Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
DEN lead MIN lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
MIN 2P — 3P —
DEN 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 174 attempts

MIN MIN Shot-making Δ

Edwards Hard 7/19 -2.7
Randle 7/16 -2.2
McDaniels 6/14 -2.1
Dosunmu Hard 5/10 +3.2
Gobert Open 8/9 +4.5
DiVincenzo Hard 4/9 +3.5
Reid Hard 2/6 -0.7
Hyland 0/3 -3.5
Conley Hard 1/1 +1.9

DEN DEN Shot-making Δ

Murray Hard 7/22 -5.8
Jokić 11/19 +4.5
Johnson 5/12 -1.2
Gordon 5/10 0.0
Braun 4/10 -0.9
Brown 3/7 -0.6
Hardaway Jr. Hard 2/6 -1.3
Jones Hard 1/1 +1.9
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
MIN
DEN
40/87 Field Goals 38/87
46.0% Field Goal % 43.7%
11/34 3-Pointers 10/36
32.4% 3-Point % 27.8%
14/19 Free Throws 30/33
73.7% Free Throw % 90.9%
55.1% True Shooting % 57.1%
50 Total Rebounds 55
7 Offensive 8
36 Defensive 39
21 Assists 27
1.62 Assist/TO Ratio 1.93
13 Turnovers 13
7 Steals 7
3 Blocks 1
25 Fouls 17
54 Points in Paint 42
14 Fast Break Pts 14
17 Points off TOs 17
10 Second Chance Pts 20
22 Bench Points 20
12 Largest Lead 15
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Nikola Jokić
25 PTS · 13 REB · 11 AST · 40.1 MIN
+18.94
2
Bruce Brown
8 PTS · 7 REB · 3 AST · 21.1 MIN
+18.35
3
Jamal Murray
30 PTS · 5 REB · 7 AST · 39.5 MIN
+17.12
4
Rudy Gobert
17 PTS · 10 REB · 2 AST · 37.8 MIN
+14.81
5
Aaron Gordon
17 PTS · 8 REB · 3 AST · 29.2 MIN
+14.28
6
Jaden McDaniels
16 PTS · 8 REB · 3 AST · 33.3 MIN
+11.21
7
Anthony Edwards
22 PTS · 9 REB · 7 AST · 38.0 MIN
+11.01
8
Donte DiVincenzo
12 PTS · 4 REB · 2 AST · 31.4 MIN
+10.41
9
Christian Braun
12 PTS · 8 REB · 1 AST · 35.7 MIN
+9.57
10
Ayo Dosunmu
14 PTS · 0 REB · 1 AST · 27.9 MIN
+9.07
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:05 DEN shot clock Team TURNOVER 105–116
Q4 0:30 J. Randle driving DUNK (16 PTS) 105–116
Q4 0:33 T. Hardaway Jr. Free Throw 2 of 2 (7 PTS) 103–116
Q4 0:33 T. Hardaway Jr. Free Throw 1 of 2 (6 PTS) 103–115
Q4 0:33 D. DiVincenzo take personal FOUL (3 PF) (Hardaway Jr. 2 FT) 103–114
Q4 0:38 A. Edwards driving finger roll Layup (22 PTS) 103–114
Q4 0:43 N. Jokić running finger roll Layup (25 PTS) (A. Gordon 3 AST) 101–114
Q4 0:46 A. Gordon REBOUND (Off:4 Def:4) 101–112
Q4 0:49 MISS A. Edwards 25' step back 3PT 101–112
Q4 0:53 C. Johnson 12' pullup Jump Shot (12 PTS) (N. Jokić 11 AST) 101–112
Q4 1:14 N. Jokić REBOUND (Off:1 Def:12) 101–110
Q4 1:16 MISS J. McDaniels 3PT 101–110
Q4 1:16 J. McDaniels REBOUND (Off:3 Def:5) 101–110
Q4 1:20 MISS R. Gobert Free Throw 2 of 2 101–110
Q4 1:20 TEAM offensive REBOUND 101–110

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

DEN Denver Nuggets
S Nikola Jokić 40.1m
25
pts
13
reb
11
ast
Impact
+9.9

Masterful offensive orchestration and surprisingly robust defensive positioning (+5.5) fueled a dominant overall impact (+8.0). His elite creation metrics were amplified by his sheer dominance on the defensive glass (+3.4 Hustle), allowing him to dictate the game's entire tempo. He operated as an unstoppable hub, punishing the defense with both pinpoint passing and high-efficiency interior touch.

Shooting
FG 11/19 (57.9%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 64.3%
USG% 24.7%
Net Rtg +11.6
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 40.1m
Scoring +19.1
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +6.2
Hustle +6.8
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -11.8
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 5
S Jamal Murray 39.5m
30
pts
5
reb
7
ast
Impact
+12.2

A massive volume of high-leverage shot creation (+20.6 Box) powered his positive impact, even as he completely blanked from beyond the arc. He offset his severe perimeter miss penalties by relentlessly attacking the mid-range and setting up teammates, while chipping in engaged point-of-attack defense (+1.4). His sheer offensive gravity kept the defense scrambling, proving his value extends beyond pure shooting efficiency.

Shooting
FG 7/22 (31.8%)
3PT 0/8 (0.0%)
FT 16/16 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.7%
USG% 29.9%
Net Rtg +14.1
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.5m
Scoring +19.3
Creation +4.9
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +1.5
Defense -3.1
Turnovers -4.7
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Christian Braun 35.7m
12
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.6

Hidden costs, likely stemming from turnovers or poor shot selection, dragged his impact into the red (-3.8) despite solid defensive engagement (+0.6). While he provided a decent boost on the boards (+1.9 Hustle), his difficulty-adjusted miss penalties erased his baseline scoring value. This outing perfectly captured the maddening inconsistency of his offensive profile.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 55.1%
USG% 12.4%
Net Rtg +2.6
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.7m
Scoring +7.4
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +4.3
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
S Cameron Johnson 33.1m
12
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.5

Severe miss penalties from a high volume of erratic perimeter looks completely cratered his overall impact (-9.3). Despite finding some baseline scoring success, his inability to convert difficult shots efficiently turned his offensive diet into a massive liability. This performance highlighted the damaging floor of his game when his three-point stroke abandons him.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 16.3%
Net Rtg +3.8
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.1m
Scoring +6.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -2.4
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Aaron Gordon 29.2m
17
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
+11.1

Elite interior finishing and relentless activity on the glass (+3.1 Hustle) drove a highly productive two-way performance. He generated massive value by hunting high-percentage looks near the rim, completely offsetting minor defensive lapses (-0.1). His ability to bully mismatches in the paint defined his overwhelmingly positive footprint.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 6/8 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.9%
USG% 20.5%
Net Rtg +12.5
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.2m
Scoring +12.5
Creation +2.2
Shot Making +2.0
Hustle +10.2
Defense -3.1
Turnovers -3.1
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
7
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.6

A catastrophic offensive showing completely erased his surprisingly disruptive defensive metrics (+3.4). His erratic trigger and inability to convert high-difficulty perimeter looks resulted in severe shot-making penalties that tanked his overall value (-6.3). This performance was a textbook example of his chaotic, boom-or-bust nature actively harming the team's half-court rhythm.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.9%
USG% 15.3%
Net Rtg +17.0
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.2m
Scoring +4.3
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -4.7
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
Bruce Brown 21.1m
8
pts
7
reb
3
ast
Impact
+13.5

Absolute defensive tyranny (+11.8) drove an elite impact score, as he completely suffocated opposing ball-handlers on the perimeter. He supplemented this lockdown masterclass with opportunistic hustle plays (+1.3) and highly efficient, low-mistake offensive execution. This was the pinnacle of his role-player ceiling, tilting the game entirely through sheer two-way disruption.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.8%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +21.2
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.1m
Scoring +4.9
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +7.9
Defense +10.0
Turnovers -2.4
STL 5
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.6

Perfect shooting efficiency allowed him to post a positive impact (+1.6) despite a very limited rotational role. By avoiding the miss penalties that usually plague his volatile offensive game, he maximized his brief floor time. He operated as a flawless, low-usage spacer, taking exactly what the defense gave him without forcing the issue.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 107.8%
USG% 10.5%
Net Rtg +17.5
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.2m
Scoring +4.5
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-13.6

A glaring lack of offensive involvement (-1.6 Box) and sluggish defensive mobility (-1.0) severely limited his effectiveness during a brief stint. While he managed to throw his weight around on the glass (+1.2 Hustle), his inability to generate any scoring gravity rendered him a spacing liability. The matchup clearly dictated his marginalization, exposing his heavy feet in space.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 5.3%
Net Rtg +5.5
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.9m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -3.1
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
MIN Minnesota Timberwolves
S Anthony Edwards 38.0m
22
pts
9
reb
7
ast
Impact
+4.3

A heavy volume of difficult, missed perimeter looks completely torpedoed his overall value (-2.1) despite positive defensive metrics (+2.8). While he remained active as a rebounder and playmaker (+2.0 Hustle), the severe shot-making penalties from his erratic perimeter trigger erased those gains. This performance highlighted the hidden costs of his tendency to devolve into an inefficient ball-stopper.

Shooting
FG 7/19 (36.8%)
3PT 2/9 (22.2%)
FT 6/7 (85.7%)
Advanced
TS% 49.8%
USG% 27.5%
Net Rtg -3.6
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.0m
Scoring +13.1
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +4.0
Hustle +2.7
Defense -0.7
Turnovers -7.8
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 3
S Rudy Gobert 37.8m
17
pts
10
reb
2
ast
Impact
+15.4

Total paint domination drove his highly positive impact (+7.6), anchored by elite rim protection and disruptive positioning (+5.0 Defense). His relentless activity on the glass (+5.5 Hustle) created crucial second-chance opportunities, reinforcing his status as an interior monolith. The sheer gravity of his defensive presence completely dictated the terms of engagement.

Shooting
FG 8/9 (88.9%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/5 (20.0%)
Advanced
TS% 75.9%
USG% 15.9%
Net Rtg -9.9
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.8m
Scoring +14.3
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +10.8
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -4.6
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
S Jaden McDaniels 33.2m
16
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
+5.7

A stark disconnect between his raw offensive production and defensive execution (-1.5) kept his overall impact muted at +0.1. While his activity on the glass provided a solid boost (Hustle: +3.0), his inability to connect from the perimeter severely capped his shot-making value. This performance perfectly illustrated his maddening tendency to oscillate between two-way dominance and offensive invisibility.

Shooting
FG 6/14 (42.9%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.8%
USG% 21.0%
Net Rtg -23.3
+/- -17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.2m
Scoring +10.7
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +6.3
Defense -2.8
Turnovers -2.4
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
12
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
+3.0

Strong perimeter defense (+3.9) couldn't salvage an impact score dragged into the red by offensive inefficiency. Although he connected on several deep looks, the difficulty-adjusted miss penalties from his high-volume outside diet ultimately outweighed his shot-making bonuses. His reliance on the three-point shot turned this outing into a volatile, net-negative roll of the dice.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 4/7 (57.1%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 66.7%
USG% 13.7%
Net Rtg -1.7
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.4m
Scoring +8.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.9
Hustle +1.2
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -2.4
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Julius Randle 31.3m
16
pts
7
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.5

Turnovers and poor shot selection likely erased his positive contributions on the glass (+3.1 Hustle). Despite a decent volume of inside scoring, his blank from beyond the arc dragged down his shot-making metrics, resulting in a slightly negative overall footprint (-1.3). This outing perfectly encapsulated his maddening tendency to blend bully-ball success with inefficient perimeter settling.

Shooting
FG 7/16 (43.8%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.4%
USG% 24.3%
Net Rtg -14.9
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.3m
Scoring +10.3
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +3.2
Hustle +5.0
Defense -2.8
Turnovers -2.4
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Ayo Dosunmu 27.9m
14
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.9

Empty-calorie scoring masked a negative overall impact (-1.7) driven by a lack of high-leverage creation and defensive disruption. While he found some success from the perimeter, the hidden costs of poor decision-making or turnovers erased his baseline box score value (+8.5 Box). He operated more as a passive floor-spacer than the ruthless two-way initiator he has shown he can be.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -11.5
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.9m
Scoring +10.3
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +3.7
Hustle +0.0
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Naz Reid 17.3m
5
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-12.1

A severe lack of scoring punch and creation plunged his impact deep into the negative (-5.7), erasing decent activity on the boards (+1.9 Hustle). His inability to generate high-value looks or stretch the floor effectively resulted in a damaging offensive footprint. This outing exposed the volatile floor of his boom-or-bust offensive profile when his jumper isn't falling.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 41.7%
USG% 19.5%
Net Rtg -18.9
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.3m
Scoring +2.1
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +0.9
Defense -2.6
Turnovers -4.7
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
Mike Conley 10.6m
3
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.0

Savvy positional defense (+1.9) and timely hustle plays (+1.2) allowed him to post a positive impact despite a microscopic offensive workload. He managed the game efficiently without forcing bad looks, avoiding the steep miss penalties that often plague aging guards. This was a masterclass in providing connective tissue and veteran stability without needing to dominate the ball.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 4.2%
Net Rtg +5.2
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.6m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.8
Turnovers +0.0
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.2

Crippling offensive passivity (-1.9 Box) completely negated his solid positional defense (+1.9) and connective orchestration. By failing to attempt a single shot, he became a glaring spacing liability, allowing the defense to completely ignore him in the half-court. His reluctance to look at the rim turned what could have been a stabilizing shift into a net-negative rotation.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 5.3%
Net Rtg -5.8
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.1m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -3.1
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-13.1

A completely invisible offensive shift (-2.4 Box) torpedoed his value during a brief, disastrous stint off the bench. Failing to register a single positive creation or shot-making metric, his erratic trigger actively harmed the second unit's rhythm. This outing perfectly captured the catastrophic floor of his microwave-scoring role when the shots refuse to fall.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 27.3%
Net Rtg -20.0
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.3m
Scoring -2.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0