GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

HOU Houston Rockets
S Amen Thompson 40.3m
23
pts
12
reb
8
ast
Impact
+2.7

Relentless rim pressure and elite playmaking vision generated a strong positive box score, but defensive rotational issues muted his overall impact. He consistently collapsed the paint to create high-value looks, continuing a strong run of offensive efficiency. However, giving up easy transition lanes on the other end kept his final rating surprisingly grounded.

Shooting
FG 7/15 (46.7%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 62.1%
USG% 23.5%
Net Rtg +13.6
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 40.3m
Offense +19.4
Hustle +1.5
Defense +2.2
Raw total +23.1
Avg player in 40.3m -20.4
Impact +2.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
S Kevin Durant 39.7m
32
pts
6
reb
5
ast
Impact
+11.8

Elite shot-making against heavy contests drove a massive positive rating. He consistently bailed out stagnant possessions with unguardable mid-range execution, maintaining his recent high-level efficiency. Combined with engaged weak-side defense, his offensive gravity warped the opponent's entire game plan.

Shooting
FG 13/24 (54.2%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.1%
USG% 28.7%
Net Rtg -2.8
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.7m
Offense +24.1
Hustle +2.5
Defense +5.4
Raw total +32.0
Avg player in 39.7m -20.2
Impact +11.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 47.1%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
16
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
-4.6

Poor shot selection from beyond the arc undermined his otherwise solid defensive contributions. Forcing contested triples early in possessions routinely killed offensive momentum and allowed transition opportunities. Despite holding his own on the defensive glass, the sheer volume of wasted possessions dragged his impact into the red.

Shooting
FG 6/16 (37.5%)
3PT 3/10 (30.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 48.7%
USG% 17.9%
Net Rtg +5.1
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.4m
Offense +8.9
Hustle +1.8
Defense +4.2
Raw total +14.9
Avg player in 38.4m -19.5
Impact -4.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 29.4%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
0
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.8

Total offensive zero whose defensive versatility couldn't overcome the spacing issues he created. Missing wide-open corner looks allowed the defense to completely ignore him and pack the paint. His continued shooting slump is severely limiting his overall effectiveness despite strong on-ball containment.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 4.5%
Net Rtg +3.0
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.8m
Offense +1.2
Hustle +2.0
Defense +5.5
Raw total +8.7
Avg player in 26.8m -13.5
Impact -4.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 77.8%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
S Tari Eason 19.1m
4
pts
8
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.6

A disastrous finishing night around the rim resulted in a heavily negative impact score. Wild attempts in traffic and poor decision-making neutralized his usual hustle and energy. The steep regression from his recent efficient play highlighted a tendency to force the issue against set defenses.

Shooting
FG 2/11 (18.2%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 18.2%
USG% 31.1%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.1m
Offense -5.1
Hustle +1.2
Defense +1.9
Raw total -2.0
Avg player in 19.1m -9.6
Impact -11.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
18
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+3.1

High-volume perimeter shooting and surprisingly stout point-of-attack defense kept his impact firmly in the green. Punishing drop coverages with deep triples stretched the floor beautifully for the primary creators. His willingness to compete defensively offset the minor inefficiency inside the arc.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 5/11 (45.5%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 60.5%
USG% 21.1%
Net Rtg -5.1
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.1m
Offense +8.0
Hustle +3.5
Defense +7.8
Raw total +19.3
Avg player in 32.1m -16.2
Impact +3.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
Clint Capela 21.6m
9
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+10.5

Dominant interior anchoring and highly efficient rim-running fueled a massive spike in his overall value. He completely shut down the restricted area, altering numerous attempts while capitalizing on every lob opportunity. This performance was a massive resurgence, utilizing his vertical spacing to perfection.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.4%
USG% 15.1%
Net Rtg -11.1
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.6m
Offense +9.8
Hustle +2.9
Defense +8.8
Raw total +21.5
Avg player in 21.6m -11.0
Impact +10.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 1
BLK 4
TO 1
Josh Okogie 13.2m
3
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.8

Low usage and minimal offensive involvement resulted in a relatively neutral overall impact. He provided competent defensive energy but failed to leave a significant mark on the game's flow. A slight uptick in efficiency wasn't enough to overcome his overall passivity on the offensive end.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 6.1%
Net Rtg +22.0
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.2m
Offense +3.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.1
Raw total +5.8
Avg player in 13.2m -6.6
Impact -0.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Jeff Green 8.9m
2
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.7

Defensive lapses and an inability to stretch the floor resulted in a negative stint during his brief minutes. He struggled to stay in front of quicker assignments, compromising the unit's rotational integrity. The lack of offensive punch made it difficult to justify his time on the court.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg -41.2
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.9m
Offense +2.8
Hustle +0.2
Defense -1.2
Raw total +1.8
Avg player in 8.9m -4.5
Impact -2.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
NOP New Orleans Pelicans
S Trey Murphy III 36.9m
14
pts
6
reb
7
ast
Impact
-14.6

Heavy volume with poor efficiency resulted in a cratered net impact, exacerbated by a lack of defensive resistance. Settling for contested jumpers early in the shot clock continually bailed out the opposing defense. This performance broke a steady run of reliable scoring, highlighting his struggles when forced to create off the bounce.

Shooting
FG 5/15 (33.3%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 44.1%
USG% 24.4%
Net Rtg +9.7
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.9m
Offense +2.9
Hustle +1.6
Defense -0.3
Raw total +4.2
Avg player in 36.9m -18.8
Impact -14.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
S Herbert Jones 35.1m
8
pts
9
reb
3
ast
Impact
-5.3

Elite hustle metrics and disruptive defensive activity couldn't salvage a disastrous shooting night. Clanking wide-open spot-up attempts repeatedly derailed offensive momentum and allowed the defense to sag into the paint. His relentless ball-pressure remains vital, but the lack of floor spacing severely handicapped the unit.

Shooting
FG 2/12 (16.7%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 28.2%
USG% 20.5%
Net Rtg +6.0
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.1m
Offense +1.8
Hustle +5.9
Defense +4.8
Raw total +12.5
Avg player in 35.1m -17.8
Impact -5.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
S Zion Williamson 34.1m
21
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.7

Dominant interior finishing and disciplined defensive positioning drove a highly efficient two-way performance. He completely controlled the painted area, punishing mismatches without forcing bad looks. Maintaining his recent elite conversion rate, his physical presence dictated the tempo whenever he touched the ball.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 7/9 (77.8%)
Advanced
TS% 75.2%
USG% 19.8%
Net Rtg -2.8
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.1m
Offense +15.1
Hustle +2.2
Defense +5.7
Raw total +23.0
Avg player in 34.1m -17.3
Impact +5.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 2
S Dejounte Murray 31.0m
35
pts
7
reb
4
ast
Impact
+17.8

An absolute masterclass in shot selection and offensive orchestration yielded a massive positive impact. He systematically dismantled drop coverage with lethal pull-up precision, breaking out of a recent slump in spectacular fashion. His ability to generate high-quality looks without sacrificing defensive integrity anchored the entire rotation.

Shooting
FG 14/18 (77.8%)
3PT 4/5 (80.0%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 86.6%
USG% 31.4%
Net Rtg +26.2
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.0m
Offense +27.9
Hustle +1.7
Defense +4.0
Raw total +33.6
Avg player in 31.0m -15.8
Impact +17.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Saddiq Bey 30.2m
5
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.5

A severe regression in shot-making tanked his overall rating despite highly effective perimeter containment. Wasted possessions on forced perimeter looks overshadowed his positive defensive rotations. The stark drop-off in offensive rhythm from his recent hot streak left a massive void in the team's half-court execution.

Shooting
FG 2/11 (18.2%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 21.9%
USG% 17.1%
Net Rtg -21.6
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.2m
Offense -1.3
Hustle +1.9
Defense +5.3
Raw total +5.9
Avg player in 30.2m -15.4
Impact -9.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
Yves Missi 25.4m
5
pts
7
reb
0
ast
Impact
+9.7

Defensive dominance and relentless rim protection fueled a stellar overall rating despite minimal offensive usage. He completely altered the geometry of the floor by deterring drives and racking up crucial hustle plays. Serving as an elite vertical deterrent proved far more valuable than any scoring contributions.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.5%
USG% 8.1%
Net Rtg -1.7
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.4m
Offense +6.7
Hustle +4.7
Defense +11.2
Raw total +22.6
Avg player in 25.4m -12.9
Impact +9.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 22
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
8
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.9

Perfect shooting execution and timely floor spacing maximized his value in limited minutes. He capitalized on every defensive lapse, extending a highly impressive streak of efficient conversions. Solid positional defense ensured his offensive perfection translated directly to the bottom line.

Shooting
FG 3/3 (100.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 133.3%
USG% 5.9%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.9m
Offense +11.2
Hustle +2.8
Defense +2.1
Raw total +16.1
Avg player in 21.9m -11.2
Impact +4.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 12.5%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
9
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.9

Over-reliance on the perimeter masked a severe inability to finish inside the arc, resulting in a negative overall score. His steep drop in scoring efficiency compared to recent outings stalled crucial offensive stretches. A lack of secondary playmaking or defensive disruption meant his missed layups were highly damaging.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg -37.9
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.2m
Offense +3.4
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.2
Raw total +3.8
Avg player in 13.2m -6.7
Impact -2.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Derik Queen 12.1m
0
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-6.3

Complete offensive invisibility and missed interior finishes dragged down his brief stint on the floor. Failing to capitalize on his touches stalled out second-unit possessions and erased his recent momentum. While he provided slight defensive resistance, the inability to convert easy looks rendered him a net negative.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg -42.3
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.1m
Offense -2.6
Hustle +0.2
Defense +2.2
Raw total -0.2
Avg player in 12.1m -6.1
Impact -6.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1