GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

WAS Washington Wizards
S Bilal Coulibaly 33.7m
21
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
+1.6

Aggressive downhill driving fueled a strong offensive night, but his overall impact was dragged down by hidden transition defensive lapses. He consistently beat his primary defender off the dribble, collapsing the defense to create quality looks. However, slow recoveries after missed shots allowed the opponent to generate easy fast-break points.

Shooting
FG 8/15 (53.3%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.1%
USG% 21.5%
Net Rtg +7.4
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.7m
Offense +15.4
Hustle +3.0
Defense +3.4
Raw total +21.8
Avg player in 33.7m -20.2
Impact +1.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
S Bub Carrington 32.6m
19
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
-6.6

High-volume perimeter scoring completely masked the defensive breakdowns and spacing issues that tanked his net impact. He routinely got caught ball-watching on the weak side, leading to uncontested corner threes for the opposition. The offensive burst was impressive, but the hidden costs of poor rotation defense were severe.

Shooting
FG 7/12 (58.3%)
3PT 4/7 (57.1%)
FT 1/3 (33.3%)
Advanced
TS% 71.3%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -8.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.6m
Offense +10.7
Hustle +1.1
Defense +1.1
Raw total +12.9
Avg player in 32.6m -19.5
Impact -6.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 83.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Will Riley 28.3m
9
pts
1
reb
4
ast
Impact
-13.7

Impact absolutely plummeted due to a combination of poor shot selection and high-leverage mistakes that fueled opponent runs. Despite decent hustle numbers, his inability to convert inside the arc stalled out multiple offensive sets. He consistently lost his man on backdoor cuts, hemorrhaging points on the defensive end.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 48.3%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -30.5
+/- -21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.3m
Offense -0.6
Hustle +3.0
Defense +0.8
Raw total +3.2
Avg player in 28.3m -16.9
Impact -13.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
S Alex Sarr 22.0m
14
pts
5
reb
8
ast
Impact
+3.7

Bounced back from a rough previous outing by utilizing his length to generate extra possessions, highlighted by a strong hustle score. His playmaking out of the high post unlocked the offense, though a few careless passes limited his total impact. He effectively deterred drives to the rim, forcing opponents into low-percentage mid-range pull-ups.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.3%
USG% 30.8%
Net Rtg +13.5
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.0m
Offense +9.2
Hustle +4.3
Defense +3.4
Raw total +16.9
Avg player in 22.0m -13.2
Impact +3.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 3
3
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+1.0

Solid defensive metrics kept his head above water on a night where his recent offensive rhythm completely vanished. He compensated for the lack of scoring by crashing the glass hard and disrupting passing lanes. A few ill-advised gambles for steals prevented his net impact from climbing higher.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 9.4%
Net Rtg +2.0
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.8m
Offense +3.2
Hustle +2.2
Defense +3.7
Raw total +9.1
Avg player in 13.8m -8.1
Impact +1.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 14.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
13
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+3.3

High-energy two-way performance anchored by relentless activity in the passing lanes and strong closeouts. He capitalized on defensive breakdowns by cutting decisively to the rim, vastly improving upon his recent scoring averages. A few forced drives into traffic slightly suppressed what was otherwise a stellar two-way shift.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 60.4%
USG% 17.2%
Net Rtg -12.3
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.8m
Offense +9.3
Hustle +4.8
Defense +4.6
Raw total +18.7
Avg player in 25.8m -15.4
Impact +3.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
Anthony Gill 25.8m
13
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+7.8

Continued his streak of hyper-efficient play by feasting on dump-off passes and offensive putbacks. His elite defensive score highlights a masterful job of fronting the post and denying entry passes to bigger matchups. He played entirely within himself, making zero mistakes while punishing defensive rotations.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.9%
USG% 16.4%
Net Rtg -19.2
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.8m
Offense +13.2
Hustle +3.5
Defense +6.5
Raw total +23.2
Avg player in 25.8m -15.4
Impact +7.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
6
pts
7
reb
0
ast
Impact
-12.4

Shot selection was the primary culprit for a cratered impact score, as he persistently settled for contested threes instead of attacking closeouts. These long misses frequently ignited the opponent's transition game before the defense could get set. Even solid rebounding numbers couldn't salvage the damage done by his perimeter inefficiency.

Shooting
FG 2/11 (18.2%)
3PT 1/8 (12.5%)
FT 1/3 (33.3%)
Advanced
TS% 24.4%
USG% 29.2%
Net Rtg -52.3
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Offense -3.2
Hustle +2.5
Defense +0.2
Raw total -0.5
Avg player in 19.9m -11.9
Impact -12.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 72.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Jaden Hardy 19.2m
10
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.4

Efficient spot-up shooting kept his offensive value afloat, though a lack of defensive resistance limited his overall ceiling. He provided a crucial spark by attacking scrambled defenses in the secondary break. However, he struggled to navigate off-ball screens, frequently leaving his assignment wide open on the perimeter.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg -55.0
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.2m
Offense +8.8
Hustle +3.5
Defense +0.6
Raw total +12.9
Avg player in 19.2m -11.5
Impact +1.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
3
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-12.2

Offensive rhythm completely collapsed, leading to a disastrous net impact driven by forced shots and poor floor mapping. His inability to penetrate the first line of defense resulted in stagnant, late-clock heaves. Defensive liabilities were exposed as he was repeatedly targeted in pick-and-roll switches.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg -39.4
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.8m
Offense -1.8
Hustle +1.2
Defense -0.5
Raw total -1.1
Avg player in 18.8m -11.1
Impact -12.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 85.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
OKC Oklahoma City Thunder
40
pts
3
reb
7
ast
Impact
+13.7

Unstoppable isolation scoring generated a massive box score advantage, though hidden costs like live-ball turnovers slightly depressed his overall net impact. He relentlessly targeted mismatches on the perimeter, breaking down the primary defender at will. Even with a heavy offensive burden, he maintained positive defensive metrics through timely weak-side digs.

Shooting
FG 17/27 (63.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 5/8 (62.5%)
Advanced
TS% 65.5%
USG% 40.0%
Net Rtg +14.3
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.8m
Offense +28.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense +2.8
Raw total +32.7
Avg player in 31.8m -19.0
Impact +13.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Chet Holmgren 26.9m
18
pts
10
reb
0
ast
Impact
+13.5

Elite interior presence anchored the positive impact, driven by a massive defensive score that reflects premium rim deterrence. His highly efficient shot profile inside the arc punished undersized matchups all night. Only a few transition lapses kept his total from matching his raw box score production.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 77.3%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg +39.4
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.9m
Offense +18.3
Hustle +3.4
Defense +7.8
Raw total +29.5
Avg player in 26.9m -16.0
Impact +13.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 31.2%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
9
pts
20
reb
10
ast
Impact
+16.2

Masterful performance defined by elite connecting play and relentless activity on the glass, reflected in a massive hustle score. His defensive impact came from flawless drop-coverage execution that completely neutralized Washington's pick-and-roll game. He consistently generated extra possessions without demanding offensive touches.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/4 (25.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.4%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +22.7
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.1m
Offense +15.3
Hustle +5.8
Defense +10.1
Raw total +31.2
Avg player in 25.1m -15.0
Impact +16.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 38.9%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
S Ajay Mitchell 15.2m
14
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
+5.7

Crisp perimeter execution and flawless deep shooting drove a highly efficient offensive stint. He maximized his limited minutes by attacking closeouts decisively rather than settling for contested mid-range looks. Solid point-of-attack defense ensured he wasn't giving back his offensive gains on the other end.

Shooting
FG 6/10 (60.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 70.0%
USG% 30.6%
Net Rtg -15.6
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.2m
Offense +10.7
Hustle +1.5
Defense +2.6
Raw total +14.8
Avg player in 15.2m -9.1
Impact +5.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Cason Wallace 14.7m
4
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
-1.3

Despite decent defensive metrics, his overall impact slipped into the red due to hidden mistakes in the half-court offense. A sharp drop in his usual scoring rhythm forced him into passive positioning, crippling the team's spacing. He gave back value through poor rotation timing during a crucial second-half stretch.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.4%
USG% 8.6%
Net Rtg -1.4
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.7m
Offense +5.9
Hustle +0.2
Defense +1.4
Raw total +7.5
Avg player in 14.7m -8.8
Impact -1.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Isaiah Joe 30.5m
9
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.8

Brutal perimeter efficiency cratered his overall impact despite commendable hustle metrics. Firing blanks from deep allowed the defense to ignite fast breaks off long rebounds, heavily penalizing his net score. His inability to punish drop coverage from the outside stalled the offense during critical half-court sets.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 48.3%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg +18.5
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.5m
Offense +3.4
Hustle +4.0
Defense +2.1
Raw total +9.5
Avg player in 30.5m -18.3
Impact -8.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Jared McCain 28.1m
18
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.1

A massive scoring surge masked significant hidden negatives that dragged his net impact down to neutral. While his aggressive perimeter shooting broke a recent slump, he gave back nearly all of that value through defensive miscommunications in transition. The volume of his outside attempts offset the damage of poor closeout recoveries.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 4/10 (40.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 55.1%
USG% 21.3%
Net Rtg +20.9
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.1m
Offense +13.0
Hustle +1.4
Defense +2.4
Raw total +16.8
Avg player in 28.1m -16.7
Impact +0.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
5
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.2

Offensive struggles severely dragged down his impact despite excellent hustle and defensive effort. A stark departure from his recent efficient stretch saw him force contested drives into traffic, resulting in empty possessions. His relentless off-ball movement couldn't offset the damage done by poor finishing at the rim.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 17.6%
Net Rtg +5.1
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.6m
Offense -4.9
Hustle +4.2
Defense +2.8
Raw total +2.1
Avg player in 20.6m -12.3
Impact -10.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 64.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
Alex Caruso 19.7m
4
pts
1
reb
5
ast
Impact
-3.7

Defensive menace whose value was ultimately undone by offensive passivity and spacing issues. By passing up open perimeter looks, he allowed defenders to sag into the paint and clog driving lanes for teammates. A few costly fouling sequences on the perimeter further eroded his net impact.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +37.7
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.7m
Offense +2.8
Hustle +1.2
Defense +4.0
Raw total +8.0
Avg player in 19.7m -11.7
Impact -3.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
11
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.0

Snapped out of a brutal shooting slump by taking high-conviction shots within the flow of the offense. His impact was driven entirely by hyper-efficient finishing around the basket rather than settling for contested jumpers. He provided steady, mistake-free minutes that perfectly complemented the starting unit.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.4%
USG% 20.6%
Net Rtg +25.9
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.5m
Offense +11.6
Hustle +0.2
Defense +1.3
Raw total +13.1
Avg player in 13.5m -8.1
Impact +5.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+1.5

Managed to stay in the green purely through elite defensive positioning and drawing crucial offensive fouls. His complete lack of offensive production was masked by his ability to execute defensive rotations flawlessly during a short stint. He anchored the second-unit defense by completely shutting off the baseline.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 4.8%
Net Rtg +42.1
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.8m
Offense -0.6
Hustle +1.8
Defense +5.5
Raw total +6.7
Avg player in 8.8m -5.2
Impact +1.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
0
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.1

A pure cardio outing where he essentially played to a draw during his brief time on the floor. He maintained structural integrity on defense by staying attached to shooters, but offered zero gravity on the offensive end. The lack of any tangible hustle plays kept his impact hovering right at zero.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.1m
Offense +1.3
Hustle 0.0
Defense +1.7
Raw total +3.0
Avg player in 5.1m -3.1
Impact -0.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0