Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
HOU lead LAL lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
LAL 2P — 3P —
HOU 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 169 attempts

LAL LAL Shot-making Δ

James 10/25 -3.9
Hachimura 8/15 +4.9
Reaves Hard 7/14 +0.7
LaRavia 3/8 -2.4
Smart Hard 2/7 -0.9
Ayton Open 2/6 -2.8
Kennard Hard 1/6 -2.9
Smith Jr. Hard 1/4 -0.5
Hayes Open 1/1 +0.6
Thiero Open 1/1 +0.6

HOU HOU Shot-making Δ

Sheppard Hard 4/19 -9.2
Thompson 7/14 -0.7
Eason 5/14 -3.8
Sengun Open 5/12 -3.6
Smith Jr. Hard 3/11 -4.8
Okogie Hard 1/3 -0.1
Tate 1/3 -1.6
Finney-Smith Hard 0/2 -1.9
Capela Open 1/1 +0.8
Holiday Open 1/1 +0.6
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
LAL
HOU
36/89 Field Goals 28/80
40.4% Field Goal % 35.0%
12/28 3-Pointers 5/28
42.9% 3-Point % 17.9%
14/24 Free Throws 17/24
58.3% Free Throw % 70.8%
49.2% True Shooting % 43.1%
67 Total Rebounds 55
15 Offensive 8
39 Defensive 37
19 Assists 13
1.73 Assist/TO Ratio 0.93
10 Turnovers 11
4 Steals 6
9 Blocks 9
19 Fouls 23
46 Points in Paint 44
19 Fast Break Pts 8
19 Points off TOs 10
7 Second Chance Pts 9
20 Bench Points 10
29 Largest Lead 5
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Rui Hachimura
21 PTS · 6 REB · 2 AST · 34.7 MIN
+18.5
2
Tari Eason
14 PTS · 5 REB · 2 AST · 37.0 MIN
+13.79
3
LeBron James
28 PTS · 7 REB · 8 AST · 37.1 MIN
+13.68
4
Amen Thompson
18 PTS · 8 REB · 3 AST · 44.5 MIN
+10.43
5
Marcus Smart
7 PTS · 7 REB · 1 AST · 34.9 MIN
+9.16
6
Austin Reaves
15 PTS · 3 REB · 2 AST · 30.7 MIN
+7.6
7
Alperen Sengun
17 PTS · 11 REB · 1 AST · 37.6 MIN
+6.2
8
Deandre Ayton
7 PTS · 16 REB · 1 AST · 28.2 MIN
+5.21
9
Jaxson Hayes
5 PTS · 4 REB · 1 AST · 16.7 MIN
+5.08
10
Jabari Smith Jr.
9 PTS · 12 REB · 3 AST · 42.0 MIN
+3.51
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:21 C. Capela putback Layup (2 PTS) 98–78
Q4 0:21 C. Capela REBOUND (Off:1 Def:0) 98–76
Q4 0:23 MISS J. Tate 25' running pullup 3PT 98–76
Q4 0:28 J. Tate REBOUND (Off:0 Def:3) 98–76
Q4 0:29 MISS N. Smith Jr. 27' 3PT 98–76
Q4 0:50 A. Holiday driving Layup (2 PTS) 98–76
Q4 1:05 J. Okogie REBOUND (Off:1 Def:3) 98–74
Q4 1:05 MISS D. Knecht 26' 3PT 98–74
Q4 1:08 J. LaRavia REBOUND (Off:3 Def:2) 98–74
Q4 1:09 MISS J. LaRavia tip Layup 98–74
Q4 1:10 J. LaRavia REBOUND (Off:2 Def:2) 98–74
Q4 1:11 MISS J. LaRavia driving reverse Layup 98–74
Q4 1:19 J. Tate running Layup (3 PTS) 98–74
Q4 1:23 J. Tate REBOUND (Off:0 Def:2) 98–72
Q4 1:24 MISS N. Smith Jr. 14' step back Shot 98–72

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

HOU Houston Rockets
S Amen Thompson 44.5m
18
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
+9.7

Thompson relentlessly attacked the paint to generate a +10.7 offensive credit, scoring efficiently (7-of-14) without attempting a single three-pointer. His elite athleticism translated to the defensive end as well, where he swatted 3 shots and grabbed 8 boards to control the interior.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 54.1%
USG% 18.0%
Net Rtg -31.1
+/- -26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 44.5m
Scoring +12.1
Creation +2.7
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +6.3
Defense -2.5
Turnovers -4.7
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 2
9
pts
12
reb
3
ast
Impact
+4.8

A cold shooting night (3-of-11 from the field) limited Smith Jr.'s offensive credit (+4.3), but he compensated by dominating the glass with 12 rebounds. His length remained a factor defensively, where 8 contests and 3 deflections highlighted a strong effort despite the scoring slump.

Shooting
FG 3/11 (27.3%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 36.5%
USG% 14.1%
Net Rtg -31.0
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 42.0m
Scoring +2.1
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +14.3
Defense -4.8
Turnovers -2.4
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
S Alperen Sengun 37.6m
17
pts
11
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.2

Sengun bullied his way to the line for 10 free throw attempts, anchoring a +7.5 offensive credit despite an uncharacteristically low playmaking output (1 assist). His 11 rebounds and 2 blocks provided solid interior stability, though 4 turnovers slightly dampened his overall effectiveness.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 7/10 (70.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.8%
USG% 24.7%
Net Rtg -36.5
+/- -27
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.6m
Scoring +10.4
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +9.1
Defense -2.4
Turnovers -10.2
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 4
S Tari Eason 37.0m
14
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.8

Eason was an absolute menace on the defensive end, utilizing 8 contests and 3 steals to generate a robust +6.7 defensive credit. While his offensive efficiency was spotty (5-of-14 shooting), his relentless two-way motor kept Houston competitive on the margins.

Shooting
FG 5/14 (35.7%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 47.0%
USG% 18.5%
Net Rtg -18.0
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.0m
Scoring +6.4
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +1.5
Defense +1.4
Turnovers +0.0
STL 3
BLK 1
TO 0
S Reed Sheppard 36.5m
10
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.7

Sheppard endured a brutal shooting performance, bricking 9 of his 10 three-point attempts to tank his offensive credit (-3.8). Remarkably, he salvaged his night with elite defensive activity, racking up 5 deflections, 2 steals, and 2 blocks to post a stellar +6.3 defensive mark.

Shooting
FG 4/19 (21.1%)
3PT 1/10 (10.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.7%
USG% 25.3%
Net Rtg -35.4
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.5m
Scoring -0.9
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +0.0
Defense +3.9
Turnovers -2.4
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 1
Josh Okogie 13.4m
3
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.5

Okogie provided his standard brand of defensive pestilence, using 2 deflections and a steal to earn a +2.5 defensive credit in limited action. His offensive limitations were glaring, however, as he managed just 3 points and failed to generate any meaningful scoring gravity.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.4m
Scoring +1.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +3.1
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -5.4
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
2
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-3.8

Holiday operated as a low-usage game manager off the bench, converting his only shot attempt and dishing 2 assists to secure a +3.0 offensive credit. He stayed active on the perimeter with 5 shot contests, providing steady but unspectacular rotational minutes.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 3.4%
Net Rtg +17.4
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.5m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.5

Finney-Smith was a complete non-factor during his brief stint, missing both of his shots and bleeding value with a -3.6 offensive credit. He managed 3 shot contests, but his inability to grab a rebound or space the floor rendered his minutes entirely empty.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg -92.9
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.8m
Scoring -1.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -3.1
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
3
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.4

Tate brought a brief burst of rebounding energy during his five minutes on the floor, grabbing 3 boards to outpace his season average. His offensive impact was minimal (+0.7 credit), as he missed both of his three-point attempts and struggled to find a rhythm.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 38.7%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg +83.3
+/- +10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.5m
Scoring +0.9
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
JD Davison 2.1m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.8

Davison merely logged cardio during two minutes of garbage time, failing to record a single statistic across any category. His appearance was entirely inconsequential to the flow of the game.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +185.0
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.1m
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.2

Capela made the most of a tiny two-minute window, converting his lone field goal attempt to post a quick +3.3 offensive credit. He added 3 shot contests defensively, flashing a hint of his veteran rim-protecting instincts before heading back to the bench.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +185.0
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.1m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +1.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
LAL Los Angeles Lakers
S LeBron James 37.1m
28
pts
7
reb
8
ast
Impact
+13.8

LeBron dictated the offensive tempo with his heavy playmaking and scoring volume, generating a massive +15.1 offensive credit despite inefficient shooting (10-of-25). His 8 assists kept the half-court attack humming, proving he can still orchestrate a game even when his jumper isn't falling.

Shooting
FG 10/25 (40.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 6/8 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 49.1%
USG% 37.6%
Net Rtg +35.6
+/- +26
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.1m
Scoring +15.3
Creation +3.9
Shot Making +5.6
Hustle +5.0
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -7.1
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Marcus Smart 34.9m
7
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+4.9

Smart completely terrorized the opposition with his relentless ball pressure, racking up 6 deflections and drawing 3 charges to generate a massive +12.8 hustle credit. While his offensive output was minimal, his elite defensive disruption (+8.4 defensive credit) completely dictated the tempo of the game.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 44.4%
USG% 11.0%
Net Rtg +34.6
+/- +25
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.9m
Scoring +2.9
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +4.0
Defense +5.1
Turnovers -2.4
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 1
S Rui Hachimura 34.7m
21
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+19.7

Hachimura exploded as a perimeter spacer, drilling 5 of his 7 three-point attempts to fuel an elite +17.6 offensive credit. He didn't just float on the perimeter, though, as his 8 shot contests and above-average rebounding (6 boards) helped stabilize the frontcourt defense.

Shooting
FG 8/15 (53.3%)
3PT 5/7 (71.4%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 70.0%
USG% 19.0%
Net Rtg +31.0
+/- +20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.7m
Scoring +15.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +5.8
Hustle +7.6
Defense -2.6
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
S Austin Reaves 30.7m
15
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.4

Reaves struggled to find his perimeter stroke (0-of-4 from deep) but still salvaged a +6.5 offensive credit by scoring efficiently inside the arc. Surprisingly, his biggest impact came as a weak-side helper, where his season-high 3 blocks (avg 0.7) provided unexpected rim protection.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 51.9%
USG% 23.2%
Net Rtg +8.1
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.7m
Scoring +9.8
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +3.6
Hustle +0.9
Defense -3.2
Turnovers -4.7
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 2
S Deandre Ayton 28.2m
7
pts
16
reb
1
ast
Impact
+10.2

Ayton's scoring vanished (7 points on 2-of-6 shooting), but he completely dominated the glass with 16 rebounds to anchor the interior. His +2.0 defensive credit reflects a solid rim-protecting effort, though foul trouble (5 personals) ultimately limited his overall effectiveness.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/7 (42.9%)
Advanced
TS% 38.5%
USG% 13.6%
Net Rtg +10.8
+/- +5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.2m
Scoring +2.1
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.8
Hustle +18.4
Defense -4.8
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Luke Kennard 29.0m
3
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
-4.9

Kennard's jumper completely abandoned him, resulting in a dismal 1-of-6 shooting night that capped his offensive value (+1.1 credit). However, he remained engaged on the other end, using 4 contests and 2 deflections to chip in a surprising +3.2 defensive credit.

Shooting
FG 1/6 (16.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 25.0%
USG% 10.6%
Net Rtg +41.5
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.0m
Scoring -0.3
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +2.8
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -2.4
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Jaxson Hayes 16.7m
5
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.0

Hayes maximized his limited minutes through sheer energy, utilizing 4 screen assists to free up shooters and generate a +7.2 offensive credit. His activity extended to the defensive end, where 5 contests and 3 deflections kept the opposing frontcourt uncomfortable.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 90.6%
USG% 10.8%
Net Rtg +61.7
+/- +21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.7m
Scoring +4.5
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +4.1
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -3.1
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
Jake LaRavia 16.2m
7
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.4

LaRavia offset a shaky shooting night with tremendous activity in the passing lanes, logging 4 deflections to boost his +3.6 hustle credit. His 5 rebounds and 5 shot contests provided solid rotational stability, even as his 2 turnovers leaked some value offensively.

Shooting
FG 3/8 (37.5%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 43.8%
USG% 24.4%
Net Rtg +3.2
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.2m
Scoring +4.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.2
Hustle +4.4
Defense -1.4
Turnovers -4.7
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.3

Thiero saw just three minutes of mop-up duty, converting his only field goal attempt to scratch out a minor +1.7 offensive credit. He offered little resistance on the other end, though his brief appearance was too short to draw meaningful conclusions.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.2%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -94.6
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.1m
Scoring +1.0
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +0.2
Hustle +1.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.5

Knecht was entirely invisible during his brief three-minute stint, missing his lone three-point attempt and failing to generate any offensive rhythm (-0.9 credit). He grabbed a single rebound but otherwise merely occupied space on the floor.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg -94.6
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.1m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.0

In a brief three-minute cameo, James made his presence felt defensively by recording 2 deflections and a steal to earn a +2.3 defensive credit. He didn't look for his own shot, focusing entirely on disruptive perimeter energy during his short stint.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg -94.6
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.1m
Scoring -0.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.3
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.1

Smith Jr. was deployed strictly as a quick-trigger scoring option during his three minutes on the floor, hoisting four shots but connecting on just one. His inability to contribute elsewhere left his overall impact negligible (+0.6 offensive credit), reflecting a pure heat-check role that failed to ignite.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg -94.6
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.1m
Scoring +0.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0