Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
LAL lead UTA lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
UTA 2P — 3P —
LAL 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 187 attempts

UTA UTA Shot-making Δ

Bailey Hard 7/21 -5.7
Tshiebwe Open 12/17 +4.2
Williams Hard 5/15 -3.7
Hinson Hard 4/12 -3.0
Sensabaugh Hard 4/10 +0.8
Mbeng 5/10 -0.1
Konchar Open 2/6 -3.9
Gray Hard 2/3 +1.2

LAL LAL Shot-making Δ

James 6/15 -2.5
Ayton Open 10/14 +3.5
Hachimura Hard 8/12 +7.2
Smith Jr. Hard 5/11 +1.8
Knecht 6/9 +6.6
James Hard 4/7 +3.8
Smart Hard 1/7 -4.4
Vanderbilt Open 2/5 -2.4
Thiero Open 4/4 +2.4
LaRavia Open 1/3 -1.9
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
UTA
LAL
41/94 Field Goals 51/93
43.6% Field Goal % 54.8%
7/34 3-Pointers 15/34
20.6% 3-Point % 44.1%
18/27 Free Throws 14/17
66.7% Free Throw % 82.4%
50.5% True Shooting % 65.2%
49 Total Rebounds 59
17 Offensive 11
25 Defensive 38
25 Assists 37
1.56 Assist/TO Ratio 2.18
16 Turnovers 15
13 Steals 12
4 Blocks 6
14 Fouls 20
50 Points in Paint 60
17 Fast Break Pts 20
18 Points off TOs 26
23 Second Chance Pts 13
25 Bench Points 61
0 Largest Lead 30
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Oscar Tshiebwe
29 PTS · 17 REB · 3 AST · 32.1 MIN
+30.76
2
Deandre Ayton
22 PTS · 10 REB · 1 AST · 25.6 MIN
+27.21
3
Rui Hachimura
22 PTS · 10 REB · 0 AST · 29.0 MIN
+22.66
4
Dalton Knecht
17 PTS · 2 REB · 4 AST · 12.0 MIN
+17.21
5
Bez Mbeng
14 PTS · 4 REB · 9 AST · 48.0 MIN
+15.71
6
LeBron James
18 PTS · 4 REB · 6 AST · 16.6 MIN
+12.97
7
Bronny James
11 PTS · 1 REB · 4 AST · 18.9 MIN
+12.41
8
Cody Williams
14 PTS · 3 REB · 6 AST · 39.2 MIN
+11.99
9
John Konchar
4 PTS · 7 REB · 2 AST · 27.8 MIN
+11.71
10
Blake Hinson
10 PTS · 6 REB · 2 AST · 25.6 MIN
+8.93
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:00 LAL shot clock Team TURNOVER 107–131
Q4 0:25 O. Tshiebwe putback Layup (29 PTS) 107–131
Q4 0:25 O. Tshiebwe REBOUND (Off:9 Def:8) 105–131
Q4 0:29 MISS C. Williams 26' pullup 3PT 105–131
Q4 0:40 A. Thiero cutting DUNK (8 PTS) (D. Knecht 4 AST) 105–131
Q4 0:57 O. Tshiebwe driving DUNK (27 PTS) 105–129
Q4 0:57 O. Tshiebwe REBOUND (Off:8 Def:8) 103–129
Q4 1:00 MISS O. Tshiebwe Free Throw 1 of 1 103–129
Q4 1:00 D. Timme shooting personal FOUL (1 PF) (Tshiebwe 1 FT) 103–129
Q4 1:00 O. Tshiebwe putback Layup (25 PTS) 103–129
Q4 1:02 O. Tshiebwe REBOUND (Off:7 Def:8) 101–129
Q4 1:03 MISS C. Williams 11' pullup Shot 101–129
Q4 1:14 LAL shot clock Team TURNOVER 101–129
Q4 1:14 TEAM offensive REBOUND 101–129
Q4 1:16 MISS N. Smith Jr. 24' step back 3PT 101–129

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

LAL Los Angeles Lakers
S Rui Hachimura 29.0m
22
pts
10
reb
0
ast
Impact
+22.8

Flawless offensive execution (+18.6 scoring) and aggressive work on the glass (+8.8 hustle) fueled a massive positive impact. He was absolutely lethal as a shot-maker (+5.5), consistently punishing his matchups by draining highly contested looks. This hyper-efficient, mistake-free outing (+0.0 turnovers) perfectly highlights his ceiling as a dynamic frontcourt weapon.

Shooting
FG 8/12 (66.7%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 79.9%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +30.2
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.0m
Scoring +18.6
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +5.5
Hustle +8.8
Defense +0.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Marcus Smart 26.3m
5
pts
2
reb
10
ast
Impact
-14.7

While he managed to generate some looks for teammates (+2.6 creation), disastrous decision-making completely tanked his value. Severe turnover damage (-7.1) ruined his offensive stint, and his trademark defensive grit was surprisingly absent (-1.1 defense). This performance highlights a frustrating pattern of erratic execution that actively sabotaged the team's momentum.

Shooting
FG 1/7 (14.3%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 31.7%
USG% 15.9%
Net Rtg +21.7
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.3m
Scoring +0.6
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Deandre Ayton 25.6m
22
pts
10
reb
1
ast
Impact
+24.7

When he seals his man and attacks with this level of intent, Ayton is nearly impossible to stop. Sheer physical imposition defined this performance, as he bullied his way to elite interior scoring (+19.4) and dominant rebounding numbers (+11.7 hustle). He converted difficult looks around the rim (+3.1 shot-making) without committing a single turnover (+0.0).

Shooting
FG 10/14 (71.4%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 73.9%
USG% 25.4%
Net Rtg +23.6
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.6m
Scoring +19.4
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +11.7
Defense -0.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 21
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 47.6%
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 0
S LeBron James 16.6m
18
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
+5.4

Sloppy execution and careless passing led to massive turnover damage (-9.5), nearly sabotaging his offensive creation. However, a dominant defensive effort (+7.1) and relentless downhill scoring (+11.5) kept his overall impact positive. He managed to salvage the performance by converting tough looks (+2.6 shot-making) when the half-court offense stagnated.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 6/7 (85.7%)
Advanced
TS% 49.8%
USG% 44.9%
Net Rtg +32.9
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.6m
Scoring +11.5
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +1.2
Defense +7.1
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 4
S Luke Kennard 11.4m
3
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-11.7

Maddening offensive passivity and defensive liabilities (-1.6) severely hampered his effectiveness on the floor. He failed to leverage his shooting gravity, and a couple of costly giveaways (-2.4 turnovers) compounded his struggles. Without any rebounding presence (+0.0 hustle), his inability to let it fly from deep turned him into a detrimental offensive decoy.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 79.8%
USG% 11.5%
Net Rtg +32.0
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.4m
Scoring +2.5
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +0.0
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Jake LaRavia 24.8m
2
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
-4.8

A stellar defensive effort (+5.2) was entirely undone by his complete inability to generate offensive value. He was virtually invisible as a scorer (+0.2) and playmaker (+0.0), allowing opposing defenses to completely ignore him on the perimeter. This outing perfectly encapsulates his maddening inconsistency, as his defensive disruption couldn't mask his offensive disappearance.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 4.8%
Net Rtg +20.8
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.8m
Scoring +0.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +1.2
Defense +5.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
Bronny James 18.9m
11
pts
1
reb
4
ast
Impact
+2.6

Shedding his recent tendency toward offensive passivity, James confidently knocked down high-difficulty jumpers (+3.3 shot-making). Efficient scoring (+8.9) and a mistake-free offensive shift (+0.0 turnovers) allowed him to post a solid positive impact. This steady two-way cameo proves he can provide reliable value in controlled, microscopic bursts.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 3/4 (75.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 78.6%
USG% 16.3%
Net Rtg +38.3
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.9m
Scoring +8.9
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +3.3
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 71.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
12
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.0

A lethal display of perimeter shot-making (+3.6) and efficient scoring (+7.6) was dragged into the red by his complete lack of peripheral contributions. He offered absolutely zero resistance on defense (+0.0) and failed to grab a single rebound (+0.0 hustle). This one-dimensional performance highlights his tendency to act as a hollow scoring spark plug who bleeds value on the margins.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 54.5%
USG% 27.3%
Net Rtg +18.0
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.6m
Scoring +7.6
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +3.6
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
4
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-6.5

Opponents blatantly ignored him on the perimeter, turning his chaotic defensive energy (+4.9 defense) into a net negative. His inability to finish plays (+1.6 scoring) and careless giveaways (-2.4 turnovers) created severe floor-spacing bottlenecks that stalled the offense. This outing proves that elite defensive disruption simply cannot compensate for crippling offensive limitations.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 12.8%
Net Rtg +12.5
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.4m
Scoring +1.6
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +1.2
Defense +4.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
Maxi Kleber 15.2m
2
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.7

Glaring defensive breakdowns (-4.2) and sloppy ball-handling (-4.7 turnovers) severely crippled his overall impact. Although he battled hard on the glass (+6.7 hustle), his extreme offensive passivity (+1.3 scoring) allowed opponents to pack the paint. He essentially functioned as a negative-value utilitarian, bleeding points on one end while shrinking the floor on the other.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 8.9%
Net Rtg +24.8
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.2m
Scoring +1.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +6.7
Defense -4.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
17
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
+10.7

Punishing the defense with his off-ball gravity, Knecht created solid looks for teammates (+2.6 creation) without turning the ball over once. A sudden, explosive scoring burst (+14.9) and elite shot-making (+4.8) completely flipped the momentum of the game. This lethal offensive masterclass easily masked his slight defensive deficiencies (-1.1).

Shooting
FG 6/9 (66.7%)
3PT 5/6 (83.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 94.4%
USG% 30.0%
Net Rtg +11.1
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.0m
Scoring +14.9
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +4.8
Hustle +0.6
Defense -1.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
Adou Thiero 12.0m
8
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-3.9

Costly decision-making and sloppy ball security (-5.4 turnovers) ruined what was otherwise a highly efficient scoring stint (+8.0). He provided solid energy on the boards (+4.1 hustle), but his chaotic offensive execution frequently short-circuited the team's rhythm. This performance underscores his volatile nature as a spark plug who often gives back his own production.

Shooting
FG 4/4 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +11.1
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.0m
Scoring +8.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +4.1
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Drew Timme 7.2m
3
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.7

Unable to anchor the paint, Timme allowed opponents to dictate the terms of the matchup. A complete lack of rebounding (+0.0 hustle) and damaging turnovers (-2.4) exposed his physical limitations in the rotation. While he managed to convert a few looks offensively (+3.0 scoring), he simply couldn't overcome the hidden costs of his defensive and physical shortcomings.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg +15.4
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.2m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.6

Defensive vulnerabilities (-1.6) and a complete lack of offensive generation (+1.1 scoring) doomed his brief stint on the floor. He failed to create any advantages for himself or his teammates, rendering him an invisible presence during half-court sets. This passive cameo highlights his struggle to impact the game positively against NBA-level length and athleticism.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg +15.4
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.2m
Scoring +1.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +1.6
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
UTA Utah Jazz
S Bez Mbeng 48.0m
14
pts
4
reb
9
ast
Impact
+6.8

Despite bleeding significant value through careless giveaways (-9.5 turnovers), his suffocating defensive masterclass (+11.2) anchored his overall value. He completely disrupted the opponent's perimeter flow while generating efficient offense (+9.5 scoring) and creating for others (+3.0 creation). His two-way aggression set the tone, even if it came with a chaotic offensive cost.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 57.4%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg -21.7
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 48.0m
Scoring +9.5
Creation +3.0
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +1.2
Defense +11.2
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 17
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 41.2%
STL 5
BLK 0
TO 4
S Cody Williams 39.2m
14
pts
3
reb
6
ast
Impact
+1.7

Consistent offensive execution (+7.4 scoring) and solid work on the glass (+3.8 hustle) kept his overall value in the green. He managed to overcome a few sloppy possessions (-2.4 turnovers) by converting tough looks when the offense bogged down. This steady two-way production marks a welcome shift from his recent erratic mid-season slumps.

Shooting
FG 5/15 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.8%
USG% 17.5%
Net Rtg -10.0
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.2m
Scoring +7.4
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +3.8
Defense +1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Oscar Tshiebwe 32.1m
29
pts
17
reb
3
ast
Impact
+30.4

He bullied his matchup all night, converting heavily contested looks at the rim (+4.7 shot-making) to anchor the frontcourt. Absolute dominance in the paint defined this monstrous performance, with staggering interior finishing (+23.4 scoring) and relentless rebounding (+18.7 hustle) overwhelming the opposition. Even a severe issue with ball security (-7.1 turnovers) couldn't derail his overall impact.

Shooting
FG 12/17 (70.6%)
3PT 0/0
FT 5/8 (62.5%)
Advanced
TS% 70.7%
USG% 28.4%
Net Rtg -20.1
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.1m
Scoring +23.4
Creation +2.3
Shot Making +4.7
Hustle +18.7
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 23
FGM Against 14
Opp FG% 60.9%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Ace Bailey 29.4m
15
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-13.7

Catastrophic decision-making completely unraveled his value, as severe turnover damage (-7.1) and glaring defensive lapses (-5.8) buried any positive contributions. Although he hit several high-degree-of-difficulty jumpers (+4.3 shot-making), his offensive tunnel vision sabotaged the team's rhythm. This performance perfectly encapsulates his maddening tendency to bleed value on the margins despite raw scoring ability.

Shooting
FG 7/21 (33.3%)
3PT 1/9 (11.1%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 34.3%
USG% 32.5%
Net Rtg -28.8
+/- -19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.4m
Scoring +3.8
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +4.3
Hustle +3.8
Defense -5.8
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 3
S Blake Hinson 25.6m
10
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.8

Salvaging what was otherwise a pedestrian offensive outing, Hinson relied on relentless work on the boards (+7.6 hustle) to stay positive. While his defensive metrics dipped slightly into the red (-1.1), his ability to hit high-difficulty shots (+2.4 shot-making) against tight closeouts provided just enough spacing to keep the defense honest.

Shooting
FG 4/12 (33.3%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 17.4%
Net Rtg -20.7
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.6m
Scoring +3.9
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +2.4
Hustle +7.6
Defense -1.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
John Konchar 27.8m
4
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.1

By embracing his role as a high-IQ glue guy, Konchar heavily influenced winning without needing to shoot the basketball. Elite defensive disruption (+7.8) and relentless rebounding (+8.9 hustle) allowed him to thrive despite being a complete non-factor as a scorer. He blew up opposing actions and secured extra possessions all night.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 10.3%
Net Rtg -25.6
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.8m
Scoring +0.5
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +8.9
Defense +7.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 3
BLK 2
TO 1
Hayden Gray 24.8m
6
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.8

Solid point-of-attack defense (+2.9) and efficient finishing (+5.3 scoring) weren't enough to overcome his overall negative impact. A complete lack of rebounding presence (+0.0 hustle) and a few costly giveaways (-2.4 turnovers) ultimately dragged down his value. He struggled to assert himself physically, allowing opposing guards to dictate the terms of engagement.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 77.3%
USG% 7.9%
Net Rtg -29.0
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.8m
Scoring +5.3
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.2
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
15
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.0

Disastrous ball security (-7.1 turnovers) completely erased his otherwise efficient scoring punch (+9.6). He demonstrated an ability to knock down tough perimeter looks (+3.4 shot-making), but his sloppy execution in half-court sets repeatedly killed offensive momentum. This outing highlights a frustrating pattern where hidden costs ruin his baseline offensive production.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 59.3%
USG% 47.1%
Net Rtg -27.4
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.2m
Scoring +9.6
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3