GAME ANALYSIS

GET THIS IN YOUR INBOX

Every breakdown for your team — free, the morning after the game.

Follow your team — free

Already have an account? Log in

Why this game is worth arguing about
game swinger
Evan Mobley actually won the night
21 points, 12 boards, 6 assists was the line. The lift came from scoring (+16.1), hustle (+11.4), and defense (+4.2), pushing Net Impact to +25.7.
Scoring +16.1
Points, shot value, and miss penalties.
Hustle +11.4
Rebounding and extra-possession work.
Defense +4.2
Steals, blocks, fouls, and defensive events.
Check the tape
box score lie
The box score sold James Harden too hard
9 points, 5 boards, 6 assists was already a rough line. The real damage was defense (-6.2) and turnovers (-2.4), pulling Net Impact down to -7.4.
Defense -6.2
Steals, blocks, fouls, and defensive events.
Turnovers -2.4
Possessions destroyed by giveaways.
Shot-making +1.0
Makes above expected shot difficulty.
Check the tape
hidden value
Max Strus's value was hiding in plain sight
9 points, 3 boards, 2 assists undersells it. scoring (+5.8), defense (+5.0), and hustle (+2.8) pushed his Net Impact to +8.9.
Scoring +5.8
Points, shot value, and miss penalties.
Defense +5.0
Steals, blocks, fouls, and defensive events.
Hustle +2.8
Rebounding and extra-possession work.
Check the tape
box score lie
The box score sold Cade Cunningham too hard
13 points, 4 boards, 5 assists was already a rough line. The real damage was turnovers (-7.1) and defense (-1.5), pulling Net Impact down to -3.9.
Turnovers -7.1
Possessions destroyed by giveaways.
Defense -1.5
Steals, blocks, fouls, and defensive events.
Creation +0.7
Assist credit weighted by shot quality created.
Check the tape

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

DET Detroit Pistons
S Cade Cunningham 36.8m
13
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
-3.9

A frigid perimeter stroke completely derailed Cunningham's scoring output, as he bricked all seven of his three-point attempts en route to just 13 points. He compensated for the offensive slump by locking in defensively, generating 7 contests and 3 deflections to power a +5.2 defense credit. While the playmaking was passable (5 assists), his inability to stretch the floor severely limited his +2.4 offense mark.

Shooting
FG 5/16 (31.2%)
3PT 0/7 (0.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 22.7%
Net Rtg -40.3
+/- -32
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.8m
Scoring +5.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +1.2
Defense -1.5
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 3
S Daniss Jenkins 34.0m
17
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
+5.3

Jenkins operated as a highly volatile offensive engine, overcoming inefficient shooting (4-of-12 FG) by relentlessly attacking the basket to draw fouls (7-of-8 FT). This aggressive downhill mentality and solid playmaking (5 assists) fueled a robust +13.3 offense credit. Unfortunately, he was an absolute sieve on the other end, allowing his matchups to shoot a blistering 73% when guarded, which resulted in a -0.5 defense mark.

Shooting
FG 4/12 (33.3%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 7/8 (87.5%)
Advanced
TS% 54.8%
USG% 20.5%
Net Rtg -20.3
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.0m
Scoring +10.9
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +1.9
Defense -2.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 72.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Ausar Thompson 28.6m
5
pts
7
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.0

Thompson's offensive limitations were on full display, as a clunky 2-of-7 shooting night resulted in a -0.7 offense credit. However, he continued to thrive in the mud, using his relentless motor to grab 7 rebounds and block 2 shots (above his 1.7 average). His connective defensive traits (+1.3 defense) kept him viable even when his scoring touch completely vanished.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/2 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 31.7%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg -27.5
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.6m
Scoring -0.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +4.0
Defense -1.5
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 1
S Jalen Duren 25.8m
7
pts
9
reb
3
ast
Impact
-1.1

Duren struggled to establish his usual interior dominance, managing just 7 points on 3-of-7 shooting while turning the ball over 3 times. He still made his presence felt defensively with 9 contests and 2 blocks, driving a +2.5 defense credit. However, his inability to finish efficiently around the rim severely capped his overall offensive influence (+1.5 offense).

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 44.4%
USG% 18.0%
Net Rtg -31.1
+/- -18
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.8m
Scoring +3.8
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +9.5
Defense -4.3
Turnovers -5.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 3
S Tobias Harris 22.6m
5
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.1

Harris endured a catastrophic shooting night, missing all six of his field goal attempts to finish 74% below his scoring average. Despite the offensive disappearing act, he salvaged some value through sheer effort, logging 8 contests and 2 deflections to earn a +3.5 hustle credit. His ability to draw fouls (5-of-6 FT) barely kept his +1.2 offense credit afloat during a brutal slump.

Shooting
FG 0/6 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 28.9%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -45.5
+/- -23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.6m
Scoring +0.3
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +4.4
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
9
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.1

Sasser embraced a microwave scoring role off the bench, launching 9 three-pointers to finish well above his season average with 9 points. While his overall efficiency was poor (3-of-12 FG), his willingness to let it fly generated a +4.4 offense credit by keeping the defense honest. He also chipped in with 4 contests and 2 deflections, showing a surprisingly active motor (+2.7 hustle) despite the clunky shooting.

Shooting
FG 3/12 (25.0%)
3PT 3/9 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 20.7%
Net Rtg -28.6
+/- -16
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.8m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +2.5
Defense -1.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
13
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
+0.2

Robinson's lethal perimeter gravity was on full display, as he drilled 3-of-5 from deep to stretch the defense and anchor a +4.8 offense credit. However, his one-dimensional nature was exposed on the other end, where opponents hunted him relentlessly and shot a perfect 3-of-3 when he was the nearest defender. Three turnovers further complicated an otherwise brilliant shooting night.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 78.1%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -45.7
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 21.7m
Scoring +9.9
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -7.8
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
Caris LeVert 16.6m
11
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+1.8

LeVert provided a highly efficient scoring punch off the bench, knocking down 60% of his shots to nearly double his season average with 11 points. This sudden burst of perimeter marksmanship (2-of-4 from deep) drove a strong +8.5 offense credit. However, his defensive rotations were frequently exploited, allowing opponents to shoot a staggering 80% when he was the primary defender.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.4%
USG% 19.0%
Net Rtg -38.9
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.6m
Scoring +8.9
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.3
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
Paul Reed 8.2m
4
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-1.8

Reed struggled to find his typical finishing touch, managing just 4 points on 2-of-5 shooting in a quiet eight-minute stint. Despite the lack of scoring, his screen-setting (3 screen assists) helped free up shooters and salvaged a +6.8 offense credit. He was largely invisible on the defensive end, failing to register a single block or steal, leading to a -0.1 defense mark.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 23.8%
Net Rtg -34.9
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.2m
Scoring +1.4
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +5.1
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.9

Stewart's brief six-minute shift was defined by a complete lack of rebounding, failing to grab a single board despite his typical role as a physical enforcer. He managed to be perfectly efficient on his lone shot attempt to secure a +3.2 offense credit, but his defensive presence was lacking (-1.1 defense). He simply couldn't impose his physical will in such a limited window.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 104.2%
USG% 7.1%
Net Rtg -61.5
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.2m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +0.0
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.4

Holland II logged a brief, low-impact shift where he struggled to leave a significant mark on the game. He knocked down one three-pointer for a +1.3 offense credit but was otherwise a non-factor offensively. His effort levels remained steady (+1.2 hustle), though he lacked the explosive bursts that define his peak performances.

Shooting
FG 1/3 (33.3%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +30.8
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.8m
Scoring +1.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Tolu Smith 5.4m
4
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-2.1

Smith made a massive defensive impact in just five minutes, completely shutting down his assignments by holding them to 0-of-3 shooting. This stifling interior presence drove a stellar +4.6 defense credit. He also capitalized on his limited offensive touches, finishing a perfect 2-of-2 from the floor to round out a highly efficient cameo with a +2.0 offense mark.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 21.4%
Net Rtg +39.1
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.4m
Scoring +4.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +0.6
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-9.1

Lanier couldn't find the bottom of the net, missing both of his shot attempts to post a -1.2 offense credit in a brief appearance. He did manage to hold his own defensively, forcing opponents into an 0-of-3 shooting clip when guarded to earn a +0.7 defense mark. Ultimately, his inability to score rendered his minutes mostly hollow.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +39.1
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.4m
Scoring -1.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
CLE Cleveland Cavaliers
S Evan Mobley 36.0m
21
pts
12
reb
6
ast
Impact
+25.7

Mobley was an absolute two-way terror, completely erasing his matchup by holding opponents to a dismal 3-of-16 shooting clip when guarded to drive a massive +11.6 defense credit. His elite rim protection was matched by highly efficient scoring (7-of-10 FG) and playmaking (6 assists), which anchored a +18.6 offense mark. He dictated the terms of the game on both ends, functioning as the ultimate two-way hub.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 6/11 (54.5%)
Advanced
TS% 70.8%
USG% 19.5%
Net Rtg +41.9
+/- +31
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.0m
Scoring +16.1
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +11.4
Defense +4.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 18.8%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 2
S James Harden 35.9m
9
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
-7.4

A brutal shooting slump derailed Harden's impact, as he completely lost his perimeter touch (0-of-6 from deep) and managed just 9 points. While he still facilitated the offense with 6 assists to salvage a +3.2 offense credit, his inability to score efficiently crippled his overall value. The lack of scoring gravity severely limited his ability to dictate the flow of the game.

Shooting
FG 2/10 (20.0%)
3PT 0/6 (0.0%)
FT 5/8 (62.5%)
Advanced
TS% 33.3%
USG% 16.5%
Net Rtg +40.2
+/- +31
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 35.9m
Scoring +1.3
Creation +2.4
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +1.5
Defense -6.2
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
26
pts
6
reb
8
ast
Impact
+22.7

Mitchell orchestrated the offense flawlessly, pairing his typical scoring volume with exceptional decision-making to avoid a single turnover (avg 2.7). This pristine ball security and high-level playmaking (8 assists) fueled a massive +22.1 offense credit. He also locked in defensively, holding his primary matchups to just 4-of-14 shooting to round out a complete performance.

Shooting
FG 10/22 (45.5%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 52.8%
USG% 34.2%
Net Rtg +30.0
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.1m
Scoring +16.3
Creation +3.4
Shot Making +5.5
Hustle +3.7
Defense -0.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
S Max Strus 27.6m
9
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+8.9

Strus made his mark on the defensive end, stifling his primary assignments to a mere 3-of-11 shooting while generating three steals (well above his 0.5 average). This disruptive perimeter presence fueled a +6.3 defense credit, compensating for a quiet night from beyond the arc (1-of-5). His +8.2 offense credit suggests he still found ways to move the ball and space the floor effectively without dominating the box score.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 57.1%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg +18.6
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.6m
Scoring +5.8
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +2.8
Defense +5.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 0
S Jarrett Allen 24.8m
23
pts
7
reb
1
ast
Impact
+17.2

A masterclass in interior aggression defined Allen's night, as he demanded the ball and bullied his way to 23 points to drive a +16.4 offense credit. His activity extended beyond scoring, with 9 contests and 4 deflections highlighting a relentless motor that earned him a +4.4 hustle mark. He consistently punished the defense inside, drawing fouls and converting efficiently around the basket.

Shooting
FG 8/14 (57.1%)
3PT 0/0
FT 7/13 (53.8%)
Advanced
TS% 58.3%
USG% 34.4%
Net Rtg +19.6
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 24.8m
Scoring +14.3
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +8.9
Defense +1.3
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 45.5%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
Sam Merrill 25.3m
23
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
+18.0

Merrill erupted as a lethal sharpshooter off the bench, torching the defense with 5-of-8 shooting from beyond the arc to post 23 points. This blistering perimeter efficiency completely warped the opposing defensive scheme and drove a massive +19.6 offense credit. When his jumper is falling at this clip, he transforms from a fringe rotation piece into an unstoppable offensive weapon.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 5/8 (62.5%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 97.8%
USG% 19.4%
Net Rtg +40.7
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.3m
Scoring +20.8
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +5.8
Hustle +1.3
Defense +1.5
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
Dean Wade 20.9m
5
pts
6
reb
1
ast
Impact
+5.7

Wade operated as a low-usage connector, taking only the shots the defense gave him to finish perfectly from the floor (2-of-2). His +8.0 offense credit reflects his ability to keep the ball moving and space the floor without forcing the issue. He quietly chipped in on the glass with 6 rebounds, executing his role flawlessly despite a lack of raw box-score production.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 125.0%
USG% 3.8%
Net Rtg +39.5
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 20.9m
Scoring +5.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.1
Hustle +7.6
Defense -0.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
-6.1

Schröder faded into offensive irrelevance, attempting just a single shot in 18 minutes while turning the ball over twice. His +3.6 defense credit shows he remained engaged on the other end, holding his matchups to 1-of-5 shooting, but his complete lack of scoring aggression neutralized his value. The playmaking (3 assists) wasn't enough to offset his disappearing act as a scoring threat, leading to a meager +2.2 offense mark.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 6.4%
Net Rtg +37.1
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.3m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +1.9
Defense +0.8
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
2
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.4

Porter Jr. provided a brief, steadying presence in his limited four minutes of action, converting his only look inside the arc. His +1.7 offense credit reflects a quiet but mistake-free shift where he kept the ball moving. He didn't force the issue, executing basic sets without bleeding value.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +3.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.0m
Scoring +1.4
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Keon Ellis 4.0m
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.0

Ellis knocked down his only perimeter look to secure a +1.1 offense credit, but otherwise struggled to leave a footprint in his four minutes. A live-ball turnover and a lack of peripheral stats highlighted his difficulty in carving out a reliable rhythm. His shift was a fleeting flash of marksmanship without much connective tissue.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +3.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.0m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers -2.4
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.0

Tomlin made the most of his brief four-minute appearance, immediately injecting energy with a steal and a perfect 1-of-1 from the floor. His activity on the less glamorous end earned a +3.0 defense credit, showcasing his raw athletic tools. He managed to be a positive disruptor without needing heavy volume, securing a +2.0 offense mark in the process.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg +3.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.0m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +0.3
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-11.8

Bryant's brief stint was marred by empty-calorie chucking, as he missed all four of his field goal attempts to generate a -2.2 offense credit. He managed to grab 4 rebounds in just 4 minutes, but his erratic shot selection actively harmed the offensive flow. This performance highlighted his struggles to find a rhythm in limited, volatile rotation minutes.

Shooting
FG 0/4 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 41.7%
Net Rtg +3.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.0m
Scoring -3.0
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +4.1
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.1

Tyson was a complete ghost during his four minutes on the floor, failing to register a single point, rebound, or assist. His -0.6 offense credit reflects a completely hollow shift where he couldn't find a way to impact the game. He simply existed on the court without altering the flow of play.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg +3.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.0m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0