GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

NYK New York Knicks
S OG Anunoby 39.6m
21
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
+6.0

Elite defensive metrics and relentless hustle plays drove a highly positive impact score. He completely neutralized his primary assignment while punishing defensive closeouts from beyond the arc. A prototypical two-way masterclass defined by timely rotations and punishing spot-up shooting.

Shooting
FG 7/16 (43.8%)
3PT 5/13 (38.5%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.2%
USG% 19.5%
Net Rtg +18.6
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.6m
Offense +15.5
Hustle +6.3
Defense +7.3
Raw total +29.1
Avg player in 39.6m -23.1
Impact +6.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 0
S Jalen Brunson 38.7m
32
pts
1
reb
7
ast
Impact
+8.3

Masterful shot creation and elite decision-making in the pick-and-roll carved up the defensive scheme. He consistently generated high-quality looks, punishing drop coverage and switches alike. The offensive engine hummed flawlessly under his direction, resulting in a massive positive swing.

Shooting
FG 11/19 (57.9%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 8/9 (88.9%)
Advanced
TS% 69.7%
USG% 29.1%
Net Rtg +19.4
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.7m
Offense +24.6
Hustle +4.2
Defense +2.1
Raw total +30.9
Avg player in 38.7m -22.6
Impact +8.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Josh Hart 37.9m
10
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
-11.4

A catastrophic net rating driven by back-breaking turnovers and undisciplined fouls that constantly bailed out the opposition. Despite generating typical hustle events, the hidden costs of his erratic decision-making completely tanked his value. His chaotic transition pushes frequently ended in empty possessions.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 49.0%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg -17.2
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.9m
Offense +4.6
Hustle +4.5
Defense +1.7
Raw total +10.8
Avg player in 37.9m -22.2
Impact -11.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 24
FGM Against 16
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Mikal Bridges 37.5m
14
pts
2
reb
7
ast
Impact
-8.0

A heavy diet of contested jumpers and missed perimeter looks severely damaged his offensive efficiency. The sheer volume of empty trips overshadowed his standard defensive stability. He struggled to find any rhythm against physical on-ball pressure, leading to a highly negative overall impact.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 4/10 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 58.3%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg -12.5
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.5m
Offense +9.5
Hustle +1.4
Defense +3.0
Raw total +13.9
Avg player in 37.5m -21.9
Impact -8.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
21
pts
14
reb
1
ast
Impact
+6.4

Dominated the interior with elite positioning, securing crucial extra possessions that fueled the offense. His gravity in the pick-and-pop forced bigs out of the paint, creating a cascading advantage for slashers. A steady, physical presence that anchored the team on both ends of the floor.

Shooting
FG 8/17 (47.1%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 57.3%
USG% 35.1%
Net Rtg -21.6
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.4m
Offense +14.2
Hustle +4.0
Defense +2.5
Raw total +20.7
Avg player in 24.4m -14.3
Impact +6.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 69.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
10
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
+6.2

Provided a massive spark by attacking closeouts and converting highly efficient looks within the flow of the offense. His decisive drives collapsed the defense, allowing him to leverage solid playmaking reads. A disciplined scoring punch that perfectly complemented the starting unit's rhythm.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 72.7%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg +26.2
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.8m
Offense +12.5
Hustle +3.6
Defense +2.1
Raw total +18.2
Avg player in 20.8m -12.0
Impact +6.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
11
pts
8
reb
0
ast
Impact
+11.6

Flawless offensive execution around the rim combined with terrifying rim protection to generate a massive impact score. He completely erased opponent drives, altering the geometry of the floor with his defensive presence. A dominant interior performance defined by elite lob-catching and shot-deterrence.

Shooting
FG 5/5 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 101.1%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg +28.9
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.7m
Offense +14.4
Hustle +4.2
Defense +5.2
Raw total +23.8
Avg player in 20.7m -12.2
Impact +11.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 35.7%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
2
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.7

Completely invisible on the offensive end, failing to leverage his minutes into any meaningful production. Defensive lapses and likely foul costs compounded his lack of involvement, dragging his score deep into the red. He was routinely exploited in space during a disjointed rotation stint.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg +64.9
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.1m
Offense -0.2
Hustle +0.2
Defense +0.9
Raw total +0.9
Avg player in 11.1m -6.6
Impact -5.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-7.1

A complete offensive zero who failed to attempt a single shot, rendering his floor time entirely unproductive. His negative defensive rating suggests he was targeted and overpowered by larger matchups. The lack of his trademark disruptive hustle plays left him with no redeeming impact metrics.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 5.0%
Net Rtg -57.2
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.3m
Offense -0.2
Hustle 0.0
Defense -1.5
Raw total -1.7
Avg player in 9.3m -5.4
Impact -7.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
NOP New Orleans Pelicans
S Herbert Jones 37.0m
13
pts
2
reb
6
ast
Impact
-1.7

Despite generating significant hustle events and converting his looks efficiently, hidden costs like turnovers or foul trouble dragged his overall impact into the red. He spent too much time bailing out opponents with undisciplined reaches. His defensive rating flatlined against quicker assignments.

Shooting
FG 6/8 (75.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 81.3%
USG% 11.5%
Net Rtg +6.2
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.0m
Offense +14.0
Hustle +6.0
Defense -0.0
Raw total +20.0
Avg player in 37.0m -21.7
Impact -1.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 58.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S Trey Murphy III 35.5m
16
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.8

Settling for contested perimeter looks tanked his offensive efficiency and let the defense off the hook. The sheer volume of missed jumpers negated his solid defensive rotations and hustle contributions. A classic case of poor shot selection dragging down an otherwise active two-way effort.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 4/12 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 53.3%
USG% 19.2%
Net Rtg -16.6
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.5m
Offense +9.2
Hustle +2.7
Defense +4.0
Raw total +15.9
Avg player in 35.5m -20.7
Impact -4.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 84.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Zion Williamson 33.9m
22
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+7.7

Bullying his way to the rim yielded elite shot quality and drew heavy defensive attention. His massive defensive rating indicates he was actively disrupting passing lanes and protecting the paint. A relentless physical mismatch that forced the defense into constant rotation.

Shooting
FG 8/10 (80.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 6/8 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.4%
USG% 19.7%
Net Rtg +24.4
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.9m
Offense +18.0
Hustle +3.5
Defense +6.0
Raw total +27.5
Avg player in 33.9m -19.8
Impact +7.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 23.5%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
S Dejounte Murray 28.0m
7
pts
5
reb
12
ast
Impact
-10.4

Offensive impact plummeted due to a barrage of clanked jumpers and forced attempts in traffic. His inability to finish at the rim or connect from deep created long rebounds that ignited opponent fast breaks. The playmaking value was entirely offset by the sheer number of empty possessions he generated.

Shooting
FG 2/12 (16.7%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 27.2%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.0m
Offense +3.2
Hustle +1.2
Defense +1.6
Raw total +6.0
Avg player in 28.0m -16.4
Impact -10.4
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Saddiq Bey 27.9m
18
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-5.6

A complete lack of hustle plays and sinking defensive metrics erased the value of his perimeter shot-making. The scoring volume masked hidden costs like turnovers and undisciplined fouls that severely penalized his net rating. He routinely allowed his primary matchup to dictate the tempo on the other end.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.8%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +1.8
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.9m
Offense +12.0
Hustle 0.0
Defense -1.3
Raw total +10.7
Avg player in 27.9m -16.3
Impact -5.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
12
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.1

Capitalized on every offensive opportunity by strictly adhering to his spots and taking only optimal shots. His flawless perimeter execution stretched the floor, opening up driving lanes for teammates. A highly disciplined performance where offensive efficiency perfectly complemented solid defensive positioning.

Shooting
FG 5/6 (83.3%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg +2.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.6m
Offense +12.6
Hustle +3.0
Defense +2.6
Raw total +18.2
Avg player in 22.6m -13.1
Impact +5.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
21
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
+10.8

Sliced through the defense with exceptional shot selection, taking only high-percentage looks to maximize his floor time. His ability to consistently break down his primary defender created a massive positive swing. Active hands on defense further cemented a highly efficient two-way performance.

Shooting
FG 9/12 (75.0%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 87.5%
USG% 35.9%
Net Rtg -13.9
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.0m
Offense +16.3
Hustle +1.3
Defense +4.9
Raw total +22.5
Avg player in 20.0m -11.7
Impact +10.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
Derik Queen 18.4m
5
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
-0.9

A heavy volume of missed interior shots severely capped his offensive rating. However, he salvaged his overall impact by anchoring the defense and generating crucial hustle plays in the paint. His rim protection kept the score afloat despite the offensive struggles.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 29.6%
USG% 21.6%
Net Rtg -17.3
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.4m
Offense +1.5
Hustle +3.3
Defense +5.0
Raw total +9.8
Avg player in 18.4m -10.7
Impact -0.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Yves Missi 16.6m
2
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-1.0

Struggled to establish deep post position, resulting in low-quality attempts that failed to convert. While he provided a slight defensive deterrent inside, his inability to finish around the basket stalled offensive momentum. A disjointed stint defined by missed bunnies and offensive stagnation.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg -63.3
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.6m
Offense +5.3
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.8
Raw total +8.7
Avg player in 16.6m -9.7
Impact -1.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0