Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
TOR lead DAL lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
DAL 2P — 3P —
TOR 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 183 attempts

DAL DAL Shot-making Δ

Flagg 7/17 -2.0
Christie 1/11 -10.0
Gafford Open 10/10 +6.0
Thompson Hard 2/10 -4.5
Williams 4/8 +0.3
Washington Hard 3/8 -0.2
Middleton 2/7 -2.7
Bagley III Open 2/6 -3.4
Marshall Open 3/5 +0.1
Johnson Hard 0/3 -2.6

TOR TOR Shot-making Δ

Barrett 13/19 +7.8
Quickley Hard 4/14 -3.8
Barnes 6/12 +1.3
Ingram 4/12 -3.4
Walter 4/11 -5.3
Poeltl Open 8/9 +4.8
Mamukelashvili 5/9 +1.7
Dick 4/8 -0.1
Temple Hard 0/1 -1.1
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
DAL
TOR
35/88 Field Goals 48/95
39.8% Field Goal % 50.5%
5/30 3-Pointers 10/36
16.7% 3-Point % 27.8%
17/20 Free Throws 16/22
85.0% Free Throw % 72.7%
47.5% True Shooting % 58.3%
57 Total Rebounds 54
13 Offensive 8
34 Defensive 34
22 Assists 39
1.16 Assist/TO Ratio 4.88
19 Turnovers 8
5 Steals 11
7 Blocks 4
20 Fouls 19
52 Points in Paint 64
4 Fast Break Pts 21
10 Points off TOs 24
27 Second Chance Pts 15
37 Bench Points 37
3 Largest Lead 32
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Daniel Gafford
21 PTS · 11 REB · 3 AST · 23.3 MIN
+30.53
2
RJ Barrett
31 PTS · 6 REB · 3 AST · 33.6 MIN
+25.1
3
Jakob Poeltl
16 PTS · 10 REB · 4 AST · 30.5 MIN
+22.79
4
Scottie Barnes
17 PTS · 4 REB · 5 AST · 34.8 MIN
+15.78
5
Sandro Mamukelashvili
13 PTS · 7 REB · 3 AST · 17.5 MIN
+14.02
6
Cooper Flagg
17 PTS · 8 REB · 6 AST · 29.5 MIN
+13.09
7
Ja'Kobe Walter
11 PTS · 3 REB · 4 AST · 25.7 MIN
+12.03
8
Immanuel Quickley
10 PTS · 2 REB · 8 AST · 31.3 MIN
+10.51
9
Brandon Williams
16 PTS · 0 REB · 1 AST · 18.8 MIN
+6.54
10
Marvin Bagley III
6 PTS · 7 REB · 2 AST · 19.6 MIN
+6.09
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:10 B. Williams Free Throw 2 of 2 (16 PTS) 92–122
Q4 0:10 B. Williams Free Throw 1 of 2 (15 PTS) 91–122
Q4 0:10 S. Mamukelashvili shooting personal FOUL (3 PF) (Williams 2 FT) 90–122
Q4 0:29 G. Dick 25' 3PT step back (10 PTS) (J. Walter 4 AST) 90–122
Q4 0:34 S. Mamukelashvili REBOUND (Off:1 Def:6) 90–119
Q4 0:37 B. Williams BLOCK (2 BLK) 90–119
Q4 0:37 MISS G. Dick running Layup - blocked 90–119
Q4 0:41 J. Walter REBOUND (Off:1 Def:2) 90–119
Q4 0:43 MISS A. Johnson driving Layup 90–119
Q4 0:56 D. Powell REBOUND (Off:1 Def:1) 90–119
Q4 0:58 MISS B. Williams 24' 3PT 90–119
Q4 1:17 J. Walter Free Throw 2 of 2 (11 PTS) 90–119
Q4 1:17 J. Walter Free Throw 1 of 2 (10 PTS) 90–118
Q4 1:17 D. Powell loose ball personal FOUL (2 PF) (Walter 2 FT) 90–117
Q4 1:17 TEAM defensive REBOUND 90–117

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

TOR Toronto Raptors
S Scottie Barnes 34.8m
17
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
+13.3

A well-rounded floor game highlighted by decisive drives and timely perimeter shooting drove a solid positive impact. He consistently generated advantages with his physical downhill attacks, breaking down the primary shell. Strong hustle metrics (+4.0) reflected his relentless effort on loose balls and secondary actions.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.8%
USG% 16.1%
Net Rtg +28.1
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.8m
Scoring +12.3
Creation +2.2
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +5.1
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 12
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
S RJ Barrett 33.6m
31
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
+29.2

An absolute offensive masterclass defined by relentless rim pressure and highly efficient finishing. He exploited defensive gaps at will, generating a massive +23.3 box score impact through pure scoring gravity. The sheer volume of successful attacks completely overwhelmed his primary defenders.

Shooting
FG 13/19 (68.4%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 74.7%
USG% 28.2%
Net Rtg +24.2
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.6m
Scoring +25.7
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +7.2
Hustle +7.6
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Brandon Ingram 31.4m
11
pts
6
reb
6
ast
Impact
+0.4

Clunky isolation attempts and poor shooting efficiency dragged his offensive impact down significantly. Despite commendable defensive effort (+3.6 Def), his inability to convert in the mid-range stalled the half-court offense. The volume of missed contested jumpers was too much for the team to overcome during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 4/12 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 23.3%
Net Rtg +9.4
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.4m
Scoring +4.5
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +7.6
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
10
pts
2
reb
8
ast
Impact
+4.2

Overcame a dreadful shooting night by transforming into a defensive menace (+7.3 Def) and high-motor facilitator. He chased shooters off the line and generated deflections to spark transition opportunities. The playmaking and hustle (+5.8) just barely outweighed the damage done by his bricked perimeter looks.

Shooting
FG 4/14 (28.6%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 35.7%
USG% 19.5%
Net Rtg +17.7
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.2m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense +5.5
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 23.1%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jakob Poeltl 30.5m
16
pts
10
reb
4
ast
Impact
+19.5

Anchored the game on both ends with dominant interior finishing and elite rim deterrence (+9.3 Def). He punished mismatches flawlessly in the paint, continuing a highly efficient stretch of basketball. Exceptional hustle (+6.5) on the glass created crucial second-chance opportunities that broke the opponent's back.

Shooting
FG 8/9 (88.9%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 88.9%
USG% 13.7%
Net Rtg +23.2
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.5m
Scoring +15.0
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +9.8
Defense +2.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 31.2%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
11
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
+5.0

Found ways to contribute positively despite a frigid night from beyond the arc. He compensated for the missed triples by attacking closeouts and generating high-energy hustle plays (+4.9). Active off-ball movement kept the defense honest even when his jumper wasn't falling.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 0/5 (0.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 44.6%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg +46.0
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.7m
Scoring +4.6
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +3.8
Defense +2.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
13
pts
7
reb
3
ast
Impact
+6.2

Provided a massive spark off the bench by stretching the floor and executing crisp defensive rotations (+5.4 Def). His ability to pop out for perimeter looks pulled opposing bigs away from the rim, opening up driving lanes. High-IQ positioning on both ends maximized his efficiency during his shift.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.8%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg +34.5
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.5m
Scoring +9.3
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +3.1
Defense -0.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
Jamal Shead 13.9m
0
pts
1
reb
4
ast
Impact
-7.4

Operated strictly as a connector, refusing to look at the rim which allowed his defender to play free safety. While his point-of-attack defense (+2.4 Def) was solid, the lack of scoring threat bogged down the half-court spacing. The offensive passivity ultimately resulted in a slight negative impact.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +25.7
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.9m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Gradey Dick 13.0m
10
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.6

Broke out of a severe shooting slump by finding open pockets in the mid-range and transition. His offensive revival provided a much-needed scoring punch for the second unit. However, defensive lapses (-1.1 Def) allowed opponents to immediately answer, keeping his overall impact virtually flat.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.3%
USG% 25.7%
Net Rtg +52.5
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.0m
Scoring +6.2
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense -3.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.3

Managed to scratch out a neutral impact in limited minutes by drawing fouls and converting at the line. His veteran positioning prevented any major defensive breakdowns while he was out there. A purely transitional shift that neither helped nor hurt the team's momentum.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.3%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +52.2
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.2m
Scoring +1.7
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.9

Barely registered during his brief time on the floor, failing to record a single counting stat. He was a ghost in offensive sets, neither spacing the floor effectively nor setting impactful screens. The lack of any tangible contribution led to a quiet negative return.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +52.2
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.2m
Scoring +2.5
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +1.1
Defense -0.7
Turnovers -0.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
DAL Dallas Mavericks
S P.J. Washington 30.9m
9
pts
7
reb
3
ast
Impact
-3.5

High-level defensive rotations and strong contest rates (+6.8 Def) kept him playable despite a sharp drop-off in scoring punch. He failed to capitalize on inside looks, stalling the offense when he touched the ball. While his hustle metrics were solid, the steep offensive regression ultimately dragged his net impact into the red.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.7%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -21.5
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.9m
Scoring +4.4
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +2.1
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 53.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Cooper Flagg 29.6m
17
pts
8
reb
6
ast
Impact
+9.3

Elite defensive instincts (+9.3 Def) salvaged a night where his usual scoring efficiency plummeted. He struggled to find his rhythm offensively, forcing difficult looks instead of letting the game come to him. However, active hands and high-motor closeouts ensured he remained a net positive.

Shooting
FG 7/17 (41.2%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 46.4%
USG% 29.7%
Net Rtg -19.7
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.6m
Scoring +9.4
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +3.9
Hustle +4.3
Defense +5.6
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 2
BLK 3
TO 4
S Max Christie 25.6m
2
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-16.9

A disastrous shooting performance completely derailed his night, resulting in a team-worst impact score. Brick after brick from beyond the arc killed offensive momentum and allowed the defense to sag off him entirely. With minimal secondary contributions to fall back on, his minutes were highly detrimental.

Shooting
FG 1/11 (9.1%)
3PT 0/7 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 9.1%
USG% 19.7%
Net Rtg -42.3
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.6m
Scoring -6.1
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +1.9
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Daniel Gafford 23.3m
21
pts
11
reb
3
ast
Impact
+28.1

Absolute perfection around the rim fueled a massive +29.0 box score impact. He punished defensive rotations with flawless finishing, extending a dominant streak of high-efficiency interior play. Solid rim protection (+3.0 Def) ensured his offensive clinic translated directly to winning margins.

Shooting
FG 10/10 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 100.6%
USG% 19.3%
Net Rtg -14.1
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.3m
Scoring +21.0
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +14.0
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S Khris Middleton 19.2m
6
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.4

Continued a brutal shooting slump that cratered his offensive value and stalled half-court possessions. Poor shot creation neutralized his playmaking attempts, while a lack of defensive disruption failed to offset the wasted trips down the floor.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 38.1%
USG% 19.6%
Net Rtg -44.7
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.2m
Scoring +2.8
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
8
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.8

Passive offensive involvement sharply reduced his usual scoring volume, limiting his ability to influence the game. While he converted the few looks he took, a negative defensive presence erased those marginal gains. He simply floated on the perimeter rather than attacking the seams as he had in recent outings.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.0%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg -11.0
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.6m
Scoring +6.6
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +0.0
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-15.4

Continued a concerning trend of forced, low-quality perimeter shots that severely damaged offensive flow. His inability to stretch the floor effectively allowed defenders to pack the paint against drivers. Without his trademark gravity, the negative impact compounded rapidly during his shifts.

Shooting
FG 2/10 (20.0%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 23.5%
Net Rtg -20.4
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.8m
Scoring -0.6
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.2
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
6
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
-1.7

A sudden drop in finishing efficiency neutralized his usually reliable interior scoring. He still managed to secure extra possessions and hold his own defensively (+2.4 Def), keeping his impact near neutral. The lack of offensive assertiveness was the main culprit for his diminished overall footprint.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 43.6%
USG% 14.0%
Net Rtg -39.8
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.6m
Scoring +2.6
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +5.0
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
16
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.5

Steady two-way play provided a stabilizing presence for the second unit. He balanced timely shot-making with active on-ball defense (+2.6 Def) to grind out a positive margin. Smart decisions in transition helped maximize his limited touches.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 69.4%
USG% 29.8%
Net Rtg -42.0
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.8m
Scoring +12.5
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.4
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 3
Caleb Martin 15.2m
0
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-12.4

Complete offensive invisibility paired with defensive lapses resulted in a highly damaging stint. He failed to register a single productive action on the offensive end, allowing his matchup to rest on defense. Poor closeouts and missed rotations further compounded the negative impact.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 5.4%
Net Rtg -47.1
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.2m
Scoring -0.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +6.3
Defense -4.8
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
2
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-5.1

Made the most of a brief appearance by supplying intense point-of-attack defense (+2.6 Def). He kept the ball moving and avoided the careless mistakes that typically plague end-of-bench minutes. A quick, disciplined shift that perfectly executed his role.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -46.2
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.5m
Scoring +1.2
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +0.3
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
AJ Johnson 5.0m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.5

Rushed his offensive opportunities, clanking all of his attempts in just five minutes of action. The hurried shot selection derailed the bench unit's rhythm. He failed to offset the wasted possessions with any meaningful defensive resistance.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -43.2
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.0m
Scoring -2.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-15.2

Offered zero offensive utility during a short stint, failing to even attempt a shot or set meaningful screens. His defensive positioning was a step slow, yielding easy driving lanes. The complete lack of statistical production made his minutes a net negative.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -43.2
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.0m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.6
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2