GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

LAC LA Clippers
S Kawhi Leonard 35.1m
29
pts
7
reb
8
ast
Impact
+14.2

Surgical precision in the mid-range and suffocating on-ball defense drove a stellar two-way performance. He completely neutralized his primary matchup during a pivotal third-quarter run, translating defensive stops directly into high-percentage transition looks.

Shooting
FG 10/19 (52.6%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.7%
USG% 27.1%
Net Rtg +31.3
+/- +26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.1m
Offense +25.2
Hustle +3.9
Defense +5.9
Raw total +35.0
Avg player in 35.1m -20.8
Impact +14.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
16
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.0

Exceptional weak-side rim protection anchored his highly effective night. Capitalizing on defensive breakdowns with explosive baseline cuts allowed him to shatter his usual scoring average without forcing bad shots.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 4/7 (57.1%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 55.4%
USG% 17.6%
Net Rtg -0.4
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.7m
Offense +11.8
Hustle +4.0
Defense +9.1
Raw total +24.9
Avg player in 33.7m -19.9
Impact +5.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 3
BLK 2
TO 1
S Darius Garland 30.4m
23
pts
1
reb
7
ast
Impact
+4.0

Perimeter shot creation kept the offense afloat, particularly during a crucial stretch of pull-up threes against under-screens. He surprisingly added massive value on the defensive end by jumping passing lanes and blowing up dribble hand-offs.

Shooting
FG 7/16 (43.8%)
3PT 5/9 (55.6%)
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 61.7%
USG% 28.8%
Net Rtg +30.8
+/- +20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.4m
Offense +13.2
Hustle +2.5
Defense +6.4
Raw total +22.1
Avg player in 30.4m -18.1
Impact +4.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 38.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S Brook Lopez 29.9m
16
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+10.4

Masterful drop-coverage execution deterred multiple drives, racking up significant defensive value. On the other end, his timely floor-spacing pulled the opposing rim protector out of the paint, opening up crucial driving lanes for the guards.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 85.8%
USG% 13.2%
Net Rtg +34.4
+/- +23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.9m
Offense +18.0
Hustle +2.6
Defense +7.5
Raw total +28.1
Avg player in 29.9m -17.7
Impact +10.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 57.9%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
S Kris Dunn 29.2m
5
pts
7
reb
3
ast
Impact
+1.0

Relentless screen navigation and high-level ball pressure set a physical tone at the point of attack. However, a handful of careless passing errors in the half-court prevented his elite defensive metrics from translating into a larger overall net positive.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 5.8%
Net Rtg +0.3
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.2m
Offense +5.0
Hustle +4.5
Defense +8.8
Raw total +18.3
Avg player in 29.2m -17.3
Impact +1.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 0
28
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.3

Aggressive downhill attacks generated a high volume of scoring, but his tunnel vision led to several forced attempts in heavy traffic. The sheer number of empty possessions and missed reads capped his overall impact despite the impressive scoring surge.

Shooting
FG 9/20 (45.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 8/9 (88.9%)
Advanced
TS% 58.4%
USG% 29.2%
Net Rtg +4.9
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.4m
Offense +16.0
Hustle +2.4
Defense +4.6
Raw total +23.0
Avg player in 36.4m -21.7
Impact +1.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
2
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.0

High-energy hustle plays couldn't mask a severely disjointed offensive showing. Clanking open spot-up looks and struggling to execute basic offensive sets resulted in a steep negative impact during his rotation.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 20.0%
USG% 14.6%
Net Rtg -10.3
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.6m
Offense -2.7
Hustle +4.8
Defense +1.4
Raw total +3.5
Avg player in 17.6m -10.5
Impact -7.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
4
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.3

Constant foul trouble negated his interior energy, frequently putting the opponent in the bonus early in quarters. While he finished his limited looks around the basket, his lack of discipline on pump fakes severely damaged his defensive value.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 9.5%
Net Rtg -38.2
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.6m
Offense +5.7
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.5
Raw total +8.7
Avg player in 16.6m -10.0
Impact -1.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 53.8%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.9

Sluggish closeouts and a step-slow rotation speed allowed opponents to feast on open perimeter looks during his minutes. His inability to connect on swing passes or hit open corner threes made him an offensive liability as well.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg -53.2
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.1m
Offense +0.4
Hustle +1.5
Defense +0.8
Raw total +2.7
Avg player in 11.1m -6.6
Impact -3.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
NYK New York Knicks
S Jalen Brunson 38.1m
28
pts
4
reb
8
ast
Impact
+1.3

Heavy isolation usage generated solid raw production, but a string of live-ball turnovers severely capped his overall effectiveness. Opponents successfully targeted him in pick-and-roll switches, bleeding away the value of his tough shot-making.

Shooting
FG 12/23 (52.2%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 57.6%
USG% 28.1%
Net Rtg +1.2
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.1m
Offense +17.1
Hustle +2.3
Defense +4.5
Raw total +23.9
Avg player in 38.1m -22.6
Impact +1.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 35.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S OG Anunoby 37.3m
22
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.8

Elite point-of-attack defense and relentless hustle metrics kept his floor high against primary assignments. However, his net impact barely broke even because of forced offensive possessions and ill-advised passes that killed momentum.

Shooting
FG 8/15 (53.3%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.6%
USG% 23.1%
Net Rtg -3.7
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.3m
Offense +11.0
Hustle +6.2
Defense +5.7
Raw total +22.9
Avg player in 37.3m -22.1
Impact +0.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 4
S Josh Hart 36.5m
12
pts
13
reb
3
ast
Impact
-4.4

Despite securing loose balls at a high rate, his overall impact fell into the red due to costly defensive breakdowns in transition. The raw production masked how much he gave back on the other end, specifically struggling to contain dribble penetration during key second-half stretches.

Shooting
FG 5/7 (71.4%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 80.6%
USG% 10.6%
Net Rtg -16.5
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.5m
Offense +15.1
Hustle +1.4
Defense +0.8
Raw total +17.3
Avg player in 36.5m -21.7
Impact -4.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 53.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
35
pts
12
reb
7
ast
Impact
+15.6

Unstoppable interior positioning and decisive shot selection fueled a massive positive impact. He consistently punished mismatches in the post, generating high-value looks while avoiding the sloppy fouls that often plague his defensive stretches.

Shooting
FG 13/17 (76.5%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 6/8 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 85.3%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -15.4
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.6m
Offense +31.1
Hustle +3.7
Defense +1.9
Raw total +36.7
Avg player in 35.6m -21.1
Impact +15.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 26
FGM Against 12
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
S Mikal Bridges 26.4m
7
pts
7
reb
4
ast
Impact
+3.5

Offensive passivity dragged down his typical scoring output, but his value was salvaged entirely on the other side of the ball. Stifling perimeter navigation and timely weak-side rotations ensured he remained a net positive despite the quiet shooting night.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 43.8%
USG% 13.8%
Net Rtg -32.7
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.4m
Offense +4.7
Hustle +3.4
Defense +11.2
Raw total +19.3
Avg player in 26.4m -15.8
Impact +3.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
9
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-17.4

Firing blanks from the perimeter cratered his value, as he repeatedly settled for contested early-clock jumpers. Compounding the wasted offensive possessions was his inability to stay in front of quicker guards, making him a severe liability on both ends.

Shooting
FG 3/12 (25.0%)
3PT 3/12 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 23.0%
Net Rtg +10.1
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.9m
Offense -2.8
Hustle +1.7
Defense -2.7
Raw total -3.8
Avg player in 22.9m -13.6
Impact -17.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
5
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.4

Disastrous rotational awareness on defense completely tanked his impact score during a rough second-quarter stint. He was repeatedly caught out of position on closeouts, bleeding open corner looks that erased any modest offensive contributions.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg +5.2
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.6m
Offense +1.6
Hustle +0.4
Defense +0.1
Raw total +2.1
Avg player in 17.6m -10.5
Impact -8.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
0
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.6

A complete lack of offensive gravity allowed defenders to aggressively pack the paint during his minutes. While he offered mild resistance as a drop defender, his inability to finish plays around the rim resulted in a net negative stint.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 3.7%
Net Rtg +16.7
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.4m
Offense +2.8
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.1
Raw total +5.8
Avg player in 12.4m -7.4
Impact -1.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
-6.3

Forcing wild floaters in traffic doomed his brief rotation, stalling the offense completely. The signature backcourt pressure never materialized, leaving him as a pure negative without his usual disruptive defensive energy.

Shooting
FG 0/4 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg -40.4
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.0m
Offense -1.8
Hustle +0.4
Defense -0.1
Raw total -1.5
Avg player in 8.0m -4.8
Impact -6.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.1

A disastrous three-minute cameo featured blown defensive assignments and zero offensive initiation. He was immediately targeted in space by opposing wings, forcing a quick hook from the coaching staff.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.2m
Offense -1.4
Hustle 0.0
Defense -0.8
Raw total -2.2
Avg player in 3.2m -1.9
Impact -4.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.1

Logged purely developmental seconds at the end of the rotation without registering a meaningful action. Kept the ball moving safely on the perimeter to run out the clock.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -25.0
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.9m
Offense +0.5
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.3
Raw total +1.0
Avg player in 1.9m -1.1
Impact -0.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0