Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
ATL lead DAL lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
DAL 2P — 3P —
ATL 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 181 attempts

DAL DAL Shot-making Δ

Thompson Hard 8/16 +5.4
Flagg 6/16 -3.2
Washington 3/11 -5.8
Marshall 5/9 +2.2
Gafford Open 6/9 +0.2
Middleton Hard 5/8 +4.7
Bagley III Open 3/7 -1.6
Christie Hard 2/6 -0.5
Williams Open 3/4 +1.0

ATL ATL Shot-making Δ

Alexander-Walker 12/19 +9.1
Johnson 10/18 +2.0
McCollum Hard 5/15 -3.0
Okongwu 7/12 +4.1
Daniels 6/11 -0.4
Landale Hard 0/5 -4.6
Vincent Hard 3/4 +3.9
Gueye Open 3/4 +0.7
Risacher Open 2/4 -0.8
Kispert 1/3 -1.3
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
DAL
ATL
41/86 Field Goals 49/95
47.7% Field Goal % 51.6%
13/32 3-Pointers 14/36
40.6% 3-Point % 38.9%
17/22 Free Throws 12/18
77.3% Free Throw % 66.7%
58.5% True Shooting % 60.2%
49 Total Rebounds 53
12 Offensive 13
31 Defensive 32
28 Assists 29
2.00 Assist/TO Ratio 2.90
14 Turnovers 9
6 Steals 8
0 Blocks 8
16 Fouls 18
48 Points in Paint 60
7 Fast Break Pts 26
13 Points off TOs 21
14 Second Chance Pts 24
57 Bench Points 23
2 Largest Lead 18
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Dyson Daniels
14 PTS · 7 REB · 10 AST · 36.0 MIN
+25.08
2
Jalen Johnson
27 PTS · 7 REB · 8 AST · 37.8 MIN
+24.46
3
Onyeka Okongwu
18 PTS · 9 REB · 2 AST · 32.5 MIN
+21.73
4
Nickeil Alexander-Walker
29 PTS · 2 REB · 3 AST · 36.7 MIN
+20.79
5
Klay Thompson
21 PTS · 1 REB · 1 AST · 28.0 MIN
+17.34
6
Daniel Gafford
14 PTS · 10 REB · 1 AST · 25.4 MIN
+15.32
7
Mouhamed Gueye
9 PTS · 5 REB · 0 AST · 10.3 MIN
+12.48
8
Brandon Williams
13 PTS · 2 REB · 5 AST · 17.6 MIN
+12.37
9
Khris Middleton
16 PTS · 1 REB · 2 AST · 23.8 MIN
+9.01
10
Marvin Bagley III
7 PTS · 6 REB · 6 AST · 20.6 MIN
+8.79
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:04 ATL shot clock Team TURNOVER 112–124
Q4 0:28 J. Johnson REBOUND (Off:0 Def:7) 112–124
Q4 0:31 MISS K. Middleton 10' fadeaway Shot 112–124
Q4 0:38 K. Middleton REBOUND (Off:0 Def:1) 112–124
Q4 0:42 MISS C. McCollum 24' pullup 3PT 112–124
Q4 0:58 C. Flagg tip Layup (14 PTS) 112–124
Q4 0:58 C. Flagg REBOUND (Off:2 Def:10) 110–124
Q4 1:00 MISS C. Flagg 9' driving floating Shot 110–124
Q4 1:08 O. Okongwu traveling TURNOVER (1 TO) 110–124
Q4 1:17 O. Okongwu REBOUND (Off:2 Def:7) 110–124
Q4 1:26 MISS P. Washington 3PT 110–124
Q4 1:34 J. Johnson running DUNK (27 PTS) (D. Daniels 10 AST) 110–124
Q4 1:36 N. Alexander-Walker STEAL (2 STL) 110–122
Q4 1:36 K. Middleton bad pass TURNOVER (3 TO) 110–122
Q4 1:38 O. Okongwu personal FOUL (1 PF) 110–122

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

ATL Atlanta Hawks
S Jalen Johnson 37.8m
27
pts
7
reb
8
ast
Impact
+15.7

Overwhelmed defenders with a relentless downhill attacking style that consistently collapsed the paint. His ability to grab the rebound and immediately push the tempo created massive matchup problems in semi-transition. The sheer physical dominance on drives translated directly to a massive positive impact.

Shooting
FG 10/18 (55.6%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 5/7 (71.4%)
Advanced
TS% 64.0%
USG% 24.7%
Net Rtg +20.5
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.8m
Scoring +20.2
Creation +2.2
Shot Making +4.4
Hustle +2.1
Defense -1.3
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
29
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
+16.5

Caught fire from the perimeter, punishing under-screens and late rotations with lethal efficiency. His aggressive shot-hunting forced the defense into constant scramble mode, opening up the floor for the rest of the unit. The scoring outburst was the primary engine behind his highly positive net rating.

Shooting
FG 12/19 (63.2%)
3PT 5/8 (62.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 76.3%
USG% 26.7%
Net Rtg +27.6
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.7m
Scoring +24.2
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +7.7
Hustle +0.6
Defense +3.1
Turnovers -9.5
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 4
S Dyson Daniels 36.0m
14
pts
7
reb
10
ast
Impact
+15.9

Dictated the pace of the game brilliantly, using his size to see over traps and deliver pinpoint passes to cutters. His suffocating point-of-attack defense disrupted the opponent's primary actions, generating deflections that fueled transition breaks. A masterclass in two-way floor generalship heavily drove winning basketball.

Shooting
FG 6/11 (54.5%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.9%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +30.8
+/- +20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.0m
Scoring +9.7
Creation +2.4
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +5.0
Defense +6.8
Turnovers +0.0
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 0
S Onyeka Okongwu 32.5m
18
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
+21.6

Anchored the interior with exceptional rim protection while unexpectedly stretching the floor from beyond the arc. His elite activity level on loose balls and timely weak-side blocks completely neutralized the opponent's interior attack. The combination of hustle plays and floor-spacing made him the most impactful player on the court.

Shooting
FG 7/12 (58.3%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.9%
USG% 18.4%
Net Rtg +38.3
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.5m
Scoring +13.9
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +4.7
Hustle +11.4
Defense +4.0
Turnovers -1.1
STL 1
BLK 4
TO 1
S CJ McCollum 28.0m
13
pts
9
reb
4
ast
Impact
-0.6

A brutal night of shot selection saw him repeatedly force contested pull-ups early in the shot clock. The high volume of empty possessions allowed the opponent to leak out for easy transition buckets, deeply hurting his overall impact. His inability to adapt to physical perimeter defense derailed the offensive flow.

Shooting
FG 5/15 (33.3%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 1/3 (33.3%)
Advanced
TS% 39.8%
USG% 26.5%
Net Rtg +31.8
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.0m
Scoring +5.1
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +9.5
Defense -3.1
Turnovers -4.7
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
4
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.9

Struggled to assert himself within the offensive flow, often floating on the perimeter without cutting with purpose. His hesitation to attack closeouts allowed the defense to recover easily, stalling out several possessions. The lack of offensive assertiveness dragged his overall impact into the negative.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 11.4%
Net Rtg -25.8
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.4m
Scoring +2.6
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.8
Hustle +2.8
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Jock Landale 15.5m
0
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-14.6

A complete lack of touch around the basket turned his offensive minutes into a black hole. By missing multiple bunnies and forcing ill-advised outside shots, he actively killed the team's momentum during his stint. The inability to finish plays or secure contested rebounds resulted in a disastrous net rating.

Shooting
FG 0/5 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 12.8%
Net Rtg -40.6
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.5m
Scoring -3.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +3.8
Defense -2.9
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
2
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-12.3

Failed to leverage his shooting gravity, rarely moving without the ball to create separation. When he did catch it, his slow release allowed defenders to contest heavily, rendering him ineffective as a spacer. The lack of dynamic movement and scoring punch severely limited his usefulness.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 8.8%
Net Rtg -7.1
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.8m
Scoring +0.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Gabe Vincent 11.0m
8
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.1

Provided a sudden jolt of bench scoring by confidently stepping into catch-and-shoot opportunities. While his defensive rotations were occasionally a step slow, the hyper-efficient offensive burst kept his head above water. He maximized a short stint by aggressively hunting his spots without turning the ball over.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 14.8%
Net Rtg -34.8
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.0m
Scoring +7.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +0.0
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
9
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
+3.5

Changed the complexion of the game with relentless energy on the offensive glass and high-motor rim runs. His willingness to do the dirty work created crucial second-chance opportunities that broke the opponent's back. A massive positive impact driven entirely by effort, efficiency, and hustle plays.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.1%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg -4.3
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.3m
Scoring +7.7
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +1.2
Hustle +6.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
DAL Dallas Mavericks
S Cooper Flagg 32.1m
14
pts
12
reb
5
ast
Impact
+5.0

Offensive inefficiency dragged down his overall impact despite a solid defensive rating. He struggled to find his rhythm against physical perimeter coverage, settling for contested mid-range looks instead of attacking the rim. The high volume of empty possessions ultimately outweighed his positive contributions on the glass.

Shooting
FG 6/16 (37.5%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.5%
USG% 23.8%
Net Rtg -22.6
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.1m
Scoring +7.1
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +8.4
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -4.7
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Naji Marshall 29.9m
14
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-0.4

Efficient scoring numbers were overshadowed by defensive lapses and poor rotational timing on the perimeter. He was repeatedly targeted in isolation down the stretch, bleeding points that negated his offensive production. The lack of off-ball awareness ultimately drove his negative final impact score.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 70.9%
USG% 18.1%
Net Rtg -31.1
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.9m
Scoring +11.1
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +1.6
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -6.6
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S P.J. Washington 28.8m
7
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.0

A disastrous shooting night from beyond the arc completely neutralized his spacing value. His inability to punish late closeouts allowed the defense to pack the paint, stalling the half-court offense. While his weak-side rotations remained crisp, the offensive dead weight cratered his overall net rating.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 29.5%
USG% 17.6%
Net Rtg -19.7
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.8m
Scoring +0.7
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +5.7
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -3.1
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Daniel Gafford 25.4m
14
pts
10
reb
1
ast
Impact
+7.2

Sustained his elite finishing at the rim by consistently beating his man down the floor in transition. His vertical spacing created massive gravity in the pick-and-roll, opening up driving lanes for the guards. He remained a reliable offensive anchor, converting high-percentage looks without demanding post touches.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.1%
USG% 19.7%
Net Rtg -40.4
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.4m
Scoring +10.5
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +12.7
Defense -3.9
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Max Christie 24.8m
6
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.8

Settled exclusively for perimeter jumpers, failing to put any pressure on the rim or collapse the defense. Despite showing active hands and fighting over screens defensively, his one-dimensional offensive approach stalled momentum. The lack of offensive versatility made him a net negative during his rotation minutes.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg -25.9
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.8m
Scoring +2.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
21
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+9.0

Broke out of a recent slump by hunting shots early in the shot clock and punishing drop coverage. His off-ball movement completely warped the opposing defensive scheme, creating chaos on flare screens. The sheer gravity of his perimeter shooting drove a highly positive overall impact.

Shooting
FG 8/16 (50.0%)
3PT 5/11 (45.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 65.6%
USG% 23.9%
Net Rtg -19.7
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.1m
Scoring +15.2
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +6.4
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.1
Turnovers +0.0
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
16
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.7

Found his scoring touch again by operating methodically out of the mid-post and taking what the defense yielded. While his offensive efficiency was a major plus, sluggish transition defense kept his overall impact hovering near neutral. He capitalized on smaller matchups but gave some value back on the other end.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 82.0%
USG% 23.6%
Net Rtg +12.0
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.8m
Scoring +14.2
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +3.7
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -7.1
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
7
pts
6
reb
6
ast
Impact
-0.9

A completely neutral performance where solid playmaking out of the high post was offset by struggles finishing inside. He failed to establish deep position against stronger matchups, resulting in forced hooks and missed opportunities around the basket. The balanced give-and-take left his overall impact flat.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 14.6%
Net Rtg +15.3
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.6m
Scoring +3.4
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +7.6
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
13
pts
2
reb
5
ast
Impact
+0.8

Provided a massive spark of efficient offense by attacking closeouts and making quick, decisive reads. His ability to collapse the defense and kick out to shooters kept the ball moving and the offense humming. He maximized his limited minutes by playing within the flow of the system and avoiding forced shots.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 86.4%
USG% 22.0%
Net Rtg +7.0
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.6m
Scoring +11.6
Creation +2.2
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
3
ast
Impact
-17.6

Completely invisible on the offensive end, failing to initiate sets or look for his own shot. His passivity allowed defenders to sag off and clog passing lanes, bogging down the second unit. The lack of aggression and poor point-of-attack defense resulted in a steep negative rating.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 10.5%
Net Rtg +26.3
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.0m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -4.7
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2