Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
ATL lead SAC lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
SAC 2P — 3P —
ATL 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 182 attempts

SAC SAC Shot-making Δ

DeRozan 9/18 +0.8
Achiuwa 8/11 +3.6
Monk 5/11 -2.0
Clifford Hard 1/11 -8.7
Plowden Hard 5/9 +4.0
Jeffries Open 6/9 +2.4
Raynaud 5/8 +3.6
Hayes Hard 4/8 +3.2
Carter 1/4 -2.5
Cardwell Open 1/4 -3.1

ATL ATL Shot-making Δ

Johnson 11/21 +3.0
McCollum Hard 9/17 +3.5
Alexander-Walker 7/14 +2.4
Landale Open 7/11 +1.5
Gueye Open 4/8 -0.3
Risacher Hard 4/7 +2.9
Kispert 2/6 -2.9
Vincent Hard 1/3 -0.8
Koloko Open 0/2 -2.6
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
SAC
ATL
45/93 Field Goals 45/89
48.4% Field Goal % 50.6%
12/32 3-Pointers 16/41
37.5% 3-Point % 39.0%
11/13 Free Throws 17/22
84.6% Free Throw % 77.3%
57.2% True Shooting % 62.3%
49 Total Rebounds 51
16 Offensive 13
26 Defensive 27
27 Assists 34
1.80 Assist/TO Ratio 2.62
15 Turnovers 13
7 Steals 10
1 Blocks 3
18 Fouls 12
56 Points in Paint 44
13 Fast Break Pts 14
20 Points off TOs 20
21 Second Chance Pts 20
45 Bench Points 19
7 Largest Lead 16
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Nickeil Alexander-Walker
27 PTS · 5 REB · 8 AST · 36.2 MIN
+32.08
2
Precious Achiuwa
16 PTS · 6 REB · 2 AST · 20.2 MIN
+23.08
3
Jock Landale
19 PTS · 13 REB · 4 AST · 34.2 MIN
+22.31
4
Maxime Raynaud
18 PTS · 10 REB · 0 AST · 30.3 MIN
+19.14
5
Jalen Johnson
26 PTS · 5 REB · 10 AST · 37.0 MIN
+18.53
6
CJ McCollum
22 PTS · 4 REB · 5 AST · 30.1 MIN
+18.51
7
DaQuan Jeffries
15 PTS · 3 REB · 1 AST · 26.5 MIN
+15.89
8
DeMar DeRozan
22 PTS · 4 REB · 3 AST · 30.0 MIN
+12.13
9
Mouhamed Gueye
10 PTS · 7 REB · 2 AST · 31.6 MIN
+10.52
10
Zaccharie Risacher
13 PTS · 2 REB · 0 AST · 19.1 MIN
+10.28
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:13 D. Jeffries driving DUNK (15 PTS) (M. Monk 7 AST) 113–123
Q4 0:26 J. Johnson 3PT (26 PTS) (N. Alexander-Walker 8 AST) 111–123
Q4 0:36 J. Landale REBOUND (Off:6 Def:7) 111–120
Q4 0:37 MISS M. Raynaud Free Throw 2 of 2 111–120
Q4 0:37 M. Raynaud Free Throw 1 of 2 (18 PTS) 111–120
Q4 0:37 M. Gueye shooting personal FOUL (3 PF) (Raynaud 2 FT) 110–120
Q4 0:48 D. DeRozan REBOUND (Off:2 Def:2) 110–120
Q4 0:53 MISS M. Monk 25' 3PT 110–120
Q4 0:55 M. Raynaud REBOUND (Off:3 Def:7) 110–120
Q4 0:58 MISS D. Jeffries driving Layup 110–120
Q4 1:06 D. DeRozan REBOUND (Off:1 Def:2) 110–120
Q4 1:10 MISS N. Alexander-Walker step back 3PT 110–120
Q4 1:29 M. Raynaud Free Throw 2 of 2 (17 PTS) 110–120
Q4 1:29 TEAM offensive REBOUND 109–120
Q4 1:29 MISS M. Raynaud Free Throw 1 of 2 109–120

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 37.0m
26
pts
5
reb
10
ast
Impact
+11.6

High-usage playmaking generated immense offensive volume, but a string of careless live-ball turnovers directly fueled opponent fast breaks. His tendency to force cross-court passes against set zones allowed defenders to jump the passing lanes and swing the momentum. Despite impressive individual shot-making, these costly possession losses dragged his overall net impact into the red.

Shooting
FG 11/21 (52.4%)
3PT 4/11 (36.4%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 61.9%
USG% 28.4%
Net Rtg +32.3
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.0m
Scoring +18.6
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +6.8
Hustle +1.5
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
27
pts
5
reb
8
ast
Impact
+27.4

Delivered a masterclass in two-way impact by suffocating the point of attack and turning defensive deflections into instant transition offense. He expertly navigated ball screens to contest shooters while simultaneously orchestrating the offense with crisp, on-time reads. His relentless perimeter pressure completely short-circuited the opposing backcourt's rhythm.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 4/9 (44.4%)
FT 9/9 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 75.2%
USG% 21.8%
Net Rtg +31.2
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.2m
Scoring +21.6
Creation +3.3
Shot Making +5.1
Hustle +4.4
Defense +9.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 2
S Jock Landale 34.2m
19
pts
13
reb
4
ast
Impact
+16.7

Anchored the paint with exceptional verticality, deterring drives and dominating the glass to limit opponents to one shot per trip. His mastery of the pick-and-roll dive created consistent rim pressure, punishing switches and forcing the defense into foul trouble. This commanding interior presence dictated the terms of engagement on both ends of the floor.

Shooting
FG 7/11 (63.6%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 72.0%
USG% 17.3%
Net Rtg +35.1
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.2m
Scoring +15.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +16.5
Defense -3.7
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 47.1%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
S Mouhamed Gueye 31.6m
10
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+0.1

Surpassed his usual offensive output by confidently knocking down trail threes, but struggled mightily with defensive positioning in the paint. He was frequently sealed off too easily by opposing bigs, surrendering deep post position that led to high-percentage conversions or fouls. The interior defensive bleed ultimately outweighed his surprising perimeter touch.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 10.7%
Net Rtg +32.8
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.6m
Scoring +6.8
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +8.9
Defense -4.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 56.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
S CJ McCollum 30.1m
22
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
+14.5

Kept the offense churning by dissecting drop coverages with his patented midrange floaters and pull-ups. While his outside shot failed to connect consistently, his ability to probe the paint and collapse the defense created essential breathing room for his teammates. Disciplined positional defense helped him maintain a positive net rating despite the erratic deep ball.

Shooting
FG 9/17 (52.9%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.6%
USG% 29.0%
Net Rtg +1.6
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.1m
Scoring +15.2
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +5.8
Hustle +4.1
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Gabe Vincent 25.0m
2
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
-12.9

Provided elite point-of-attack harassment that blew up multiple dribble hand-offs, but his complete lack of offensive gravity severely cramped the floor. Defenders entirely ignored him on the perimeter, allowing them to aggressively trap the primary ball-handlers. The resulting stagnation in the half-court offense nullified his otherwise stellar defensive contributions.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg -13.1
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.0m
Scoring +0.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +0.9
Defense +4.4
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
13
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.2

Capitalized on defensive inattention by decisively attacking closeouts and sinking open spot-up looks to punish rotation errors. He provided a much-needed scoring jolt to the secondary unit, though occasional blown assignments in transition defense capped his overall ceiling. Still, his confident shot-making profile offered a clear upgrade over his recent offensive struggles.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 74.2%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -30.4
+/- -11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.1m
Scoring +9.5
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +1.6
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-14.1

A complete inability to connect from beyond the arc allowed the opposing defense to aggressively pack the paint and ignore him on the perimeter. Forced to put the ball on the floor, he often drove into traffic, resulting in stalled possessions and contested, low-value attempts. His spacing value evaporated, directly contributing to a stagnant offensive flow during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 21.6%
Net Rtg -35.3
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.8m
Scoring +0.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
0
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-11.4

Made his mark entirely without the ball by executing flawless weak-side rotations that walled off the rim during a crucial second-quarter stretch. Even though he failed to convert on his limited offensive touches, his sheer length altered multiple floaters and deterred paint touches. This specialized rim-protection role provided immense value in a short, focused burst.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 7.1%
Net Rtg -60.0
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.0m
Scoring -2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
SAC Sacramento Kings
S Maxime Raynaud 30.3m
18
pts
10
reb
0
ast
Impact
+18.8

Floor-spacing from the frontcourt opened up driving lanes for the guards, punishing drop coverages with perfect perimeter execution. He paired this offensive versatility with disciplined rim protection, contesting shots vertically without fouling to generate a strong defensive rating. His ability to stretch the floor while securing the defensive glass dictated the tempo whenever he was on the court.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 6/8 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 78.1%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg -35.0
+/- -21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.3m
Scoring +14.8
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +10.8
Defense +2.1
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 13
Opp FG% 68.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S DeMar DeRozan 30.0m
22
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+6.0

Despite efficient isolation scoring that kept the half-court offense afloat, his overall impact sank into the negative due to defensive lapses on the perimeter. He consistently lost his man off the ball, allowing back-door cuts that negated his offensive production. The heavy reliance on midrange pull-ups also stalled overall ball movement during crucial stretches.

Shooting
FG 9/18 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.9%
USG% 30.6%
Net Rtg -13.8
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.0m
Scoring +16.0
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +5.0
Hustle +4.1
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -7.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Malik Monk 27.4m
10
pts
2
reb
7
ast
Impact
-7.9

Playmaking flashes were overshadowed by erratic perimeter shooting and forced passes into traffic that resulted in costly momentum-swinging turnovers. Opposing guards consistently targeted him in isolation, exposing his lateral footwork and forcing defensive rotations that compromised the weak side. His inability to stretch the floor from deep allowed the defense to pack the paint against driving teammates.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 45.5%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg -25.9
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.4m
Scoring +5.7
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense -2.3
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
16
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+13.5

Dominated the interior matchups by converting high-percentage looks around the rim to sustain a highly efficient offensive streak. His massive positive impact was driven by relentless activity on the glass and switchable pick-and-roll defense that completely disrupted the opponent's rhythm. This two-way physical presence anchored the second unit's most successful runs.

Shooting
FG 8/11 (72.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 72.7%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -2.5
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.2m
Scoring +13.9
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +6.7
Defense +3.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Devin Carter 17.7m
2
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-16.1

Offensive rhythm completely evaporated, as poor shot selection against set defenses resulted in empty possessions that fueled opponent transition opportunities. While he offered marginal resistance at the point of attack, his inability to generate rim pressure severely handicapped the half-court offense. The drastic drop in scoring gravity allowed defenders to aggressively cheat off him into the passing lanes.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 14.6%
Net Rtg +3.3
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.7m
Scoring -0.6
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
14
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.1

Provided crucial floor spacing by knocking down catch-and-shoot looks, but gave the value right back through poor navigation of off-ball screens on defense. Opponents relentlessly targeted his side of the floor during pick-and-roll actions, exploiting his tendency to get caught on picks. The resulting defensive breakdowns completely erased the benefits of his perimeter marksmanship.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 4/8 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 77.8%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg -6.1
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.4m
Scoring +10.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +1.9
Defense -2.9
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
15
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+6.1

Energized the rotation with relentless baseline cuts and opportunistic transition finishes that punished a sleeping defense. His high-motor closeouts and willingness to dive for 50/50 balls generated crucial momentum swings during the middle quarters. By capitalizing on every defensive breakdown, he maximized his touches without disrupting the broader offensive flow.

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 79.4%
USG% 13.2%
Net Rtg +14.5
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.5m
Scoring +12.6
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +2.8
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 11.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
-19.0

A disastrous shooting night cratered his overall value, as he repeatedly forced contested perimeter jumpers early in the shot clock. The constant stream of clanked iron essentially acted as live-ball turnovers, jumpstarting the opponent's fast break before the defense could get set. Even a few disciplined closeouts on the other end couldn't salvage the severe offensive detriment he caused.

Shooting
FG 1/11 (9.1%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 13.6%
USG% 22.0%
Net Rtg -17.5
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.4m
Scoring -4.6
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +1.2
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 70.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
3
pts
7
reb
4
ast
Impact
-6.6

Struggled to finish through contact around the basket, leaving valuable points on the board during key interior sequences. He managed to salvage his shift somewhat by setting bruising screens and battling for loose balls to generate extra possessions. However, the lack of finishing gravity ultimately allowed the opposing frontcourt to roam freely as help defenders.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 33.8%
USG% 10.6%
Net Rtg -11.6
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.0m
Scoring +0.5
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +7.0
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 75.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
10
pts
1
reb
4
ast
Impact
-4.7

Capitalized on defensive sagging by confidently stepping into perimeter looks, providing an unexpected scoring punch that kept the second unit afloat. His active hands in the passing lanes disrupted opposing sets, though occasional over-helping left shooters open in the corners. This aggressive two-way approach marked a sharp, positive deviation from his recent offensive passivity.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 22.7%
Net Rtg +16.2
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.0m
Scoring +7.0
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2