Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
CLE lead MIA lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
MIA 2P — 3P —
CLE 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 188 attempts

MIA MIA Shot-making Δ

Adebayo Hard 3/14 -7.0
Jaquez Jr. 9/13 +6.5
Herro Hard 4/13 -2.9
Powell Hard 5/10 +2.2
Ware 5/10 +1.1
Fontecchio 4/7 +1.8
Jakučionis Hard 3/6 +1.6
Mitchell Hard 1/6 -4.4
Wiggins Hard 3/5 +3.9
Larsson 2/4 -0.2

CLE CLE Shot-making Δ

Mobley Open 10/15 +2.2
Strus Hard 10/14 +13.7
Harden Hard 4/11 -1.2
Allen Open 8/10 +4.2
Bryant 5/10 -1.2
Mitchell 1/10 -8.6
Merrill Hard 3/9 -1.6
Schröder Hard 3/7 0.0
Ellis Hard 4/5 +4.9
Minix 2/3 +2.6
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
MIA
CLE
40/91 Field Goals 52/97
44.0% Field Goal % 53.6%
15/46 3-Pointers 19/41
32.6% 3-Point % 46.3%
33/38 Free Throws 26/31
86.8% Free Throw % 83.9%
59.4% True Shooting % 67.3%
51 Total Rebounds 55
11 Offensive 7
34 Defensive 39
25 Assists 38
1.92 Assist/TO Ratio 3.80
13 Turnovers 9
5 Steals 9
4 Blocks 1
22 Fouls 26
46 Points in Paint 52
17 Fast Break Pts 20
17 Points off TOs 17
16 Second Chance Pts 16
74 Bench Points 75
0 Largest Lead 36
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Max Strus
29 PTS · 8 REB · 1 AST · 22.8 MIN
+25.01
2
Evan Mobley
23 PTS · 10 REB · 3 AST · 29.2 MIN
+24.29
3
Jarrett Allen
18 PTS · 10 REB · 0 AST · 18.2 MIN
+21.51
4
James Harden
17 PTS · 5 REB · 14 AST · 29.5 MIN
+20.05
5
Kel'el Ware
14 PTS · 8 REB · 1 AST · 20.7 MIN
+17.24
6
Simone Fontecchio
12 PTS · 2 REB · 0 AST · 9.9 MIN
+13.33
7
Kasparas Jakučionis
14 PTS · 3 REB · 1 AST · 19.5 MIN
+12.46
8
Norman Powell
15 PTS · 3 REB · 2 AST · 25.4 MIN
+11.36
9
Bam Adebayo
14 PTS · 16 REB · 3 AST · 30.7 MIN
+10.31
10
Jaime Jaquez Jr.
20 PTS · 2 REB · 3 AST · 21.2 MIN
+9.74
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:10 M. Gardner driving finger roll Layup (3 PTS) 128–149
Q4 0:20 TEAM delay-of-game VIOLATION 126–149
Q4 0:20 O. Sarr Free Throw 2 of 2 (1 PTS) 126–149
Q4 0:20 TEAM offensive REBOUND 126–148
Q4 0:20 MISS O. Sarr Free Throw 1 of 2 126–148
Q4 0:20 K. Jakučionis loose ball personal FOUL (3 PF) (Sarr 2 FT) 126–148
Q4 0:23 L. Nance Jr. REBOUND (Off:0 Def:1) 126–148
Q4 0:30 MISS K. Jakučionis 25' 3PT 126–148
Q4 0:40 R. Minix 3PT (6 PTS) (L. Nance Jr. 1 AST) 126–148
Q4 0:56 K. Ware Free Throw 2 of 2 (14 PTS) 126–145
Q4 0:56 K. Ware Free Throw 1 of 2 (13 PTS) 125–145
Q4 0:56 O. Sarr shooting personal FOUL (2 PF) (Ware 2 FT) 124–145
Q4 0:57 K. Ware REBOUND (Off:3 Def:5) 124–145
Q4 1:02 MISS M. Gardner 3PT 124–145
Q4 1:12 T. Proctor Free Throw 2 of 2 (6 PTS) 124–145

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

CLE Cleveland Cavaliers
6
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
+1.6

An abysmal shooting night severely handicapped the primary offense, as he forced contested looks against set defenses. Surprisingly, he managed to salvage some value by digging in defensively and generating stops at the point of attack.

Shooting
FG 1/10 (10.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.5%
USG% 18.4%
Net Rtg +18.6
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.6m
Scoring -1.4
Creation +2.3
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +5.1
Defense +8.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 2
S James Harden 29.5m
17
pts
5
reb
14
ast
Impact
+11.4

Masterful orchestration of the half-court offense drove his positive impact, systematically picking apart defensive coverages. Even with his own shot not falling efficiently, his elite read-and-react passing kept the scoreboard ticking.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 60.4%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg +38.5
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.5m
Scoring +11.6
Creation +4.5
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +1.5
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Evan Mobley 29.2m
23
pts
10
reb
3
ast
Impact
+16.9

Completely dismantled the interior defense with a relentless diet of high-percentage finishes and timely cuts. His elite two-way presence was punctuated by dominant rim protection that suffocated opposing drives.

Shooting
FG 10/15 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 72.4%
USG% 22.9%
Net Rtg +23.4
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.2m
Scoring +18.8
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +3.0
Defense -0.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Sam Merrill 26.7m
10
pts
3
reb
4
ast
Impact
-1.7

Brick-heavy perimeter shooting stalled out the offense and allowed the opponent to leak out in transition. The constant misfires from deep neutralized any value he brought as a secondary floor spacer.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.6%
USG% 13.6%
Net Rtg +41.7
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.7m
Scoring +5.3
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +0.9
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
S Jarrett Allen 18.2m
18
pts
10
reb
0
ast
Impact
+21.1

Feasted in the pick-and-roll, using his gravity as a lob threat to generate incredibly efficient offense. He controlled the paint on both ends, turning away challengers while cleaning up the glass with authority.

Shooting
FG 8/10 (80.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 82.7%
USG% 24.4%
Net Rtg +45.0
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.2m
Scoring +16.1
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +11.7
Defense -1.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 10.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Keon Ellis 24.5m
10
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-2.9

Despite hyper-efficient spot-up shooting, his overall rating slipped due to defensive miscommunications and getting caught out of position. The offensive pop was solid, but he gave up too many easy angles on the perimeter.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 91.9%
USG% 8.2%
Net Rtg +16.4
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.5m
Scoring +8.7
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +0.0
Defense -2.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Max Strus 22.8m
29
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+27.3

An absolute flamethrower from beyond the arc, he warped the opposing defensive scheme with his relentless movement and quick trigger. This nuclear shooting display single-handedly blew the game open during his shifts.

Shooting
FG 10/14 (71.4%)
3PT 8/11 (72.7%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 97.4%
USG% 27.1%
Net Rtg +39.5
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.8m
Scoring +25.5
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +8.2
Hustle +8.2
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
8
pts
0
reb
5
ast
Impact
-2.2

Over-dribbling and a failure to generate rim pressure bogged down the second-unit offense. While he managed the game acceptably, a lack of dynamic creation left his overall impact slightly in the red.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 48.1%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg +1.1
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Scoring +4.8
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
11
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.3

Traded baskets in the paint but struggled to anchor the defense when pulled into pick-and-roll actions. His interior scoring was reliable, yet his inability to secure key stops negated the offensive production.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 55.0%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg -3.7
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.0m
Scoring +6.7
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +5.1
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -4.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
6
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.1

A quiet rotational appearance where defensive lapses slightly outweighed his minimal offensive contributions. He struggled to stay in front of quicker guards, leading to defensive breakdowns.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 79.8%
USG% 23.5%
Net Rtg -28.3
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.7m
Scoring +5.2
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-12.2

Looked lost during a brief stint, failing to execute offensive sets or provide any resistance on the defensive end. The lack of physical engagement led to a quick negative swing in the margins.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -28.3
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.7m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
6
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-6.2

Maximized garbage-time minutes by decisively taking open shots and spacing the floor effectively. His readiness to fire when called upon provided a quick, positive jolt to the lineup.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg -60.9
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.7m
Scoring +5.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
1
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-13.1

Was repeatedly targeted in defensive switches, bleeding points during a very short run. Offering zero offensive counter-punch, his stint was a distinct negative.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.8%
USG% 7.7%
Net Rtg -75.0
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.2m
Scoring +0.5
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -3.1
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.1

Operated strictly as a placeholder, converting his lone opportunity but otherwise failing to influence the game's physicality. A lack of rebounding or defensive disruption kept his impact slightly below neutral.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 106.4%
USG% 23.1%
Net Rtg -75.0
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.2m
Scoring +3.5
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
MIA Miami Heat
S Tyler Herro 31.4m
11
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
-4.2

Poor shot selection and heavy bricklaying from the perimeter tanked his overall effectiveness. While he tried to compensate with secondary playmaking, the sheer volume of empty possessions proved too costly.

Shooting
FG 4/13 (30.8%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 39.6%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg -36.4
+/- -23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.4m
Scoring +4.7
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +1.9
Defense -2.5
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Bam Adebayo 30.7m
14
pts
16
reb
3
ast
Impact
+16.0

Elite defensive anchoring and relentless effort on the glass almost completely salvaged a nightmare shooting night. His inability to finish around the rim dragged down his offensive value, but his rim protection kept the overall impact near neutral.

Shooting
FG 3/14 (21.4%)
3PT 1/8 (12.5%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 27.0%
Net Rtg -26.1
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.7m
Scoring +5.2
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +19.4
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 47.1%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
S Norman Powell 25.4m
15
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.8

Despite efficient perimeter scoring, his overall impact cratered due to costly live-ball turnovers that fueled transition opportunities. He struggled to maintain defensive discipline on the wing, giving back much of the value he created on the offensive end.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 66.3%
USG% 18.3%
Net Rtg -19.1
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.4m
Scoring +11.3
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +0.9
Defense -1.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
S Davion Mitchell 24.0m
2
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
-19.7

An absolute disaster of a stint defined by offensive stagnation and an inability to break down his primary defender. Without his usual scoring punch, his lack of point-of-attack disruption left him as a massive liability on the floor.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 16.7%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg -45.0
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.0m
Scoring -1.8
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +3.1
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
S Andrew Wiggins 20.0m
12
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+2.7

A highly efficient perimeter performance was amplified by excellent activity levels off the ball. His willingness to make extra hustle plays and contest shots on the wing kept his net impact firmly in the green.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 3/3 (100.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 88.8%
USG% 14.6%
Net Rtg -36.3
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.0m
Scoring +10.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
10
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
-0.1

Maintained a positive footprint through sheer grit, logging high-level hustle plays and sturdy perimeter defense. He didn't force his own offense, instead letting the game come to him while thriving as a connective piece.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 75.3%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg -17.2
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.7m
Scoring +8.4
Creation +2.7
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +3.8
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
20
pts
2
reb
3
ast
Impact
+1.3

Scoring efficiency was entirely offset by defensive breakdowns and a string of momentum-killing turnovers. He found his spots offensively with ease, but gave up too much ground on the other end of the floor.

Shooting
FG 9/13 (69.2%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 74.4%
USG% 30.2%
Net Rtg -12.3
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.2m
Scoring +16.3
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +5.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense -2.9
Turnovers -7.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 53.8%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
Kel'el Ware 20.7m
14
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+12.3

Capitalized on his physical tools to dominate the interior, converting high-percentage looks while providing a formidable defensive presence. His rim-running and vertical spacing consistently collapsed the opposing defense.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 19.0%
Net Rtg -9.6
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.7m
Scoring +9.7
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +8.2
Defense +0.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 61.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
14
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.0

A sudden scoring surge provided a massive lift, as he confidently hunted his shot and capitalized on defensive rotations. The offensive pop was exactly what the second unit needed to maintain pacing.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.0%
USG% 14.8%
Net Rtg +20.8
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.5m
Scoring +11.6
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +3.8
Defense -3.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
12
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+5.8

Provided an explosive spark off the bench by hunting catch-and-shoot opportunities and executing defensive assignments flawlessly. This brief but highly productive burst completely shifted the momentum during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 76.1%
USG% 26.7%
Net Rtg -23.1
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.9m
Scoring +9.5
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +2.5
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.9

Struggled to find a rhythm in limited action, rushing his offensive looks and failing to bend the defense. The short stint was marred by empty possessions rather than glaring mistakes.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 38.7%
USG% 17.4%
Net Rtg +5.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.8m
Scoring +0.9
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.2
Turnovers +0.0
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
1
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.0

A completely invisible shift where he failed to register any meaningful defensive events or hustle plays. Simply existing on the floor without contributing to the margins resulted in a negative bleed.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.8%
USG% 6.7%
Net Rtg +60.9
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.7m
Scoring +0.5
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0