GAME ANALYSIS

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

MEM Memphis Grizzlies
S Rayan Rupert 37.6m
13
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
-3.6

Despite a surprising surge in scoring volume, hidden mistakes like poorly timed fouls and defensive lapses dragged his net rating into the red. He struggled to maintain consistency over a massive minute load, eventually wearing down and conceding easy transition opportunities. The counting stats masked a fundamentally flawed floor game.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.7%
USG% 14.1%
Net Rtg -22.5
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.6m
Offense +8.6
Hustle +4.6
Defense +4.9
Raw total +18.1
Avg player in 37.6m -21.7
Impact -3.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 35.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jaylen Wells 32.4m
23
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+8.3

Capitalized on defensive inattention to deliver a massive, unexpected scoring punch from the wing. His confident shot-making stretched the floor and consistently punished late closeouts. This sudden offensive eruption provided a crucial secondary scoring dimension that the team desperately needed.

Shooting
FG 7/15 (46.7%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 6/6 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.2%
USG% 21.5%
Net Rtg -27.1
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.4m
Offense +18.9
Hustle +3.8
Defense +4.2
Raw total +26.9
Avg player in 32.4m -18.6
Impact +8.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
S GG Jackson 30.7m
20
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+1.5

Relentless attacking of the basket salvaged a performance that was nearly derailed by poor perimeter shot selection. He consistently bailed out the defense by settling for contested threes instead of utilizing his physical advantages inside. High-end hustle metrics barely kept his overall impact above water.

Shooting
FG 8/15 (53.3%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.1%
USG% 25.3%
Net Rtg +8.4
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.7m
Offense +12.2
Hustle +4.8
Defense +2.2
Raw total +19.2
Avg player in 30.7m -17.7
Impact +1.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S Javon Small 28.1m
19
pts
2
reb
9
ast
Impact
+4.5

Masterful orchestration of the pick-and-roll allowed him to dissect the defense with both his passing and efficient scoring. He consistently made the right reads in traffic, generating high-quality looks while maintaining excellent ball security. Elite hustle metrics further highlighted his complete command of the game's tempo.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.0%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +7.3
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.1m
Offense +12.7
Hustle +5.4
Defense +2.6
Raw total +20.7
Avg player in 28.1m -16.2
Impact +4.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
9
pts
8
reb
2
ast
Impact
-2.6

An icy shooting night from beyond the arc completely short-circuited his offensive value and broke a recent streak of high efficiency. He kept firing despite the slump, resulting in empty possessions that fueled opponent fast breaks. Exceptional defensive metrics were the only thing preventing a total statistical collapse.

Shooting
FG 4/13 (30.8%)
3PT 1/8 (12.5%)
FT 0/3 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 31.4%
USG% 23.4%
Net Rtg -30.9
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.5m
Offense +2.4
Hustle +3.1
Defense +7.2
Raw total +12.7
Avg player in 26.5m -15.3
Impact -2.6
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
8
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
-8.3

Offensive rhythm was completely derailed by forced shots in the mid-range and an inability to finish through contact. The resulting inefficiency created long rebounds and easy transition chances for the opposition. While his point-of-attack defense was passable, it couldn't compensate for the offensive dead weight.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 33.7%
USG% 16.3%
Net Rtg +7.6
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.2m
Offense +4.3
Hustle +2.5
Defense +2.9
Raw total +9.7
Avg player in 31.2m -18.0
Impact -8.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
Tyler Burton 29.4m
3
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-20.9

A catastrophic perimeter shooting performance single-handedly killed multiple offensive rallies. He repeatedly clanked wide-open looks from deep, allowing the opposing defense to aggressively trap the primary ball-handlers. This offensive black hole resulted in the worst net impact score on the roster.

Shooting
FG 1/9 (11.1%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 16.7%
USG% 13.7%
Net Rtg -1.6
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.4m
Offense -5.8
Hustle +1.6
Defense +0.2
Raw total -4.0
Avg player in 29.4m -16.9
Impact -20.9
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
17
pts
10
reb
2
ast
Impact
+18.7

Anchored the entire defensive scheme with elite rim protection and flawless weak-side rotations. He paired this defensive masterclass with a surprising offensive breakout, knocking down timely perimeter shots to punish sagging defenders. A truly dominant two-way showing that swung the momentum of the game.

Shooting
FG 7/12 (58.3%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 70.8%
USG% 20.6%
Net Rtg +11.6
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.1m
Offense +19.4
Hustle +1.9
Defense +11.3
Raw total +32.6
Avg player in 24.1m -13.9
Impact +18.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
DAL Dallas Mavericks
S Cooper Flagg 33.2m
13
pts
6
reb
7
ast
Impact
-3.1

Opposing schemes successfully neutralized his recent scoring tear by forcing heavily contested jumpers all night. The resulting inefficiency completely tanked his overall impact despite maintaining decent hustle metrics. His inability to find a rhythm from deep allowed the defense to pack the paint.

Shooting
FG 6/16 (37.5%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 38.5%
USG% 20.5%
Net Rtg +15.9
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.2m
Offense +12.0
Hustle +2.9
Defense +1.2
Raw total +16.1
Avg player in 33.2m -19.2
Impact -3.1
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 53.8%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S P.J. Washington 28.0m
12
pts
10
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.7

Floor spacing suffered immensely as his perimeter attempts repeatedly drew iron. While his defensive rotations remained sharp, the offensive drag from those empty possessions pulled his net rating into the red. He failed to punish closeouts, settling for contested looks instead.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.6%
USG% 17.9%
Net Rtg +5.3
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.0m
Offense +7.3
Hustle +0.8
Defense +3.3
Raw total +11.4
Avg player in 28.0m -16.1
Impact -4.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S Daniel Gafford 27.3m
22
pts
14
reb
1
ast
Impact
+13.3

Absolute dominance in the restricted area drove a massive positive impact. He capitalized on every pick-and-roll opportunity, continuing a highly efficient finishing streak that completely warped the opponent's interior defense. Elite rim protection metrics further cemented his two-way value.

Shooting
FG 9/12 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/7 (57.1%)
Advanced
TS% 72.9%
USG% 23.3%
Net Rtg +8.2
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.3m
Offense +21.1
Hustle +3.2
Defense +4.7
Raw total +29.0
Avg player in 27.3m -15.7
Impact +13.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S Max Christie 24.6m
13
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.5

Strong point-of-attack defense was completely undone by erratic offensive execution. Despite finding some success from the perimeter, his overall impact cratered due to empty possessions and poor decision-making in traffic. The scoring bump was a mirage masking significant structural flaws in his floor game.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 54.2%
USG% 26.2%
Net Rtg +13.1
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.6m
Offense -2.7
Hustle +2.9
Defense +5.5
Raw total +5.7
Avg player in 24.6m -14.2
Impact -8.5
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 5
S Naji Marshall 23.3m
5
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
-18.7

A brutal regression to the mean offensively completely torpedoed his overall value. He repeatedly stalled out half-court sets by forcing bad shots and failing to connect from deep. Even respectable defensive effort couldn't salvage a performance defined by offensive stagnation.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 31.7%
USG% 22.6%
Net Rtg -3.7
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 23.3m
Offense -10.4
Hustle +1.1
Defense +4.0
Raw total -5.3
Avg player in 23.3m -13.4
Impact -18.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 6
12
pts
8
reb
5
ast
Impact
+5.2

Smothering perimeter defense served as the primary catalyst for his positive overall grade. While his outside shot abandoned him, he compensated by making decisive reads and disrupting passing lanes. The defensive intensity set a tone that elevated the second unit.

Shooting
FG 4/8 (50.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 61.5%
USG% 16.2%
Net Rtg -8.3
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.2m
Offense +10.0
Hustle +3.5
Defense +8.1
Raw total +21.6
Avg player in 28.2m -16.4
Impact +5.2
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 15.4%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 2
35
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
+26.8

An absolute masterclass in perimeter shot-making single-handedly broke the opponent's defensive scheme. He punished every late rotation with lethal efficiency from deep, snapping out of a recent slump in spectacular fashion. This nuclear offensive explosion resulted in a stratospheric overall impact rating.

Shooting
FG 10/17 (58.8%)
3PT 8/10 (80.0%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 87.2%
USG% 30.3%
Net Rtg +38.9
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.7m
Offense +32.4
Hustle +2.7
Defense +6.0
Raw total +41.1
Avg player in 24.7m -14.3
Impact +26.8
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 36.4%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
6
pts
9
reb
0
ast
Impact
+7.0

Thrived by accepting a low-usage, high-energy role rather than forcing offensive touches. Excellent rotational defense and relentless activity on the glass drove a highly positive net rating despite a sharp drop in scoring volume. He maximized his minutes by doing the dirty work in the paint.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 9.8%
Net Rtg +17.4
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.1m
Offense +8.1
Hustle +4.2
Defense +5.6
Raw total +17.9
Avg player in 19.1m -10.9
Impact +7.0
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 31.2%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 0
Caleb Martin 14.6m
2
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.3

Floated through his minutes without leaving any tangible imprint on the offensive end. The lack of aggression allowed his defender to freely roam and clog the paint for others. A completely passive stint dragged down the lineup's overall productivity.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 10.3%
Net Rtg -3.0
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.6m
Offense +0.2
Hustle +0.4
Defense +2.5
Raw total +3.1
Avg player in 14.6m -8.4
Impact -5.3
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
0
pts
2
reb
5
ast
Impact
-2.7

Operating as a pure facilitator, his complete refusal to look at the rim allowed the defense to play five-on-four. While he generated some decent looks for teammates, the lack of personal scoring gravity cramped the floor. Solid defensive tracking wasn't enough to offset the offensive limitations.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 5.7%
Net Rtg +17.9
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.4m
Offense -0.2
Hustle +1.5
Defense +3.8
Raw total +5.1
Avg player in 13.4m -7.8
Impact -2.7
How is this calculated?
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.6

Only saw the floor for a fleeting rotational cameo that offered no real sample size for evaluation. Managed to log a single hustle play before returning to the bench. His brief stint was entirely inconsequential to the game's flow.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -150.0
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.7m
Offense +0.5
Hustle +0.7
Defense -0.8
Raw total +0.4
Avg player in 1.7m -1.0
Impact -0.6
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
AJ Johnson 1.7m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.0

Burned a minute and a half of clock without registering a single meaningful action on either end of the floor. Essentially just cardio in a mop-up duty role. The negative impact score is merely statistical noise from a microscopic sample.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -150.0
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.7m
Offense 0.0
Hustle 0.0
Defense 0.0
Raw total 0.0
Avg player in 1.7m -1.0
Impact -1.0
How is this calculated?
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0