Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
NOP lead ORL lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
ORL 2P — 3P —
NOP 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 177 attempts

ORL ORL Shot-making Δ

Bane 8/19 -1.9
Suggs Hard 4/19 -9.4
Banchero 6/14 -3.9
Wagner 4/10 -2.7
Carter Hard 5/9 +2.2
Carter Jr. Open 6/7 +3.0
Cain 3/7 -2.1
Bitadze Open 3/4 +0.4
da Silva Hard 1/4 -1.7

NOP NOP Shot-making Δ

Bey 10/24 -2.4
Fears 4/14 -5.4
Williamson Open 5/11 -4.1
Missi Open 8/9 +3.6
Hawkins Hard 2/7 -0.8
Peavy Hard 1/6 -3.2
Jones Hard 2/4 +1.1
Alexander 2/4 +0.8
Queen 1/4 -2.0
Dickinson Hard 0/1 -1.1
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
ORL
NOP
40/93 Field Goals 35/84
43.0% Field Goal % 41.7%
7/33 3-Pointers 10/31
21.2% 3-Point % 32.3%
25/36 Free Throws 28/36
69.4% Free Throw % 77.8%
51.5% True Shooting % 54.1%
68 Total Rebounds 53
16 Offensive 9
41 Defensive 38
27 Assists 18
2.08 Assist/TO Ratio 1.20
13 Turnovers 15
6 Steals 7
5 Blocks 8
23 Fouls 27
48 Points in Paint 50
15 Fast Break Pts 13
20 Points off TOs 13
24 Second Chance Pts 5
27 Bench Points 17
7 Largest Lead 15
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Saddiq Bey
32 PTS · 6 REB · 1 AST · 38.8 MIN
+22.45
2
Yves Missi
18 PTS · 13 REB · 3 AST · 39.8 MIN
+19.22
3
Desmond Bane
27 PTS · 6 REB · 4 AST · 34.1 MIN
+17.7
4
Paolo Banchero
23 PTS · 16 REB · 6 AST · 38.0 MIN
+16.65
5
Zion Williamson
17 PTS · 7 REB · 2 AST · 27.8 MIN
+11.06
6
Jeremiah Fears
19 PTS · 3 REB · 7 AST · 36.7 MIN
+10.72
7
Jevon Carter
11 PTS · 5 REB · 1 AST · 20.8 MIN
+9.9
8
Goga Bitadze
6 PTS · 8 REB · 1 AST · 16.2 MIN
+8.96
9
Franz Wagner
11 PTS · 5 REB · 2 AST · 20.2 MIN
+7.86
10
Jamal Cain
8 PTS · 5 REB · 2 AST · 27.6 MIN
+7.52
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:02 P. Banchero REBOUND (Off:3 Def:13) 112–108
Q4 0:05 MISS J. Hawkins 27' turnaround fadeaway bank 3PT 112–108
Q4 0:09 D. Bane Free Throw 2 of 2 (27 PTS) 112–108
Q4 0:09 TEAM offensive REBOUND 111–108
Q4 0:09 MISS D. Bane Free Throw 1 of 2 111–108
Q4 0:09 S. Bey personal FOUL (4 PF) (Bane 2 FT) 111–108
Q4 0:10 S. Bey Free Throw 2 of 2 (32 PTS) 111–108
Q4 0:10 S. Bey Free Throw 1 of 2 (31 PTS) 111–107
Q4 0:10 J. Suggs shooting personal FOUL (4 PF) (Bey 2 FT) 111–106
Q4 0:12 D. Bane Free Throw 2 of 2 (26 PTS) 111–106
Q4 0:12 TEAM offensive REBOUND 110–106
Q4 0:12 MISS D. Bane Free Throw 1 of 2 110–106
Q4 0:12 Z. Williamson personal FOUL (3 PF) (Bane 2 FT) 110–106
Q4 0:21 J. Fears Free Throw 3 of 3 (19 PTS) 110–106
Q4 0:21 J. Fears Free Throw 2 of 3 (18 PTS) 110–105

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

NOP New Orleans Pelicans
S Yves Missi 39.8m
18
pts
13
reb
3
ast
Impact
+10.5

Flawless finishing around the rim and elite defensive anchoring (+6.0) skyrocketed Missi's net rating to the top of the charts. He dominated the painted area, utilizing his length to erase mistakes and generating massive value through second-chance opportunities (+4.2 Hustle). A masterclass in pick-and-roll execution and vertical spacing made him an absolute nightmare for the opposing frontcourt.

Shooting
FG 8/9 (88.9%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 83.6%
USG% 13.5%
Net Rtg +3.7
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.8m
Scoring +13.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +15.5
Defense -4.3
Turnovers -5.9
STL 0
BLK 4
TO 3
S Saddiq Bey 38.8m
32
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+27.9

Massive shot volume and relentless scoring aggression fueled Bey's stellar box score impact (+19.6). Even with a few forced looks in isolation, his ability to continuously bend the defense and draw attention opened up the floor. A willingness to absorb contact on drives and finish through traffic defined his dominant offensive showcase.

Shooting
FG 10/24 (41.7%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 9/11 (81.8%)
Advanced
TS% 55.5%
USG% 31.9%
Net Rtg +7.1
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.8m
Scoring +21.4
Creation +3.6
Shot Making +5.9
Hustle +7.6
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -3.1
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jeremiah Fears 36.7m
19
pts
3
reb
7
ast
Impact
+1.7

Poor shooting efficiency completely neutralized Fears' otherwise strong defensive (+3.8) and hustle (+3.0) metrics. He repeatedly short-circuited offensive possessions with ill-advised jumpers early in the shot clock, bleeding away the value he created on the other end. His inability to find a rhythm as a scorer ultimately dragged his overall impact into the red.

Shooting
FG 4/14 (28.6%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 9/11 (81.8%)
Advanced
TS% 50.4%
USG% 24.7%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.7m
Scoring +10.3
Creation +3.7
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +1.9
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -7.8
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 3
S Zion Williamson 27.8m
17
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.8

Williamson's impact was surprisingly muted due to a lack of defensive playmaking and minimal hustle contributions (+0.4). While his interior scoring remained highly efficient, he struggled to impose his will physically and frequently settled for contested looks. A passive stretch in the second half prevented him from taking over the game in his usual dominant fashion.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 0/0
FT 7/9 (77.8%)
Advanced
TS% 56.8%
USG% 21.9%
Net Rtg -4.5
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.8m
Scoring +11.2
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +6.0
Defense -2.9
Turnovers -2.4
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S Herbert Jones 8.7m
5
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.5

In a brief stint, Jones provided a steadying presence characterized by smart cuts and timely defensive rotations. He didn't force the issue offensively, taking only high-percentage looks and maintaining floor balance. His quick hands and positional awareness disrupted a few key actions, ensuring his short shift was a net positive.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg +42.1
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.7m
Scoring +3.5
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +0.9
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Micah Peavy 27.9m
3
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
-10.6

Offensive ineptitude severely punished Peavy's net rating, as he clanked multiple open looks and stalled the half-court offense. Although he fought hard defensively (+2.8), his defender was able to completely ignore him on the perimeter, clogging the driving lanes for his teammates. This lack of floor spacing turned him into an offensive liability that his hustle could not overcome.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 10.1%
Net Rtg -30.6
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.9m
Scoring -0.7
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +1.5
Defense +0.7
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
7
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-11.1

A frigid shooting night and defensive invisibility combined to produce a disastrous net rating for Hawkins. He struggled to navigate screens, frequently dying on picks and forcing teammates into scramble situations. Because his primary value is tied to his jumper, missing his perimeter looks rendered him highly detrimental to the team's success.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.0%
USG% 15.2%
Net Rtg -3.5
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.4m
Scoring +3.3
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +2.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -7.1
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
Derik Queen 18.3m
2
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-14.9

A severe lack of offensive production and inability to establish deep post position cratered Queen's effectiveness. He was repeatedly pushed off his spots by stronger defenders, leading to rushed attempts and wasted possessions. Without his usual scoring punch, his modest defensive contributions weren't nearly enough to salvage a highly negative stint.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 12.8%
Net Rtg -15.9
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.3m
Scoring -0.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +1.2
Defense -3.9
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.7

Alexander managed to scrape together a slightly positive impact through energetic perimeter defense and opportunistic scoring. He stayed within his role, attacking closeouts decisively and avoiding costly turnovers. A couple of hard-nosed closeouts on shooters highlighted a disciplined, low-mistake performance.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 18.5%
Net Rtg -16.7
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.3m
Scoring +3.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +0.6
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-13.0

Dickinson was a complete non-factor during his brief time on the court, failing to register any meaningful positive plays. He looked a step slow in pick-and-roll coverage, allowing guards to turn the corner with ease. Without any offensive touches to balance the scales, his short appearance was a distinct negative.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -80.0
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.4m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -3.1
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
ORL Orlando Magic
S Paolo Banchero 38.0m
23
pts
16
reb
6
ast
Impact
+19.2

A massive defensive rating (+7.5) and relentless hustle (+4.0) propelled Banchero's overall value, compensating for a volume-heavy, inefficient shooting chart. He dominated the interior by outmuscling his matchups, drawing fouls, and fighting for loose balls. This gritty, physical approach allowed him to dictate the game's tempo even when his perimeter jumper wasn't falling.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 11/15 (73.3%)
Advanced
TS% 55.8%
USG% 25.5%
Net Rtg -1.2
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.0m
Scoring +15.2
Creation +3.3
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +17.4
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -11.8
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 5
S Desmond Bane 34.1m
27
pts
6
reb
4
ast
Impact
+18.0

Bane's elite net rating was driven by a combination of aggressive shot creation and high-level hustle (+4.0). He constantly pressured the defense, leveraging his gravity to open up driving lanes, while simultaneously disrupting passing lanes on the other end. A relentless motor characterized his night, allowing him to overcome a few forced attempts and generate immense overall value.

Shooting
FG 8/19 (42.1%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 8/11 (72.7%)
Advanced
TS% 56.6%
USG% 29.2%
Net Rtg +9.2
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.1m
Scoring +16.9
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +5.5
Hustle +5.7
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -3.5
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
S Jalen Suggs 33.6m
11
pts
4
reb
8
ast
Impact
-3.0

An abysmal shooting performance completely cratered Suggs' impact score, as he squandered possessions with poor shot selection from beyond the arc. While his trademark hustle (+4.3) and playmaking remained intact, the sheer volume of missed jumpers killed offensive momentum. His inability to recognize when to defer to teammates ultimately defined a frustrating outing.

Shooting
FG 4/19 (21.1%)
3PT 3/12 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 28.9%
USG% 23.3%
Net Rtg -2.7
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.6m
Scoring -0.4
Creation +3.4
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +4.1
Defense -1.4
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
13
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
-0.0

Despite near-perfect offensive efficiency, Carter Jr.'s overall impact slipped into the negative due to defensive lapses (-2.5). He struggled to anchor the paint against pick-and-roll actions, frequently giving up deep positioning or arriving late on rotations. His highly effective scoring was ultimately undone by his inability to string together consecutive stops.

Shooting
FG 6/7 (85.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/4 (25.0%)
Advanced
TS% 74.2%
USG% 12.2%
Net Rtg -4.0
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.8m
Scoring +10.7
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +5.4
Defense -6.5
Turnovers -3.1
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Franz Wagner 20.2m
11
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.3

Wagner's positive impact was anchored by his defensive contributions (+2.3) rather than his scoring efficiency, which dipped from his recent hot streak. His ability to generate stops and secure extra possessions kept him in the black despite a middling shooting night. A few timely rotations in the half-court defined his steady, if unspectacular, two-way performance.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 46.8%
USG% 21.1%
Net Rtg +21.3
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.2m
Scoring +6.3
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.5
Defense -1.1
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Jamal Cain 27.6m
8
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-1.8

Cain's negative overall impact stemmed from a lack of defensive resistance and minimal hustle metrics, offsetting a decent offensive showing. He frequently found himself out of position on closeouts, allowing straight-line drives that compromised the defensive shell. Without generating extra possessions or stops, his modest scoring wasn't enough to keep his head above water.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.8%
USG% 11.9%
Net Rtg +26.0
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.6m
Scoring +4.2
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +5.4
Defense -3.1
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Jevon Carter 20.8m
11
pts
5
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.2

A sudden burst of offensive aggression drove Carter's positive rating, as he confidently hunted his shot and capitalized on defensive breakdowns. He paired this scoring punch with solid hustle (+2.1), extending possessions and applying persistent ball pressure. His ability to break out of a recent slump and punish drop coverage completely shifted the momentum during his shifts.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 61.1%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +9.3
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.8m
Scoring +8.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.2
Hustle +4.4
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-9.6

Offensive invisibility severely dragged down da Silva's rating, as he failed to capitalize on his touches and completely vanished from the scoring column. Though he provided a slight defensive lift (+2.8), his lack of aggression and inability to space the floor allowed defenders to sag off him. A passive approach on the perimeter neutralized any value he brought to the other end of the court.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 13.3%
Net Rtg -40.3
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.6m
Scoring -0.3
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +3.8
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -4.7
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
Goga Bitadze 16.2m
6
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.7

High-level rim protection (+4.3 Def) and flawless shot selection allowed Bitadze to maximize his limited minutes. He served as a formidable deterrent in the paint, altering several attempts and cleaning up the glass efficiently. Playing entirely within himself, he provided exactly the kind of low-mistake, high-leverage interior presence the second unit needed.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +29.9
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.2m
Scoring +5.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +10.2
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -5.4
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 2