Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
ORL lead DET lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
DET 2P — 3P —
ORL 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 166 attempts

DET DET Shot-making Δ

Huerter 7/14 +2.2
Green Hard 6/13 +1.0
Jenkins 6/11 +0.4
Duren Open 7/9 +2.0
Sasser Hard 2/8 -2.9
Reed 4/7 +1.6
Lanier Hard 1/7 -4.9
Holland II 2/6 -1.5
Thompson Open 4/5 +1.5
Smith Open 3/5 0.0

ORL ORL Shot-making Δ

Bane 9/17 +4.2
Banchero 10/16 +4.0
Black 4/11 -3.3
da Silva 5/10 -0.8
Suggs 4/9 +0.1
Bitadze Open 4/6 +0.6
Carter Jr. 2/4 +0.5
Carter Hard 0/3 -2.8
Cain Hard 1/1 +1.9
Wagner Open 1/1 +0.6
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
DET
ORL
42/85 Field Goals 41/81
49.4% Field Goal % 50.6%
10/30 3-Pointers 11/26
33.3% 3-Point % 42.3%
13/19 Free Throws 30/40
68.4% Free Throw % 75.0%
57.3% True Shooting % 62.4%
46 Total Rebounds 55
8 Offensive 6
27 Defensive 29
32 Assists 28
1.52 Assist/TO Ratio 1.87
19 Turnovers 14
10 Steals 16
7 Blocks 9
24 Fouls 19
58 Points in Paint 52
16 Fast Break Pts 23
14 Points off TOs 33
15 Second Chance Pts 8
37 Bench Points 31
1 Largest Lead 26
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Paolo Banchero
31 PTS · 5 REB · 3 AST · 37.7 MIN
+31.67
2
Jalen Suggs
12 PTS · 6 REB · 12 AST · 33.9 MIN
+21.85
3
Desmond Bane
25 PTS · 3 REB · 1 AST · 32.1 MIN
+20.21
4
Javonte Green
17 PTS · 6 REB · 2 AST · 27.2 MIN
+19.08
5
Kevin Huerter
17 PTS · 3 REB · 5 AST · 31.7 MIN
+14.45
6
Jalen Duren
18 PTS · 9 REB · 4 AST · 31.6 MIN
+11.35
7
Ausar Thompson
8 PTS · 3 REB · 6 AST · 31.0 MIN
+11.33
8
Wendell Carter Jr.
12 PTS · 3 REB · 3 AST · 18.4 MIN
+10.81
9
Daniss Jenkins
18 PTS · 2 REB · 7 AST · 33.6 MIN
+9.26
10
Anthony Black
14 PTS · 1 REB · 2 AST · 15.5 MIN
+9.21
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:08 DET shot clock Team TURNOVER 107–123
Q4 0:32 ORL shot clock Team TURNOVER 107–123
Q4 0:32 TEAM offensive REBOUND 107–123
Q4 0:33 MISS N. Penda 25' 3PT 107–123
Q4 0:34 TEAM offensive REBOUND 107–123
Q4 0:34 P. Reed BLOCK (1 BLK) 107–123
Q4 0:34 MISS A. Morales driving Layup - blocked 107–123
Q4 0:55 C. Castleton REBOUND (Off:0 Def:1) 107–123
Q4 0:58 MISS C. Lanier 24' 3PT 107–123
Q4 1:19 J. Richardson driving Layup (3 PTS) 107–123
Q4 1:31 P. Reed driving Hook (9 PTS) 107–121
Q4 1:35 P. Reed REBOUND (Off:3 Def:3) 105–121
Q4 1:37 MISS R. Holland II driving floating bank Shot 105–121
Q4 1:43 P. Reed REBOUND (Off:2 Def:3) 105–121
Q4 1:50 MISS T. Smith Free Throw 2 of 2 105–121

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

ORL Orlando Magic
S Paolo Banchero 37.7m
31
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+34.6

Completely dictated the terms of engagement with overpowering mismatch hunting and elite shot creation. Breaking out of a recent slump by aggressively attacking the rim warped the defense and opened up the floor for teammates. His massive +8.0 defensive metric shows he was equally dominant shutting down the opponent's primary actions.

Shooting
FG 10/16 (62.5%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 10/10 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 76.0%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +26.6
+/- +23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.7m
Scoring +26.8
Creation +2.8
Shot Making +4.9
Hustle +6.3
Defense +6.5
Turnovers -4.7
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 2
S Jalen Suggs 33.9m
12
pts
6
reb
12
ast
Impact
+15.2

Orchestrated the offense flawlessly while suffocating opposing guards at the point of attack. His +8.8 defensive impact reflects relentless ball pressure that blew up multiple pick-and-roll actions before they could develop. By prioritizing high-leverage playmaking over his own shot, he maximized the efficiency of the entire unit.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 60.7%
USG% 13.9%
Net Rtg +41.8
+/- +30
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.9m
Scoring +8.3
Creation +3.3
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +4.7
Defense +7.3
Turnovers -2.4
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 1
12
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.9

Severe defensive breakdowns and likely costly turnovers completely overshadowed a decent shooting night. Despite showing flashes of hustle, he was repeatedly exploited in isolation matchups, bleeding points at an alarming rate. His inability to stay in front of quicker wings drove his impact score into the basement.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 55.1%
USG% 19.2%
Net Rtg +37.0
+/- +27
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.2m
Scoring +7.2
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.2
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -9.5
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
S Desmond Bane 32.1m
25
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
+19.5

Punished drop coverages with lethal perimeter shot-making that heavily skewed his box impact. He complemented his scoring gravity with excellent defensive positioning, frequently jumping passing lanes to disrupt opponent sets. This dual-threat performance kept the opposing defense in constant rotation.

Shooting
FG 9/17 (52.9%)
3PT 4/7 (57.1%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.1%
USG% 24.4%
Net Rtg +16.6
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.1m
Scoring +18.3
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +6.2
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.5
Turnovers -2.4
STL 2
BLK 3
TO 1
12
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+4.5

Maintained his streak of hyper-efficient finishing by picking his spots perfectly within the flow of the offense. He anchored the paint with disciplined drop coverage, forcing tough mid-range attempts without fouling. This low-mistake, high-IQ execution provided a highly stable positive impact.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 79.8%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +61.5
+/- +26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.4m
Scoring +9.7
Creation +2.0
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +2.8
Defense -0.8
Turnovers -3.1
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Goga Bitadze 24.2m
9
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.4

Generated tremendous value through sheer physical effort, posting an elite +5.4 hustle rating. He dominated the interior with timely offensive putbacks and sturdy rim protection that deterred drives. This blue-collar execution easily pushed his impact into the positive despite limited offensive touches.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 65.4%
USG% 15.0%
Net Rtg -23.1
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.2m
Scoring +6.9
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.2
Hustle +4.1
Defense +1.7
Turnovers -4.7
STL 1
BLK 3
TO 2
Jevon Carter 19.2m
0
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
-4.0

An elite defensive showing (+7.2) was nearly enough to offset a completely barren offensive performance. Hounding ball-handlers relentlessly created havoc, but his inability to knock down open perimeter looks allowed defenders to heavily stunt off him. The resulting offensive spacing issues ultimately tipped his net impact slightly into the red.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 8.0%
Net Rtg -12.5
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.2m
Scoring -2.2
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +2.2
Defense +5.7
Turnovers -2.4
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 1
14
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.5

Overcame inefficient shooting by making his presence felt as a disruptive perimeter defender. His +5.0 defensive rating stemmed from navigating screens effectively and blowing up dribble hand-offs. He managed to positively influence the game purely through high-IQ defensive rotations.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 5/7 (71.4%)
Advanced
TS% 49.7%
USG% 38.1%
Net Rtg -36.5
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.5m
Scoring +7.7
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.3
Defense +4.7
Turnovers -4.7
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 2
Jamal Cain 11.1m
3
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.2

Faded into the background during his brief stint, failing to assert himself offensively. While he avoided glaring mistakes, his lack of aggression allowed the defense to rest when he was on the floor. This passive approach resulted in a slight negative drag on the overall lineup.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 79.8%
USG% 6.7%
Net Rtg -3.8
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.1m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.3

Managed to keep his head above water during spot minutes by converting his lone opportunity. He stayed disciplined within the defensive scheme, avoiding the foul trouble that often plagues young guards. A completely neutral, mistake-free shift.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 79.8%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -75.0
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.7m
Scoring +2.5
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-6.2

Provided a quick, stabilizing spark during a very brief rotational window. Executing his assignments cleanly without forcing the issue ensured the bench unit maintained its momentum. It was a low-volume but perfectly efficient cameo.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 10.0%
Net Rtg +8.9
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.5m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.2
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.6

Rushed his lone offensive touch during a fleeting late-game appearance. The missed shot and lack of measurable hustle stats resulted in a minor negative blip on the radar.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.8m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.5

Barely saw the floor, logging under two minutes of action. He offered a slight defensive presence but didn't have enough time to alter the game's trajectory.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.8m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Noah Penda 1.8m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.1

Continued his recent offensive struggles by forcing up a heavily contested look in limited action. Failing to register any defensive or hustle metrics meant there was nothing to compensate for the empty possession. His brief stint was entirely unproductive.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.8m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
DET Detroit Pistons
S Daniss Jenkins 33.6m
18
pts
2
reb
7
ast
Impact
+0.5

Empty-calorie production defined his minutes, as a seemingly solid offensive night masked severe on-court bleeding. Poor transition defense and costly live-ball turnovers cratered his overall net rating despite decent shooting splits. He struggled to organize the offense during critical stretches, giving back everything he generated.

Shooting
FG 6/11 (54.5%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 68.2%
USG% 21.7%
Net Rtg -23.7
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.6m
Scoring +14.4
Creation +2.2
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +2.5
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -11.8
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 5
S Kevin Huerter 31.7m
17
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
+7.4

A massive defensive rating (+8.9) was the unexpected engine behind his positive impact tonight. He broke out of a recent scoring slump with aggressive perimeter shot-making, but it was his crisp off-ball defensive rotations that truly kept the team afloat. This two-way engagement represented a sharp turnaround from his recent passive outings.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.7%
USG% 23.1%
Net Rtg -18.3
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.7m
Scoring +11.9
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +4.4
Hustle +0.9
Defense +7.6
Turnovers -9.5
STL 4
BLK 0
TO 4
S Jalen Duren 31.6m
18
pts
9
reb
4
ast
Impact
+5.3

Hidden costs dragged his overall net impact into the red despite excellent interior finishing that heavily padded his box score. Poor rotational positioning likely bled points during his stints, completely negating his offensive efficiency. His lack of secondary rim protection allowed opponents to capitalize when he was pulled into space.

Shooting
FG 7/9 (77.8%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/7 (57.1%)
Advanced
TS% 74.5%
USG% 20.5%
Net Rtg -25.0
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.6m
Scoring +15.0
Creation +2.1
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +3.7
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -9.5
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
S Ausar Thompson 31.0m
8
pts
3
reb
6
ast
Impact
+1.9

Elite energy and defensive activity drove a positive impact despite modest offensive volume. Active hands and constant off-ball movement translated into a stellar +5.3 hustle rating. He maximized his touches by finishing efficiently around the rim when cutting.

Shooting
FG 4/5 (80.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 80.0%
USG% 8.1%
Net Rtg -24.3
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.0m
Scoring +7.4
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +2.8
Defense -0.4
Turnovers -2.4
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 1
S Paul Reed 18.6m
9
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
-3.1

Continued his highly efficient interior finishing streak to anchor the second-unit scoring. While his defensive metrics dipped slightly into the negative, his reliable shot selection kept his overall impact firmly in the green. He provided a steadying, low-mistake presence during his rotational minutes.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -57.2
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.6m
Scoring +6.7
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +4.7
Defense -5.8
Turnovers -2.4
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
17
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+16.5

An absolute menace on the defensive end, using relentless ball pressure to generate a massive +9.1 defensive impact. He paired this point-of-attack disruption with high-energy hustle plays that created extra possessions and transition opportunities. This two-way aggression fueled a breakout performance that far exceeded his recent baseline.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 59.4%
USG% 22.7%
Net Rtg +6.6
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.2m
Scoring +11.0
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +3.9
Hustle +6.7
Defense +5.9
Turnovers -2.4
STL 3
BLK 2
TO 1
5
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.6

Errant shot selection and a lack of offensive rhythm severely hampered his floor time. Although he tried to compensate with active defensive closeouts, his inability to stretch the floor allowed defenders to sag and clog the paint. The resulting offensive stagnation tanked his net impact.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.1m
Scoring +1.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
5
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-11.3

A complete lack of hustle plays and poor perimeter efficiency resulted in a disastrous minus-11.5 impact score. Settling for contested jumpers instead of attacking the paint short-circuited multiple offensive possessions. Without any defensive playmaking to offset the missed shots, his minutes were highly detrimental.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 31.3%
USG% 21.3%
Net Rtg +10.8
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.2m
Scoring +0.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -4.7
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Chaz Lanier 16.0m
2
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-10.7

Ice-cold perimeter shooting completely derailed his offensive value, leading to a steep negative impact. Opponents aggressively ignored him off the ball, which destroyed the team's spacing and stalled half-court sets. The lack of secondary playmaking meant he had no way to salvage his minutes when the jumper wasn't falling.

Shooting
FG 1/7 (14.3%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 14.3%
USG% 17.9%
Net Rtg -23.5
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.0m
Scoring -2.6
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +0.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Tolu Smith 13.0m
8
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.3

Capitalized on limited touches to surge past his recent scoring baseline, but defensive lapses kept his overall impact slightly negative. Opponents frequently targeted him in pick-and-roll coverage, bleeding points on the other end. The interior scoring burst simply couldn't outpace his defensive bleeding.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.2%
USG% 21.9%
Net Rtg +32.0
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.0m
Scoring +5.6
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +1.9
Defense -3.4
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0