustle +10.2
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -10.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
S Miles Bridges 32.5m
14
pts
8
reb
5
ast
Impact
+15.1

Bullied his way to the rim and provided stellar weak-side help defense to anchor a highly productive shift. His ability to finish through contact and crash the glass effectively masked a few errant perimeter attempts.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.9%
USG% 17.3%
Net Rtg +19.4
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.5m
Scoring +9.3
Creation +2.1
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +7.2
Defense +6.8
Turnovers -6.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
S LaMelo Ball 29.9m
15
pts
4
reb
8
ast
Impact
+9.9

Elite playmaking vision was heavily offset by a disastrous shooting night and forced attempts early in the shot clock. He kept the offense humming with pinpoint transition passes, but his inability to score efficiently in isolation neutralized his overall value.

Shooting
FG 6/19 (31.6%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 38.6%
USG% 27.4%
Net Rtg +31.3
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.9m
Scoring +6.0
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +4.3
Hustle +4.1
Defense +4.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Kon Knueppel 28.7m
10
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+9.1

Excellent defensive positioning and active hands were overshadowed by a brutal shooting slump from beyond the arc. He generated quality looks but couldn't convert, allowing the defense to cheat off him in critical moments.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 0/3 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.6%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +39.3
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.7m
Scoring +3.1
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +10.2
Defense +4.7
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
Coby White 21.5m
20
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.7

High-volume scoring masked significant defensive liabilities at the point of attack. Opposing guards consistently blew past him on the perimeter, forcing defensive rotations that ultimately bled points and tanked his overall impact.

Shooting
FG 5/13 (38.5%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 8/9 (88.9%)
Advanced
TS% 59.0%
USG% 33.9%
Net Rtg +0.1
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.5m
Scoring +13.4
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +3.3
Hustle +0.9
Defense -2.2
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Josh Green 14.8m
6
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.8

Found success attacking closeouts but struggled to make a dent defensively against larger wing assignments. A lack of overall volume and a few missed rotations in zone coverage dragged his net impact into the red.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 77.3%
USG% 15.0%
Net Rtg -6.9
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.8m
Scoring +4.6
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +3.8
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
2
pts
7
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.2

Provided steady drop-coverage defense but was practically invisible on the offensive end. He failed to establish deep post position, rendering him an afterthought in the half-court offense.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 20.5%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg -35.5
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.8m
Scoring -2.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +7.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.8

Sturdy post defense and vocal leadership couldn't compensate for a complete lack of offensive aggression. He passed up open looks to keep the ball moving, but his reluctance to shoot allowed the defense to pack the paint.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 5.4%
Net Rtg +0.9
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.2m
Scoring -0.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +3.8
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Sion James 13.9m
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.9

Played fundamentally sound defense but was too passive offensively to tilt the scales. He blended into the background during his minutes, rarely attacking the gaps or forcing the defense to react.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +21.4
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.9m
Scoring +1.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.1

A brief, ineffective stint where he was immediately targeted on defense. The lack of floor time prevented any chance to establish a rhythm or contribute positively.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg +66.7
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.3m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.8

Inserted purely for late-game clock management. He executed his assignment without error but didn't play enough to move the needle.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +66.7
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.3m
Scoring +0.9
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +1.8
Defense -0.9
Turnovers -1.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Tre Mann 1.3m
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.1

Logged barely over a minute of action at the end of the rotation. Managed to keep the ball moving but had no runway to make a tangible impact.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +66.7
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.3m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
POR Portland Trail Blazers
S Jrue Holiday 33.1m
25
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
+13.8

Elite point-of-attack defense and pristine shot selection drove a highly efficient two-way performance. He consistently punished defensive lapses with timely cuts and perimeter makes, dictating the tempo whenever he initiated the offense.

Shooting
FG 9/16 (56.2%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 70.4%
USG% 29.3%
Net Rtg +3.1
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.1m
Scoring +20.0
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +5.6
Hustle +1.5
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
S Toumani Camara 32.5m
12
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.1

Despite active hands and solid rotational defense, erratic perimeter shooting dragged down his overall rating. He settled for too many contested outside looks rather than attacking closeouts, which short-circuited several promising possessions.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.0%
USG% 17.1%
Net Rtg -26.5
+/- -21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.5m
Scoring +6.3
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +3.7
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jerami Grant 31.8m
21
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.1

High-level hustle plays and timely weak-side rotations defined his two-way effort. He absorbed tough defensive assignments while maintaining a steady scoring diet, though a few forced isolation jumpers capped his ceiling.

Shooting
FG 9/18 (50.0%)
3PT 3/9 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 58.3%
USG% 28.8%
Net Rtg -26.9
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.8m
Scoring +13.7
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +5.4
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
S Donovan Clingan 26.0m
7
pts
8
reb
2
ast
Impact
-1.3

Rim deterrence was his calling card tonight, anchoring the paint and forcing opponents into tough floaters. However, a limited offensive role and a few missed connections in the pick-and-roll kept his net impact hovering just above neutral.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 58.3%
USG% 12.3%
Net Rtg -28.6
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.0m
Scoring +3.9
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +4.3
Defense -3.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 35.3%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
S Kris Murray 16.7m
2
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.6

A severe drop-off in offensive rhythm tanked his overall impact, as he struggled to find clean looks and missed all his perimeter attempts. The inability to stretch the floor allowed defenders to sag off, stalling the half-court offense during his stint.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 20.0%
USG% 16.2%
Net Rtg -42.2
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.7m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +5.1
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
4
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.6

Offensive invisibility and bricked spot-up attempts doomed his net rating despite commendable effort on 50/50 balls. Opponents routinely ignored him on the perimeter, which clogged driving lanes for the primary creators.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 29.1%
USG% 10.8%
Net Rtg +3.7
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.2m
Scoring -0.2
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense -0.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
8
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-8.2

Frigid perimeter shooting and forced drives into traffic severely undercut his offensive value. He salvaged some utility by generating deflections and pushing the pace in transition, but the half-court decision-making remains a work in progress.

Shooting
FG 3/12 (25.0%)
3PT 0/7 (0.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 30.0%
USG% 29.6%
Net Rtg -12.3
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.0m
Scoring +0.8
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +3.8
Defense -0.1
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
5
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.3

Vertical spacing and elite rim protection made him a massive deterrent during his limited minutes. He completely altered the geometry of the paint defensively, though a lack of offensive touches prevented a larger overall swing.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.5%
USG% 13.6%
Net Rtg -11.4
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.8m
Scoring +3.2
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +0.2
Hustle +6.7
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
5
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.3

Absolute defensive havoc in a short burst, completely blowing up opposing pick-and-rolls with his length and anticipation. He didn't need high usage to swing the game, leveraging transition opportunities created by his own steals.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 13.8%
Net Rtg +12.0
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.0m
Scoring +3.4
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +2.8
Defense +5.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
Blake Wesley 11.0m
2
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.0

High-energy closeouts and ball pressure kept him afloat, but an inability to finish at the rim erased his positive defensive equity. He struggled to break down his primary defender, leading to stagnant offensive sets.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +20.7
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.0m
Scoring +0.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense -0.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-12.5

Looked completely out of sync during a brief rotation cameo, failing to register any meaningful offensive production. Rushed decisions and poor spacing negated the minor hustle plays he managed to string together.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.3m
Scoring -2.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.7

Capitalized on a garbage-time opportunity with immediate interior execution. Showed solid positional awareness on defense during his brief stint on the floor.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.2m
Scoring +1.3
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +1.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.7

Barely saw the floor in a late-game cameo. Did not have enough time to register any measurable impact on either end of the court.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -66.7
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.3m
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0