GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

BKN Brooklyn Nets
S Danny Wolf 27.6m
14
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.6

Struggled to establish deep post position, resulting in a slew of tough, contested hooks that dragged down his efficiency. While his rim protection and defensive rebounding were adequate, his offensive struggles negated those contributions. A few costly illegal screens further hampered his overall net impact.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 52.6%
USG% 21.2%
Net Rtg +3.8
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.6m
Offense +9.0
Hustle +2.2
Defense +5.3
Raw total +16.5
Avg player in 27.6m -17.1
Impact -0.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
S Drake Powell 26.7m
9
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.4

Defensive lapses severely undercut his floor spacing contributions, as he repeatedly lost back-door cutters. He failed to close out under control, allowing straight-line drives that compromised the entire defensive shell. The perimeter shooting was a bright spot, but it couldn't mask his overall negative presence on the floor.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 13.1%
Net Rtg -5.8
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.7m
Offense +6.2
Hustle +1.5
Defense +1.6
Raw total +9.3
Avg player in 26.7m -16.7
Impact -7.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Nolan Traore 23.1m
17
pts
1
reb
4
ast
Impact
+5.2

Punished the defense's decision to play off him by knocking down spot-up triples with supreme confidence. His decisive decision-making in transition kept the opponent scrambling and unable to set their half-court defense. Maintained solid defensive positioning, rounding out a highly effective two-way performance.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 4/5 (80.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 86.0%
USG% 21.6%
Net Rtg +21.1
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.1m
Offense +13.6
Hustle +2.9
Defense +3.2
Raw total +19.7
Avg player in 23.1m -14.5
Impact +5.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S Nic Claxton 21.0m
9
pts
8
reb
5
ast
Impact
+3.4

Anchored the defense with disciplined drop coverage, forcing opponents into low-percentage floaters. Offensively, he served as an elite lob threat, drawing multiple defenders and creating gravity in the pick-and-roll. A highly efficient, mistake-free shift that provided steady, positive value.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 71.2%
USG% 18.6%
Net Rtg +10.5
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.0m
Offense +9.5
Hustle +3.0
Defense +4.0
Raw total +16.5
Avg player in 21.0m -13.1
Impact +3.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 2
S Noah Clowney 20.3m
10
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
-5.4

Offensive rhythm was entirely disjointed, characterized by rushed releases and poor spacing in the half-court. He provided decent weak-side rim protection, but it wasn't enough to cover for the empty offensive trips. Gave back too much value by biting on pump fakes and committing undisciplined fouls.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.5%
USG% 30.4%
Net Rtg -21.6
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.3m
Offense 0.0
Hustle +2.0
Defense +5.2
Raw total +7.2
Avg player in 20.3m -12.6
Impact -5.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 3
Ben Saraf 24.9m
4
pts
2
reb
7
ast
Impact
-14.7

A disastrous shooting night allowed defenders to sag off and clog the passing lanes, severely stifling the team's offensive flow. He tried to compensate by forcing tight-window passes, leading to deflections and disrupted timing. The lack of scoring gravity made him a massive liability in the half-court.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 29.1%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg +3.8
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.9m
Offense -2.4
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.8
Raw total +0.9
Avg player in 24.9m -15.6
Impact -14.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
Jalen Wilson 22.8m
6
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-3.6

Faded into the background offensively, failing to assert himself or demand the ball despite perfect shooting splits. His passive approach allowed the defense to effectively play five-on-four, stalling out several possessions. While he didn't make glaring mistakes, his lack of aggression resulted in a net negative impact.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 5.5%
Net Rtg +67.8
+/- +31
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.8m
Offense +6.0
Hustle +2.5
Defense +2.0
Raw total +10.5
Avg player in 22.8m -14.1
Impact -3.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 30.8%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Ochai Agbaji 22.4m
18
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+9.8

Broke out of a recent slump by aggressively attacking closeouts and finishing with precision at the rim. His exceptional defensive impact was highlighted by suffocating on-ball pressure that completely neutralized his matchup. Played entirely within the flow of the offense, making quick decisions that kept the ball moving.

Shooting
FG 8/9 (88.9%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 19.6%
Net Rtg +30.5
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.4m
Offense +15.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense +6.8
Raw total +23.7
Avg player in 22.4m -13.9
Impact +9.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 2
11
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
+7.0

Excelled as a secondary creator, using his length to read the defense and make the right extra pass. His active hands in the passing lanes generated crucial transition opportunities that swung momentum. Provided a stabilizing presence with timely cuts and disciplined defensive rotations.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 66.1%
USG% 19.1%
Net Rtg +59.6
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.0m
Offense +9.2
Hustle +4.2
Defense +5.5
Raw total +18.9
Avg player in 19.0m -11.9
Impact +7.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
19
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+14.8

Dominated the interior by sealing his man early and finishing with authority through contact. His physical screen-setting freed up the guards and created massive driving lanes all night. Controlled the paint on both ends, driving a massive positive swing whenever he was on the floor.

Shooting
FG 8/11 (72.7%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 80.0%
USG% 31.1%
Net Rtg +47.4
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.6m
Offense +18.1
Hustle +3.0
Defense +4.7
Raw total +25.8
Avg player in 17.6m -11.0
Impact +14.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 12.5%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 2
3
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.7

Pressed the issue during his brief stint, jacking up contested jumpers early in the shot clock. His defensive rotations were a step slow, leading to easy blow-bys that forced the defense into rotation. A highly erratic shift that actively hurt the team's rhythm.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 41.7%
Net Rtg -76.5
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.9m
Offense -1.0
Hustle +0.8
Defense -1.5
Raw total -1.7
Avg player in 4.9m -3.0
Impact -4.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.0

Blended in during his short run, offering little in the way of rim pressure or defensive disruption. He executed the scheme adequately but failed to generate any distinct advantages. A largely forgettable performance that barely moved the needle in either direction.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -76.5
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.9m
Offense -0.8
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.0
Raw total +2.1
Avg player in 4.9m -3.1
Impact -1.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
4
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.2

Maximized his limited minutes by executing perfectly within his role, setting bone-crushing screens and rolling hard to the rim. His defensive communication helped snuff out a potential opponent run during a critical stretch. Proved to be a highly efficient spark plug off the bench.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -76.5
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.9m
Offense +4.0
Hustle +1.5
Defense +2.8
Raw total +8.3
Avg player in 4.9m -3.1
Impact +5.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
MEM Memphis Grizzlies
S Javon Small 32.5m
19
pts
7
reb
3
ast
Impact
+7.7

Dictated the tempo perfectly by attacking drop coverage and finishing through contact at the rim. His stellar defensive impact stemmed from aggressive point-of-attack pressure that disrupted the opponent's offensive rhythm. A sharp uptick in scoring aggression paid off beautifully without sacrificing defensive integrity.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.6%
USG% 19.1%
Net Rtg -1.1
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.5m
Offense +14.7
Hustle +4.3
Defense +9.0
Raw total +28.0
Avg player in 32.5m -20.3
Impact +7.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
15
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.5

Careless ball security derailed an otherwise efficient shooting performance, with live-ball turnovers feeding directly into opponent fast breaks. He struggled to navigate screens defensively, frequently losing his man and compromising the team's rotation scheme. Despite decent hustle metrics, his mistakes in execution proved too costly.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.3%
USG% 15.9%
Net Rtg +2.0
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.4m
Offense +9.0
Hustle +3.1
Defense +0.7
Raw total +12.8
Avg player in 32.4m -20.3
Impact -7.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 58.8%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S Jaylen Wells 26.5m
17
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+10.8

Smashed his recent scoring averages by hunting transition opportunities and converting open catch-and-shoot looks. His elite hustle metrics reflect a relentless off-ball motor and a willingness to dive for loose balls. Perimeter containment kept opposing guards out of the paint, cementing a highly positive two-way impact.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.0%
USG% 23.7%
Net Rtg -25.9
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.5m
Offense +13.9
Hustle +8.0
Defense +5.5
Raw total +27.4
Avg player in 26.5m -16.6
Impact +10.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Cam Spencer 26.4m
6
pts
2
reb
8
ast
Impact
-2.0

Operated primarily as a passive facilitator, passing up open looks which bogged down the half-court offense. While his defensive positioning and hustle were solid, the reluctance to pressure the rim allowed defenders to aggressively play the passing lanes. His impact hovered in the negative because he failed to bend the defense as a scoring threat.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.6%
USG% 10.2%
Net Rtg -18.4
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.4m
Offense +6.2
Hustle +3.3
Defense +4.9
Raw total +14.4
Avg player in 26.4m -16.4
Impact -2.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 77.8%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 2
S GG Jackson 26.3m
18
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
-7.0

Shot selection cratered his overall value, as he repeatedly forced contested mid-range jumpers early in the shot clock. The high volume of empty possessions negated his scoring output and allowed the defense to set up in transition. Lacked the defensive intensity or hustle needed to offset his inefficient offensive night.

Shooting
FG 8/21 (38.1%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.1%
USG% 34.3%
Net Rtg -49.1
+/- -26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.3m
Offense +8.1
Hustle +1.0
Defense +0.4
Raw total +9.5
Avg player in 26.3m -16.5
Impact -7.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Rayan Rupert 35.9m
20
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.9

Perimeter shot-making kept his impact afloat, punishing defenders who dared to go under screens. However, his inability to finish inside the arc limited his overall efficiency and prevented a true breakout performance. Strong closeouts and active hands on defense helped salvage a slightly positive net rating.

Shooting
FG 5/13 (38.5%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.9%
USG% 18.9%
Net Rtg -13.4
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.9m
Offense +13.3
Hustle +4.7
Defense +5.2
Raw total +23.2
Avg player in 35.9m -22.3
Impact +0.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 35.7%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 2
7
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+9.5

Completely changed the complexion of the game through sheer effort, generating extra possessions via offensive rebounds and deflections. His staggering hustle metrics illustrate a masterclass in doing the dirty work that doesn't show up in traditional scoring columns. Locked down his primary assignment, proving that low-volume shooting nights can still yield massive positive value.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.9%
USG% 9.9%
Net Rtg -10.8
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.0m
Offense +6.4
Hustle +15.8
Defense +6.7
Raw total +28.9
Avg player in 31.0m -19.4
Impact +9.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 35.7%
STL 2
BLK 3
TO 1
13
pts
0
reb
4
ast
Impact
-12.2

Bogged down the offense by heavily relying on contested isolation plays that yielded poor returns. The resulting long rebounds fueled opponent transition pushes, compounding the damage of his inefficient shooting. Failed to leverage his playmaking, often forcing his own offense instead of finding the open man.

Shooting
FG 4/12 (33.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.2%
USG% 22.8%
Net Rtg -6.6
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.1m
Offense +0.9
Hustle +2.5
Defense +2.5
Raw total +5.9
Avg player in 29.1m -18.1
Impact -12.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4