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 a shooter to isolate their shots on the court
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 174 attempts

DET DET Shot-making Δ

Cunningham Hard 8/23 -3.4
Harris 8/16 +1.7
Thompson Open 7/10 +2.2
Duren Open 3/10 -6.4
Robinson Hard 3/8 +0.7
Green Hard 2/6 -0.2
Jenkins 2/3 +1.9
Reed 2/3 +0.9
Stewart Open 1/3 -2.2
Huerter Hard 0/2 -1.7

ORL ORL Shot-making Δ

Bane 9/18 +5.8
Wagner 7/18 -3.5
Banchero Open 6/17 -6.7
Suggs Hard 5/12 +1.1
Carter Jr. Open 5/9 -1.1
Black 1/6 -3.5
Cain Hard 2/4 +1.1
Bitadze Open 1/3 -2.2
da Silva 0/2 -2.3
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
DET
ORL
37/85 Field Goals 36/89
43.5% Field Goal % 40.4%
11/32 3-Pointers 15/33
34.4% 3-Point % 45.5%
20/24 Free Throws 26/33
83.3% Free Throw % 78.8%
54.9% True Shooting % 54.6%
50 Total Rebounds 63
10 Offensive 14
32 Defensive 34
24 Assists 22
1.50 Assist/TO Ratio 1.57
16 Turnovers 14
6 Steals 8
12 Blocks 8
25 Fouls 24
40 Points in Paint 36
12 Fast Break Pts 9
19 Points off TOs 24
17 Second Chance Pts 19
20 Bench Points 17
4 Largest Lead 17
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Ausar Thompson
17 PTS · 8 REB · 3 AST · 37.3 MIN
+25.21
2
Paolo Banchero
25 PTS · 12 REB · 9 AST · 38.2 MIN
+23.73
3
Tobias Harris
23 PTS · 7 REB · 2 AST · 38.5 MIN
+20.62
4
Desmond Bane
25 PTS · 7 REB · 0 AST · 38.3 MIN
+18.93
5
Wendell Carter Jr.
14 PTS · 17 REB · 3 AST · 36.8 MIN
+13.26
6
Franz Wagner
17 PTS · 5 REB · 6 AST · 33.8 MIN
+12.75
7
Anthony Black
8 PTS · 1 REB · 1 AST · 25.9 MIN
+9.8
8
Duncan Robinson
10 PTS · 0 REB · 3 AST · 27.8 MIN
+5.87
9
Jamal Cain
7 PTS · 1 REB · 0 AST · 14.0 MIN
+4.89
10
Jalen Duren
8 PTS · 9 REB · 1 AST · 27.4 MIN
+4.7
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:07 P. Banchero REBOUND (Off:2 Def:10) 105–113
Q4 0:11 MISS D. Robinson 27' pullup 3PT 105–113
Q4 0:19 J. Suggs bad pass out-of-bounds TURNOVER (5 TO) 105–113
Q4 0:26 W. Carter Jr. REBOUND (Off:8 Def:9) 105–113
Q4 0:29 MISS C. Cunningham 29' 3PT 105–113
Q4 0:38 P. Banchero 25' 3PT pullup (25 PTS) (F. Wagner 6 AST) 105–113
Q4 0:58 P. Banchero STEAL (3 STL) 105–110
Q4 0:58 C. Cunningham bad pass TURNOVER (9 TO) 105–110
Q4 1:07 W. Carter Jr. Free Throw 2 of 2 (14 PTS) 105–110
Q4 1:07 TEAM offensive REBOUND 105–109
Q4 1:07 MISS W. Carter Jr. Free Throw 1 of 2 105–109
Q4 1:07 J. Duren shooting personal FOUL (6 PF) (Carter Jr. 2 FT) 105–109
Q4 1:07 W. Carter Jr. REBOUND (Off:8 Def:8) 105–109
Q4 1:08 MISS F. Wagner 8' driving floating Shot 105–109
Q4 1:29 D. Robinson personal FOUL (3 PF) 105–109

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 Desmond Bane 38.3m
25
pts
7
reb
0
ast
Impact
+18.9

Scorching perimeter marksmanship carried his offensive value, as he torched the nets with 7-of-9 shooting from beyond the arc. This elite shot-making fueled a +17.1 Offense credit, allowing him to pour in 25 points (↑) despite failing to record a single assist (↓).

Shooting
FG 9/18 (50.0%)
3PT 7/9 (77.8%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 69.4%
USG% 19.6%
Net Rtg +8.7
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.3m
Scoring +18.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +7.5
Hustle +6.0
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Paolo Banchero 38.2m
25
pts
12
reb
9
ast
Impact
+22.0

A relentless ability to draw contact and orchestrate the offense masked his inefficient shooting (6-of-17 FG). He dominated the game through sheer volume, using 11 made free throws and 9 assists (↑) to drive a massive +17.7 Offense credit while adding 3 steals (↑) for a +10.2 Defense mark.

Shooting
FG 6/17 (35.3%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 11/14 (78.6%)
Advanced
TS% 54.0%
USG% 28.3%
Net Rtg +7.6
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.2m
Scoring +14.3
Creation +3.0
Shot Making +3.2
Hustle +14.3
Defense +5.0
Turnovers -7.8
STL 3
BLK 2
TO 3
14
pts
17
reb
3
ast
Impact
+15.7

Absolute dominance on the glass defined his performance, as he vacuumed up 17 rebounds (↑) to control the interior. His efficient inside finishing (5-of-9 FG) fueled a +15.7 Offense credit, though 4 turnovers (↓) slightly dampened his overall offensive execution.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 16.3%
Net Rtg +9.2
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.8m
Scoring +9.8
Creation +2.9
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +21.6
Defense -2.0
Turnovers -7.7
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 4
S Franz Wagner 33.8m
17
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
+4.9

Connective playmaking and active hands compensated for a sluggish shooting night. While he struggled to find his touch from the field (39%), his 6 assists (↑) and 4 deflections powered a balanced stat line that featured strong Offense (+11.0) and Defense (+3.2) credits.

Shooting
FG 7/18 (38.9%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 45.0%
USG% 23.8%
Net Rtg +25.4
+/- +19
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.8m
Scoring +9.2
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +4.0
Hustle +3.4
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
S Jalen Suggs 33.3m
15
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
-11.8

Sloppy ball-handling severely undercut his scoring contributions. While he chipped in 15 points (↑), his 5 turnovers (↓) and lack of defensive playmaking (0 steals, ↓) dragged his Offense credit down to a marginal +2.5.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 3/8 (37.5%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.2%
USG% 20.5%
Net Rtg +2.8
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.3m
Scoring +9.6
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +4.1
Hustle +1.9
Defense -6.5
Turnovers -11.8
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 5
8
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+3.4

Elite defensive disruption entirely salvaged a miserable shooting performance. He missed five of his six field goal attempts, but racked up 5 deflections, 3 steals (↑), and 3 blocks (↑) to generate a massive +9.4 Defense credit.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 5/8 (62.5%)
Advanced
TS% 42.0%
USG% 13.8%
Net Rtg -22.6
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.9m
Scoring +2.5
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +8.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 3
BLK 3
TO 0
Jamal Cain 14.0m
7
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.4

Efficient spot-up shooting defined his brief 14-minute cameo off the bench. He converted half his looks to score 7 points, generating a solid +5.8 Offense credit despite offering virtually nothing as a rebounder or playmaker.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 71.7%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +46.2
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.0m
Scoring +5.6
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +0.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Goga Bitadze 10.9m
2
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.3

Operating in a very limited backup role, he struggled to make his usual interior impact. He finished with just 2 points and 2 rebounds (both ↓), though his 5 shot contests provided a minor boost to his +1.6 Hustle credit.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 12.0%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.9m
Scoring +0.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +1.6
Defense +0.5
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.8

A completely invisible 8-minute shift left him without a single point, rebound, or assist. His inability to impact the game in any capacity resulted in negative credits across the board, highlighted by a -1.7 Offense mark.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 9.1%
Net Rtg -31.7
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.7m
Scoring -1.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
DET Detroit Pistons
S Cade Cunningham 41.2m
27
pts
5
reb
9
ast
Impact
-1.6

A catastrophic lack of ball security completely undermined his high-volume playmaking efforts. While he generated 9 assists (↑), his 9 live-ball turnovers (↓) and inefficient 8-of-23 shooting severely capped his Offense credit (+5.4) despite a 27-point scoring total.

Shooting
FG 8/23 (34.8%)
3PT 3/10 (30.0%)
FT 8/9 (88.9%)
Advanced
TS% 50.1%
USG% 36.5%
Net Rtg +2.4
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 41.2m
Scoring +16.0
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +5.5
Hustle +5.4
Defense -0.9
Turnovers -20.1
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 9
S Tobias Harris 38.5m
23
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+14.2

A heavy scoring load carried his value as he capitalized on his elevated minutes to pour in 23 points (↑). His +16.5 Offense credit reflects a steady diet of efficient shooting (8-of-16 FG, 5-of-5 FT), providing a reliable scoring punch despite minimal playmaking.

Shooting
FG 8/16 (50.0%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 63.2%
USG% 21.3%
Net Rtg -9.0
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.5m
Scoring +17.2
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +3.9
Hustle +2.1
Defense +1.6
Turnovers -2.4
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Ausar Thompson 37.2m
17
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
+21.0

Elite interior finishing and rim protection defined his high-impact night. He converted a highly efficient 7-of-10 from the floor to drive a +18.3 Offense credit, while simultaneously anchoring the interior with 5 blocks (↑) to fuel a +9.4 Defense mark.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 3/5 (60.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.7%
USG% 15.1%
Net Rtg -8.7
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.2m
Scoring +13.8
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +9.2
Defense +5.0
Turnovers -2.4
STL 2
BLK 5
TO 1
S Duncan Robinson 27.8m
10
pts
0
reb
3
ast
Impact
-2.2

Perimeter spacing remained his sole offensive weapon, as all of his made field goals came from beyond the arc (3-of-7 3P). However, an inability to impact the glass (0 rebounds, ↓) or generate stops limited his overall footprint, reflected in a negative (-0.7) Defense credit.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 59.2%
USG% 12.9%
Net Rtg -14.3
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.8m
Scoring +6.1
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +0.0
Defense -1.7
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
S Jalen Duren 27.4m
8
pts
9
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.1

Foul trouble (6 fouls) and frigid finishing completely derailed his typical interior dominance. He struggled to convert around the basket (3-of-10 FG), severely depressing his scoring output (8 points, ↓), though his 5 blocks (↑) and 12 contests salvaged some defensive utility.

Shooting
FG 3/10 (30.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 36.8%
USG% 21.3%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.4m
Scoring +2.6
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +7.5
Defense -4.1
Turnovers -5.4
STL 0
BLK 5
TO 2
6
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.5

Defensive disruption outweighed his offensive struggles during a spotty 23-minute shift. He failed to connect on anything inside the arc (2-of-6 FG, all 3P attempts) leading to a negative Offense credit (-0.6), but salvaged value through active hands that fueled a +3.0 Defense mark.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 14.8%
Net Rtg +0.3
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.9m
Scoring +2.8
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +0.3
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -3.5
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
0
pts
1
reb
5
ast
Impact
-9.2

A complete disappearing act as a scorer defined his brief 15-minute stint. He failed to register a single point (0-of-2 FG), though he did pivot to a connective role by dishing out 5 assists (↑) to salvage a slightly positive (+0.8) Offense credit.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 5.9%
Net Rtg -3.3
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.9m
Scoring -1.4
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.8
Turnovers +0.0
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.8

A lack of volume and engagement rendered him largely invisible during his 12 minutes on the floor. He generated minimal production across the board, resulting in a muted +1.2 Offense credit and a slightly negative (-0.1) Defense mark.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 38.7%
USG% 13.8%
Net Rtg -28.0
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.4m
Scoring +0.7
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +0.9
Defense -0.7
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Paul Reed 7.0m
4
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.7

Operating in a strictly limited bench role, he managed to crash the glass effectively for 5 rebounds. His efficient interior finishing (2-of-3 FG) drove a +4.5 Offense credit, though his defensive impact (-1.1 Defense) lagged behind.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +7.7
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.0m
Scoring +3.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +4.4
Defense -3.4
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
5
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.0

A sharp reduction in playing time completely neutralized his typical offensive engine role. He was highly efficient with his limited touches (2-of-3 FG) to earn a +4.2 Offense credit, but the lack of volume resulted in an unusually quiet outing.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 23.1%
Net Rtg -70.5
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.7m
Scoring +4.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.6

Relegated to a microscopic 4-minute cameo, he had virtually no opportunity to establish a rhythm. His lone field goal attempt found the bottom of the net, but a turnover negated any real offensive traction, resulting in a marginal +0.1 Offense credit.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +13.9
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.0m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1