Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
SAC lead PHX lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
PHX 2P — 3P —
SAC 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 182 attempts

PHX PHX Shot-making Δ

Booker Hard 6/19 -2.1
Green 7/16 -2.0
Allen Hard 6/15 +0.6
Gillespie Hard 6/10 +7.9
Ighodaro Open 7/10 +1.3
O'Neale Hard 2/7 -1.4
Williams Open 3/6 -1.9
Fleming 3/4 +3.3
Coffey 1/3 -1.3
Dunn Hard 1/2 +0.1

SAC SAC Shot-making Δ

DeRozan Hard 5/15 -2.7
Westbrook Hard 6/14 +2.0
Achiuwa 8/14 +0.3
Clifford 5/13 -3.8
Raynaud 10/12 +7.6
Monk Hard 5/10 +2.0
Hayes Hard 1/4 -1.2
Carter 1/4 -2.3
Plowden Hard 0/3 -3.2
Eubanks Hard 0/1 -0.9
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
PHX
SAC
42/92 Field Goals 41/90
45.7% Field Goal % 45.6%
19/49 3-Pointers 7/27
38.8% 3-Point % 25.9%
11/17 Free Throws 14/18
64.7% Free Throw % 77.8%
57.3% True Shooting % 52.6%
60 Total Rebounds 49
18 Offensive 13
35 Defensive 27
31 Assists 25
1.63 Assist/TO Ratio 1.79
19 Turnovers 14
11 Steals 11
3 Blocks 2
13 Fouls 14
44 Points in Paint 50
32 Fast Break Pts 21
31 Points off TOs 26
27 Second Chance Pts 13
44 Bench Points 20
20 Largest Lead 8
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Maxime Raynaud
22 PTS · 10 REB · 4 AST · 35.9 MIN
+24.04
2
Precious Achiuwa
18 PTS · 9 REB · 1 AST · 39.0 MIN
+21.66
3
Oso Ighodaro
14 PTS · 14 REB · 3 AST · 25.8 MIN
+18.56
4
Collin Gillespie
17 PTS · 5 REB · 9 AST · 31.5 MIN
+18.42
5
Grayson Allen
18 PTS · 3 REB · 6 AST · 25.3 MIN
+16.14
6
Russell Westbrook
16 PTS · 2 REB · 7 AST · 31.5 MIN
+15.31
7
Mark Williams
10 PTS · 9 REB · 0 AST · 22.2 MIN
+11.59
8
Nique Clifford
10 PTS · 8 REB · 4 AST · 39.3 MIN
+10.36
9
Rasheer Fleming
8 PTS · 6 REB · 1 AST · 15.1 MIN
+9.85
10
Jalen Green
20 PTS · 4 REB · 1 AST · 31.0 MIN
+9.8
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:21 R. O'Neale REBOUND (Off:0 Def:4) 114–103
Q4 0:23 MISS K. Hayes 25' pullup 3PT 114–103
Q4 0:30 M. Williams alley-oop DUNK (10 PTS) (D. Booker 6 AST) 114–103
Q4 0:46 M. Williams REBOUND (Off:3 Def:6) 112–103
Q4 0:48 MISS P. Achiuwa 9' driving bank Shot 112–103
Q4 1:02 J. Green traveling TURNOVER (7 TO) 112–103
Q4 1:23 M. Raynaud 6' running Layup (22 PTS) (K. Hayes 2 AST) 112–103
Q4 1:30 N. Clifford REBOUND (Off:2 Def:6) 112–101
Q4 1:33 MISS C. Gillespie 16' step back Shot 112–101
Q4 1:57 M. Raynaud 7' driving Layup (20 PTS) (N. Clifford 4 AST) 112–101
Q4 2:02 M. Raynaud REBOUND (Off:4 Def:6) 112–99
Q4 2:04 MISS D. Booker driving Layup 112–99
Q4 2:23 J. Green REBOUND (Off:0 Def:4) 112–99
Q4 2:26 MISS D. Plowden 26' 3PT 112–99
Q4 2:38 P. Achiuwa REBOUND (Off:3 Def:6) 112–99

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

SAC Sacramento Kings
S Nique Clifford 39.3m
10
pts
8
reb
4
ast
Impact
+0.6

Provided excellent point-of-attack resistance (+9.0 Def) but gave that value right back with a frigid shooting night from the perimeter. Missing all of his three-point attempts allowed defenders to sag into the paint and clog driving lanes for his teammates.

Shooting
FG 5/13 (38.5%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 38.5%
USG% 16.1%
Net Rtg +6.1
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.3m
Scoring +4.3
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +7.2
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 84.6%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
18
pts
9
reb
1
ast
Impact
+19.9

Imposed his will in the restricted area by finishing through contact and sealing off defenders early in the shot clock. His sustained interior efficiency generated a robust box score impact (+18.0) that stabilized the frontcourt rotation.

Shooting
FG 8/14 (57.1%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 60.5%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg +1.3
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.0m
Scoring +13.7
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +11.4
Defense +2.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 13.3%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
S Maxime Raynaud 35.9m
22
pts
10
reb
4
ast
Impact
+17.2

Put on an absolute clinic in rim-running and pick-and-roll execution, converting nearly every touch near the basket. His astronomical impact (+16.8) was fueled by flawless shot selection and a relentless motor that overwhelmed opposing bigs in transition.

Shooting
FG 10/12 (83.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 82.6%
USG% 18.4%
Net Rtg +3.9
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.9m
Scoring +20.1
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +4.5
Hustle +11.7
Defense -1.5
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 25
FGM Against 12
Opp FG% 48.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
S DeMar DeRozan 33.6m
17
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.3

A heavy diet of contested, isolation mid-range jumpers tanked his offensive efficiency and overall score (-5.8). Although he worked hard to navigate screens defensively, the sheer volume of empty offensive possessions allowed the opposition to dictate the tempo.

Shooting
FG 5/15 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 7/9 (77.8%)
Advanced
TS% 44.8%
USG% 23.8%
Net Rtg -19.2
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.6m
Scoring +9.5
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
16
pts
2
reb
7
ast
Impact
+6.9

Energized the second unit with chaotic but effective defensive pressure that disrupted the opponent's offensive flow (+9.9 Def). Hitting half of his perimeter looks forced defenders to respect his shot, opening up crucial passing angles in the half-court.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.8%
USG% 22.8%
Net Rtg -6.1
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.5m
Scoring +9.8
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +4.5
Hustle +0.6
Defense +9.4
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 4
BLK 1
TO 3
2
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.7

Completely neutralized on the offensive end, failing to register a single made field goal during his twenty minutes of action. While his defensive rotations were passable, the lack of scoring gravity severely hampered the team's spacing.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.8%
USG% 8.7%
Net Rtg -24.6
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.0m
Scoring -0.4
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +4.1
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Malik Monk 17.9m
13
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
-6.1

Scored in bunches but leaked points on the other end due to late closeouts and poor screen navigation. His quick-trigger offense couldn't outpace the defensive breakdowns that occurred during his shifts.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 65.0%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg -58.3
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.9m
Scoring +9.2
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +2.8
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
3
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.8

Hesitant decision-making stalled the offense whenever he initiated sets at the top of the key. Settling for heavily contested pull-ups rather than probing the defense kept his impact firmly in the negative.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -15.8
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.8m
Scoring +1.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.5

Rushed his attempts around the basket during a brief, ineffective stint. Failed to establish any offensive rhythm, resulting in empty possessions that slightly depressed his overall impact score.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 19.0%
Net Rtg -41.2
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.4m
Scoring -0.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +2.5
Defense +2.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-15.9

Endured a disastrous two-minute cameo where blown defensive assignments immediately gifted the opposition a quick scoring run. Was quickly yanked from the game after failing to protect the rim or secure loose balls.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg -116.7
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.6m
Scoring -0.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
PHX Phoenix Suns
17
pts
5
reb
9
ast
Impact
+9.8

Capitalized brilliantly on defensive breakdowns to drill high-value perimeter looks. His massive box score impact (+17.0) stemmed from flawless shot selection and timely playmaking that consistently punished defensive over-rotations.

Shooting
FG 6/10 (60.0%)
3PT 5/8 (62.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 85.0%
USG% 14.8%
Net Rtg +20.1
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.5m
Scoring +14.0
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +5.5
Hustle +4.4
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 43.8%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Devin Booker 31.1m
17
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
+1.1

A brutal night finishing inside the arc completely derailed his overall metrics (-10.1). He repeatedly forced contested midrange jumpers against set defenses, bleeding value on wasted possessions while offering little resistance on the other end.

Shooting
FG 6/19 (31.6%)
3PT 4/9 (44.4%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 43.7%
USG% 27.5%
Net Rtg -7.4
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.1m
Scoring +8.9
Creation +2.3
Shot Making +4.8
Hustle +5.1
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 30.8%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Jalen Green 31.0m
20
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+3.4

Strong defensive rotations and active hands (+12.3 Def) kept him engaged on one end of the floor. However, his overall impact slipped into the red due to erratic perimeter shot selection that stalled offensive momentum. He settled for contested looks from deep rather than attacking the paint.

Shooting
FG 7/16 (43.8%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.3%
USG% 30.4%
Net Rtg +12.1
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.0m
Scoring +13.3
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +3.9
Hustle +1.2
Defense +8.4
Turnovers -12.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 4
BLK 1
TO 7
S Royce O'Neale 29.0m
6
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
-9.6

Exclusively hunting looks from beyond the arc yielded poor returns and cratered his overall impact (-8.0). While his defensive positioning remained solid, the inability to generate rim pressure or connect on spot-up opportunities severely limited his floor value.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 42.9%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg -9.4
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.0m
Scoring +2.1
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.2
Defense -1.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
S Mark Williams 22.2m
10
pts
9
reb
0
ast
Impact
+8.8

Anchored the interior effectively by contesting shots at the rim and securing defensive glass. His positive impact (+3.6) was driven by disciplined paint positioning rather than offensive volume, forcing opponents into tough floaters.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 57.9%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg -20.4
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.2m
Scoring +6.7
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +11.4
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 61.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Oso Ighodaro 25.8m
14
pts
14
reb
3
ast
Impact
+14.7

Dominated the painted area with elite finishing and superb screen-setting that freed up guards all night. His towering impact score (+14.8) was a direct result of taking only high-percentage looks and controlling the interior physicality.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +36.4
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.8m
Scoring +10.9
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +17.8
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -4.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 43.8%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
18
pts
3
reb
6
ast
Impact
+8.3

Relentless perimeter ball pressure and active closeouts (+9.5 Def) defined his highly productive stint. Even with a barrage of missed triples, his constant hustle plays and disruptive passing lane deflections heavily tilted the math in his team's favor.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 4/12 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.7%
USG% 29.2%
Net Rtg +32.7
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.3m
Scoring +11.1
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +4.9
Hustle +1.9
Defense +7.1
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 3
Ryan Dunn 16.8m
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.1

Faded completely into the background during offensive sets, offering zero gravity to stretch the floor. While he chipped in slightly with hustle plays, his inability to threaten the defense allowed opponents to freely double-team primary creators.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 34.7%
USG% 7.1%
Net Rtg +40.6
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.8m
Scoring +0.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
8
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.6

Provided a sharp injection of spacing by knocking down catch-and-shoot opportunities from the corner. Maximized his brief rotation minutes by taking exactly what the defense conceded without forcing the issue.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 10.5%
Net Rtg +9.3
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.1m
Scoring +7.2
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +2.0
Hustle +5.7
Defense -3.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Amir Coffey 12.1m
2
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.7

Struggled to find the rhythm of the game during a disjointed second-quarter stint. His negative overall mark (-4.7) reflected a passive offensive approach where he frequently passed up open driving lanes.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 10.3%
Net Rtg -2.2
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.1m
Scoring +0.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0