Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
PHI lead NYK lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
NYK 2P — 3P —
PHI 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 177 attempts

NYK NYK Shot-making Δ

Brunson Hard 8/17 +4.3
McBride Hard 7/10 +11.0
Hart Hard 6/10 +6.4
Bridges 6/10 +1.1
Shamet Hard 4/7 +5.4
Towns 5/7 +4.9
Alvarado 3/6 +0.7
Kolek 2/5 -1.4
Dadiet 2/4 +1.1
Robinson Open 2/4 -1.4

PHI PHI Shot-making Δ

Maxey Hard 6/16 -2.8
Edgecombe 4/14 -7.3
Edwards Hard 3/9 -2.7
Embiid 8/8 +9.9
George Hard 3/7 0.0
Oubre Jr. 4/6 +1.2
Grimes Hard 2/6 -0.3
Broome 3/5 +1.5
Terry 3/4 +2.3
Drummond Open 2/4 -1.4
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
NYK
PHI
49/91 Field Goals 43/86
53.8% Field Goal % 50.0%
25/44 3-Pointers 8/35
56.8% 3-Point % 22.9%
21/29 Free Throws 20/28
72.4% Free Throw % 71.4%
69.4% True Shooting % 58.0%
59 Total Rebounds 43
15 Offensive 7
32 Defensive 23
33 Assists 24
3.00 Assist/TO Ratio 2.40
9 Turnovers 9
6 Steals 5
4 Blocks 3
22 Fouls 23
40 Points in Paint 54
20 Fast Break Pts 7
23 Points off TOs 10
18 Second Chance Pts 15
51 Bench Points 48
44 Largest Lead 2
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Miles McBride
25 PTS · 4 REB · 0 AST · 29.3 MIN
+26.93
2
Joel Embiid
24 PTS · 5 REB · 4 AST · 27.6 MIN
+19.36
3
Jalen Brunson
22 PTS · 4 REB · 6 AST · 28.3 MIN
+19.21
4
Josh Hart
17 PTS · 9 REB · 1 AST · 29.3 MIN
+19.1
5
Mikal Bridges
12 PTS · 4 REB · 6 AST · 28.3 MIN
+18.05
6
Karl-Anthony Towns
17 PTS · 4 REB · 10 AST · 19.9 MIN
+16.62
7
Dalen Terry
9 PTS · 1 REB · 3 AST · 12.0 MIN
+10.47
8
Kelly Oubre Jr.
10 PTS · 4 REB · 0 AST · 25.9 MIN
+9.51
9
Landry Shamet
12 PTS · 0 REB · 0 AST · 11.3 MIN
+7.97
10
Adem Bona
7 PTS · 2 REB · 0 AST · 10.0 MIN
+7.71
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:14 J. Broome running DUNK (7 PTS) (D. Terry 3 AST) 144–114
Q4 0:19 D. Terry STEAL (3 STL) 144–112
Q4 0:19 J. Sochan lost ball TURNOVER (1 TO) 144–112
Q4 0:36 J. Sochan REBOUND (Off:1 Def:1) 144–112
Q4 0:40 MISS J. Broome 26' 3PT 144–112
Q4 0:44 P. Dadiet 24' 3PT (5 PTS) (T. Kolek 2 AST) 144–112
Q4 0:55 J. Broome 27' 3PT (5 PTS) (J. Edwards 1 AST) 141–112
Q4 1:03 J. Sochan Free Throw 2 of 2 (5 PTS) 141–109
Q4 1:03 J. Sochan Free Throw 1 of 2 (4 PTS) 140–109
Q4 1:03 T. Watford loose ball personal FOUL (2 PF) (Sochan 2 FT) 139–109
Q4 1:03 TEAM offensive REBOUND 139–109
Q4 1:05 MISS T. Kolek 27' 3PT 139–109
Q4 1:17 T. Watford driving floating Jump Shot (2 PTS) 139–109
Q4 1:25 J. Sochan running alley-oop DUNK (3 PTS) (T. Kolek 1 AST) 139–107
Q4 1:28 P. Dadiet REBOUND (Off:0 Def:3) 137–107

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

PHI Philadelphia 76ers
S Tyrese Maxey 33.4m
17
pts
2
reb
4
ast
Impact
-0.7

Maxey's offensive engine sputtered due to a brutal 1-of-7 showing from beyond the arc, holding him well below his usual scoring average. He remained active defensively with 6 contests and 3 deflections (+3.1 Hustle credit), but his inefficient volume dragged down his overall impact.

Shooting
FG 6/16 (37.5%)
3PT 1/7 (14.3%)
FT 4/6 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 45.6%
USG% 28.0%
Net Rtg -53.8
+/- -35
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.4m
Scoring +8.7
Creation +1.5
Shot Making +3.1
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 54.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S VJ Edgecombe 30.4m
8
pts
6
reb
7
ast
Impact
+1.5

Edgecombe's jumper completely abandoned him, as he bricked all six of his three-point attempts en route to a dismal 29% shooting night. He pivoted to a playmaking role to salvage his value, dishing out 7 assists without a single turnover to earn a +5.7 Offense credit.

Shooting
FG 4/14 (28.6%)
3PT 0/6 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 28.6%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -55.7
+/- -33
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.4m
Scoring +0.4
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +7.6
Defense +0.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
S Joel Embiid 27.6m
24
pts
5
reb
4
ast
Impact
+14.8

Embiid delivered a masterclass in offensive efficiency, hitting all eight of his field goals and both three-pointers to generate a massive +23.1 Offense credit. However, his rim protection completely collapsed, allowing opponents to shoot a staggering 70% (14-of-20) when he was the nearest defender.

Shooting
FG 8/8 (100.0%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 6/7 (85.7%)
Advanced
TS% 108.3%
USG% 23.7%
Net Rtg -47.6
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.6m
Scoring +23.5
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +5.0
Hustle +3.4
Defense -2.2
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 14
Opp FG% 70.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 3
S Paul George 26.6m
7
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.5

A severe scoring drought defined George's night, as he managed just 7 points on 43% shooting to drag down his offensive value. He tried to compensate with high-effort defensive plays, logging 7 contests and drawing a charge to salvage a +4.8 Hustle credit.

Shooting
FG 3/7 (42.9%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 15.5%
Net Rtg -62.8
+/- -35
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.6m
Scoring +4.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 41.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
S Kelly Oubre Jr. 25.9m
10
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
+4.3

Oubre Jr. operated with extreme tunnel vision, failing to record a single assist while focusing entirely on efficient interior scoring (4-of-6 FG). This direct approach yielded a +9.3 Offense credit, though his defensive resistance was lacking as opponents shot 67% against him.

Shooting
FG 4/6 (66.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 68.3%
USG% 11.3%
Net Rtg -53.8
+/- -28
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.9m
Scoring +8.1
Creation +0.6
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +3.1
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
8
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.1

Edwards doubled his season scoring average with 8 points, but his shot selection was highly inefficient, missing all six of his three-point attempts. He managed a +3.7 Offense credit by getting to the line and avoiding turnovers, though his perimeter stroke was non-existent.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 0/6 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 40.5%
USG% 23.8%
Net Rtg +8.1
+/- +3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.5m
Scoring +3.4
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
6
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.8

Grimes operated strictly as a perimeter decoy, failing to record a single rebound or assist while shooting a poor 33% from the floor. His +2.6 Offense credit was entirely dependent on his two made three-pointers, highlighting a one-dimensional and largely ineffective performance.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 15.4%
Net Rtg -67.4
+/- -24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.8m
Scoring +2.5
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
5
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-4.1

Barlow made his mark through sheer defensive activity, racking up 8 shot contests and 3 deflections to earn a +3.5 Hustle credit. He supplemented this gritty effort with an efficient 5 points on 2-of-3 shooting, maximizing his 15 minutes of floor time.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 72.7%
USG% 8.3%
Net Rtg -17.1
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.2m
Scoring +4.5
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +0.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Dalen Terry 12.0m
9
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
+3.5

Terry was an absolute menace in the passing lanes, generating a +5.7 Defense credit by racking up 3 steals and 5 deflections. He paired this defensive havoc with a highly efficient offensive burst, scoring 9 points on 75% shooting to easily clear his season average.

Shooting
FG 3/4 (75.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 2/5 (40.0%)
Advanced
TS% 72.6%
USG% 24.1%
Net Rtg +33.3
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.0m
Scoring +6.6
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +0.3
Defense +4.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
Adem Bona 10.0m
7
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-0.5

Bona provided a perfect spark of interior efficiency, converting both of his field goals and drawing fouls to generate a +8.4 Offense credit. He was equally stout on the other end, holding his matchups to just 1-of-4 shooting to secure a positive defensive impact.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 93.1%
USG% 16.0%
Net Rtg +13.9
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.0m
Scoring +6.5
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +0.9
Hustle +1.6
Defense -1.1
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 25.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
2
pts
0
reb
1
ast
Impact
-3.8

Watford's value was entirely driven by lockdown individual defense, suffocating his matchups to a dismal 1-of-8 shooting clip. This stifling coverage, combined with 2 steals, earned him a +3.8 Defense credit despite a nearly invisible offensive showing.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 100.0%
USG% 4.8%
Net Rtg +73.8
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.4m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +0.0
Defense +2.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 12.5%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
4
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.0

Drummond was largely ineffective during his brief seven-minute stint, managing just 4 rebounds—well below his usual glass-cleaning standards. His defensive positioning suffered, yielding a -2.1 Defense credit as opponents converted 2-of-3 attempts against him.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 25.0%
Net Rtg -81.7
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.3m
Scoring +2.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +4.1
Defense -4.0
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
-9.9

Walker failed to make a dent offensively, missing his only shot attempt to finish scoreless in seven minutes of action. He managed to grab 2 rebounds and log a deflection, but his overall impact remained negligible.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 6.3%
Net Rtg +80.0
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 6.8m
Scoring -1.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.6
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
7
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.0

Broome capitalized on a brief three-minute cameo, scoring 7 points on 60% shooting to generate a quick +6.3 Offense credit. He added value through 2 screen assists, showing impressive efficiency in extreme garbage-time minutes.

Shooting
FG 3/5 (60.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 70.0%
USG% 62.5%
Net Rtg +59.7
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.2m
Scoring +5.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
NYK New York Knicks
S Josh Hart 29.3m
17
pts
9
reb
1
ast
Impact
+18.9

Hart's offensive surge (+13.7 Offense credit) was fueled by a sudden spike in perimeter efficiency, drilling 4-of-6 from deep to easily surpass his 10.3 point average. He remained a relentless presence on the glass with 9 rebounds, though his individual defensive matchup struggled as opponents shot 67% when he was the primary defender.

Shooting
FG 6/10 (60.0%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.4%
USG% 15.7%
Net Rtg +46.9
+/- +30
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.3m
Scoring +14.1
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +4.8
Hustle +8.5
Defense +2.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
S Miles McBride 29.3m
25
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
+27.7

A staggering perimeter eruption defined McBride's night, as he torched the nets for 7-of-9 from deep to generate a massive +24.6 Offense credit. He completely shed his playmaking duties (0 assists) to focus purely on scoring, finishing with 25 points while committing zero turnovers.

Shooting
FG 7/10 (70.0%)
3PT 7/9 (77.8%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 106.3%
USG% 16.4%
Net Rtg +54.0
+/- +33
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.3m
Scoring +22.9
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +6.7
Hustle +4.1
Defense +2.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 19
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 47.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
S Mikal Bridges 28.3m
12
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
+10.6

Bridges operated as a disruptive two-way connector, generating a +7.4 Defense credit by racking up 4 deflections and 3 steals (↑). He didn't need to force his perimeter shot, instead leaning into efficient playmaking with 6 assists to drive his positive offensive impact.

Shooting
FG 6/10 (60.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 60.0%
USG% 16.2%
Net Rtg +56.4
+/- +31
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.3m
Scoring +9.1
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +3.1
Defense +5.5
Turnovers -1.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 42.9%
STL 3
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jalen Brunson 28.3m
22
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
+15.0

Brunson's +20.4 Offense credit was built on lethal perimeter marksmanship, draining 6-of-10 from beyond the arc. He managed the game flawlessly with zero turnovers, compensating for a slightly below-average scoring output by picking his spots efficiently.

Shooting
FG 8/17 (47.1%)
3PT 6/10 (60.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 64.7%
USG% 25.8%
Net Rtg +54.2
+/- +31
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.3m
Scoring +15.4
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +6.8
Hustle +3.1
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
17
pts
4
reb
10
ast
Impact
+6.0

Towns shifted away from his usual rebounding dominance (just 4 boards) to operate as a highly efficient offensive hub, dishing out an above-average 10 assists. His +19.3 Offense credit reflects a stellar 71% shooting night, though he offered little resistance inside as opponents converted 10-of-13 shots against him.

Shooting
FG 5/7 (71.4%)
3PT 2/3 (66.7%)
FT 5/6 (83.3%)
Advanced
TS% 88.2%
USG% 25.5%
Net Rtg +60.2
+/- +23
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.9m
Scoring +15.1
Creation +2.9
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +3.1
Defense -4.0
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 76.9%
STL 0
BLK 2
TO 2
6
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.1

Robinson did his damage in the margins, using 6 screen assists to free up shooters and drive a +10.2 Offense credit despite taking just four shots. He provided his typical rebounding baseline (6 boards) but failed to register a single block or steal in his 16 minutes.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.1%
USG% 15.0%
Net Rtg +55.8
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 16.2m
Scoring +2.7
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +0.2
Hustle +6.7
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
5
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-8.5

Hukporti struggled to finish inside (1-of-4 FG) but remained active around the rim, logging 8 shot contests to anchor his interior presence. Despite the hustle, his defensive positioning faltered, allowing opponents to shoot 50% against him and resulting in a -3.1 Defense credit.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 3/6 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 37.7%
USG% 19.0%
Net Rtg -5.6
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.6m
Scoring +1.3
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +5.1
Defense -4.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Tyler Kolek 12.9m
4
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-8.7

Kolek failed to find his perimeter stroke (0-of-2 from deep) during a quiet 13-minute shift. He managed to chip in 2 assists and 3 rebounds, but his overall offensive impact (+0.5) was muted by his inability to stretch the floor.

Shooting
FG 2/5 (40.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.0%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -24.1
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.9m
Scoring +1.8
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +0.7
Hustle +0.9
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 4
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
5
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.6

Dadiet made the most of his limited touches, hitting half his shots including his lone three-point attempt. He stayed engaged defensively with 3 contests and a deflection, though opponents still found success (60%) when he was the primary matchup.

Shooting
FG 2/4 (50.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 62.5%
USG% 16.1%
Net Rtg -33.3
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.0m
Scoring +3.5
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +0.9
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
12
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
+2.7

Shamet operated purely as a catch-and-shoot weapon, burying 4-of-6 from deep to nearly triple his season scoring average. His +9.5 Offense credit came entirely from this perimeter barrage, as he registered zero rebounds or assists in his 11 minutes of action.

Shooting
FG 4/7 (57.1%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 85.7%
USG% 23.3%
Net Rtg +53.3
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.3m
Scoring +9.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.8
Hustle +0.0
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
7
pts
3
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.1

Alvarado brought his trademark energy in a brief 10-minute stint, chipping in 7 points on efficient 50% shooting. He added a steal and a deflection to generate a +3.5 Defense credit, proving disruptive even in a limited rotational role.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 58.3%
USG% 23.3%
Net Rtg +54.2
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.3m
Scoring +4.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-13.0

Diawara was completely invisible on the offensive end, missing all three of his shot attempts to finish with zero points, rebounds, or assists. His struggles extended to his defensive assignments, where opponents converted both of their attempts against him.

Shooting
FG 0/3 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 12.5%
Net Rtg -73.8
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.4m
Scoring -2.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
5
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.1

Sochan maximized his brief nine-minute appearance by attacking the rim and drawing fouls, converting 3-of-4 from the stripe. He paired this efficient offensive cameo (+5.2 Offense credit) with solid defensive resistance, holding his matchups to 2-of-5 shooting.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 90.6%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg -73.8
+/- -14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 9.4m
Scoring +4.5
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +2.5
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
7
pts
1
reb
3
ast
Impact
-2.5

Clarkson provided a hyper-efficient offensive spark off the bench, converting 2-of-3 shots and dishing out 3 assists in just under eight minutes. This quick burst of creation and scoring yielded a +8.9 Offense credit without surrendering a single turnover.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 73.5%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +47.1
+/- +8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.7m
Scoring +5.8
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +0.6
Hustle +1.3
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0