Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
MEM lead CLE lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
CLE 2P — 3P —
MEM 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 183 attempts

CLE CLE Shot-making Δ

Merrill Hard 7/16 +1.5
Schröder 8/12 +3.9
Ellis 7/11 +5.3
Mobley Open 9/11 +4.5
Nance Jr. Open 5/8 +0.2
Proctor 2/8 -4.3
Allen Open 5/7 +1.6
Porter Jr. 4/7 +0.9
Tomlin 4/7 +0.8
Enaruna 1/2 -0.5

MEM MEM Shot-making Δ

Whitehead Hard 7/15 +3.9
Williamson Hard 5/15 -1.5
Bal Hard 7/14 +4.9
Prosper 10/12 +11.1
Clayton Jr. 4/10 -1.9
Jackson 3/9 -3.5
Okani Hard 1/8 -5.4
Coward 5/6 +5.1
Spencer Hard 3/5 +3.1
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
CLE
MEM
52/89 Field Goals 45/94
58.4% Field Goal % 47.9%
12/32 3-Pointers 29/59
37.5% 3-Point % 49.2%
26/37 Free Throws 7/10
70.3% Free Throw % 70.0%
67.4% True Shooting % 64.0%
64 Total Rebounds 36
13 Offensive 8
35 Defensive 23
36 Assists 32
2.77 Assist/TO Ratio 2.46
12 Turnovers 13
12 Steals 7
5 Blocks 4
11 Fouls 27
76 Points in Paint 30
11 Fast Break Pts 10
14 Points off TOs 17
21 Second Chance Pts 15
43 Bench Points 53
17 Largest Lead 17
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Craig Porter Jr.
11 PTS · 8 REB · 6 AST · 26.2 MIN
+23.16
2
Sam Merrill
21 PTS · 2 REB · 2 AST · 27.9 MIN
+20.81
3
Keon Ellis
19 PTS · 3 REB · 8 AST · 27.3 MIN
+19.63
4
Olivier-Maxence Prosper
24 PTS · 3 REB · 0 AST · 19.4 MIN
+19.36
5
Dennis Schröder
22 PTS · 5 REB · 11 AST · 29.3 MIN
+19.14
6
Cedric Coward
12 PTS · 5 REB · 3 AST · 17.5 MIN
+18.44
7
Evan Mobley
24 PTS · 6 REB · 4 AST · 25.7 MIN
+17.72
8
Adama Bal
20 PTS · 6 REB · 0 AST · 36.6 MIN
+16.34
9
Jarrett Allen
13 PTS · 9 REB · 1 AST · 24.8 MIN
+14.76
10
Lucas Williamson
17 PTS · 5 REB · 4 AST · 39.8 MIN
+14.41
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:07 T. Proctor REBOUND (Off:0 Def:2) 142–126
Q4 0:14 MISS D. Whitehead 3PT 142–126
Q4 0:22 T. Proctor Free Throw 2 of 2 (10 PTS) 142–126
Q4 0:22 T. Proctor Free Throw 1 of 2 (9 PTS) 141–126
Q4 0:22 L. Williamson take personal FOUL (6 PF) (Proctor 2 FT) 140–126
Q4 0:23 TEAM defensive REBOUND 140–126
Q4 0:25 MISS G. Jackson 25' pullup 3PT 140–126
Q4 0:32 C. Porter Jr. Free Throw 2 of 2 (11 PTS) 140–126
Q4 0:32 C. Porter Jr. Free Throw 1 of 2 (10 PTS) 139–126
Q4 0:32 L. Williamson take personal FOUL (5 PF) (Porter Jr. 2 FT) 138–126
Q4 0:37 C. Porter Jr. REBOUND (Off:3 Def:5) 138–126
Q4 0:40 MISS C. Spencer 24' running pullup 3PT 138–126
Q4 0:46 G. Jackson REBOUND (Off:0 Def:5) 138–126
Q4 0:50 MISS T. Enaruna 25' 3PT 138–126
Q4 1:09 TEAM defensive REBOUND 138–126

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

MEM Memphis Grizzlies
17
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
+4.2

High-volume perimeter chucking tanked his offensive value despite a massive scoring leap. Strong hustle and defensive metrics couldn't fully repair the damage from his wasted possessions and forced shots.

Shooting
FG 5/15 (33.3%)
3PT 5/12 (41.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.5%
USG% 17.9%
Net Rtg -15.3
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.8m
Scoring +8.8
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +4.8
Hustle +5.4
Defense +1.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 11
Opp FG% 78.6%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
S Cam Spencer 20.9m
9
pts
1
reb
9
ast
Impact
-7.2

Elite playmaking vision was entirely undone by severe defensive liabilities. Opponents actively hunted him in switches, bleeding away the value of his offensive creation by scoring at will on the other end.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 82.7%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg -0.7
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.9m
Scoring +7.6
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 85.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
24
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+11.6

Punished defensive closeouts relentlessly during an absolute flamethrower performance from the perimeter. This offensive explosion completely overwhelmed his average defensive metrics, forcing the opponent to constantly alter their coverages.

Shooting
FG 10/12 (83.3%)
3PT 4/5 (80.0%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 96.5%
USG% 31.1%
Net Rtg +9.8
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.4m
Scoring +22.0
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +6.8
Hustle +2.8
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 77.8%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S GG Jackson 18.1m
11
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
-2.8

Sheer defensive willpower salvaged his impact rating despite a brutal shooting slump. His length disrupted passing lanes and generated crucial stops even when his jumper completely betrayed him.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.1%
USG% 29.3%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.1m
Scoring +6.5
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +1.5
Defense +3.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 1
S Cedric Coward 17.5m
12
pts
5
reb
3
ast
Impact
+9.9

Hyper-efficient shot selection and elite defensive metrics drove a massive positive swing. His ability to capitalize on low-usage opportunities while locking down the perimeter maximized his value.

Shooting
FG 5/6 (83.3%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 15.8%
Net Rtg +45.8
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.5m
Scoring +11.3
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +6.3
Defense +3.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 30.0%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 0
Adama Bal 36.6m
20
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
+9.8

A classic empty-calories performance where a massive scoring surge was hollowed out by zero defensive resistance. His one-dimensional perimeter barrage failed to translate to winning basketball as opponents easily matched his production.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 6/11 (54.5%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 71.4%
USG% 15.7%
Net Rtg -33.1
+/- -25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.6m
Scoring +14.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +6.2
Hustle +4.7
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Toby Okani 31.9m
3
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-24.3

An absolute disaster class defined by forced shots and constant defensive breakdowns. His inability to stay in front of his man or hit open looks cratered the team's net rating during his minutes.

Shooting
FG 1/8 (12.5%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 16.9%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg -20.0
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.9m
Scoring -3.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +1.6
Defense -6.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 64.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
20
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.4

Sunk by a high volume of low-quality perimeter attempts that fueled long rebounds and transition opportunities for the opponent. The scoring bump was a mirage that actively harmed the team's offensive flow and rhythm.

Shooting
FG 7/15 (46.7%)
3PT 6/12 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -42.0
+/- -33
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.8m
Scoring +13.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +6.3
Hustle +0.9
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 55.6%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
10
pts
1
reb
11
ast
Impact
-14.7

Excellent distribution was completely negated by erratic finishing and defensive lapses. He struggled to contain dribble penetration, giving back everything he created on the offensive end.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 20.3%
Net Rtg -36.4
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.9m
Scoring +5.5
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +1.3
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
CLE Cleveland Cavaliers
22
pts
5
reb
11
ast
Impact
+5.2

Masterful orchestration of the offense masked average defensive contributions. He aggressively exploited drop coverage to generate a massive scoring leap, dictating the game's tempo with surgical precision.

Shooting
FG 8/12 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 75.1%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg +25.4
+/- +16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.3m
Scoring +18.7
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +3.7
Hustle +3.4
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Sam Merrill 27.9m
21
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+12.9

Floor spacing was his primary weapon, as a massive perimeter shooting explosion stretched the opposing defense past its breaking point. Surprisingly, his elite defensive metrics provided just as much value as his outside stroke.

Shooting
FG 7/16 (43.8%)
3PT 4/11 (36.4%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.1%
USG% 23.9%
Net Rtg -10.2
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.9m
Scoring +13.5
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +5.4
Hustle +0.6
Defense +7.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 0
S Keon Ellis 27.3m
19
pts
3
reb
8
ast
Impact
+11.1

A sudden surge in scoring efficiency drove his positive impact, capitalizing perfectly on defensive breakdowns. His dual-threat ability to orchestrate the offense while hitting timely perimeter jumpers kept the defense constantly rotating.

Shooting
FG 7/11 (63.6%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 77.1%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg +30.6
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.3m
Scoring +15.2
Creation +5.3
Shot Making +4.6
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Evan Mobley 25.7m
24
pts
6
reb
4
ast
Impact
+9.4

Total dominance in the painted area defined this stint, continuing a multi-game streak of hyper-efficient interior finishing. He anchored the floor on both ends, using his length to generate crucial stops that fueled transition opportunities.

Shooting
FG 9/11 (81.8%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 5/8 (62.5%)
Advanced
TS% 82.6%
USG% 30.5%
Net Rtg -1.1
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.7m
Scoring +20.9
Creation +2.0
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +6.7
Defense -3.4
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 23
FGM Against 14
Opp FG% 60.9%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Jarrett Allen 24.8m
13
pts
9
reb
1
ast
Impact
+10.5

Defensive intimidation and relentless hustle on the glass were the true engines of his positive rating. Rather than forcing offense, he thrived as an elite rim-runner who completely shut off the opponent's interior passing lanes.

Shooting
FG 5/7 (71.4%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 70.7%
USG% 18.6%
Net Rtg +25.6
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.8m
Scoring +10.2
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +11.4
Defense +3.4
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 22
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 40.9%
STL 1
BLK 2
TO 2
11
pts
8
reb
6
ast
Impact
+12.7

Two-way versatility completely flipped the momentum during his minutes on the floor. An unexpected scoring eruption combined with suffocating point-of-attack defense made him the ultimate spark plug.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.8%
USG% 11.9%
Net Rtg +3.4
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.2m
Scoring +8.7
Creation +2.1
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +8.2
Defense +5.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 0
10
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.7

Elite defensive metrics and relentless ball pressure kept him afloat during a brutal offensive outing. His inability to convert quality looks from the perimeter severely capped his ceiling, turning him into a pure defensive specialist.

Shooting
FG 2/8 (25.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 47.0%
USG% 21.1%
Net Rtg -0.8
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.0m
Scoring +4.7
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense +6.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 22.2%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
10
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.1

Despite finding a highly efficient offensive rhythm, his overall impact cratered. Defensive lapses in pick-and-roll coverage and a failure to secure contested rebounds allowed opponents to feast on second-chance opportunities.

Shooting
FG 5/8 (62.5%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.3%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg +6.4
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.5m
Scoring +6.1
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +1.3
Hustle +2.8
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
10
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.1

Timely weak-side rotations and strong defensive anchoring fueled a highly productive stint. He maximized his low-usage role by finishing efficiently around the rim and generating extra possessions through sheer activity.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.2%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg +23.5
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.5m
Scoring +7.0
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +9.5
Defense +2.6
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-12.3

Barely factored into the game during his short rotational stint. A lack of meaningful defensive events or hustle plays left him as a net negative on the floor.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 6.7%
Net Rtg +75.0
+/- +18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.3m
Scoring +1.2
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.3

Logged pure garbage time minutes without registering a single statistical event. Served merely as a placeholder to close out the clock.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +100.0
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.3m
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.3

Stepped on the floor for brief cardio at the end of the rotation. Failed to impact the game in any measurable capacity.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +100.0
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 1.3m
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0