Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
SAS lead MIN lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
MIN 2P — 3P —
SAS 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 172 attempts

MIN MIN Shot-making Δ

Randle 6/17 -6.6
Dosunmu 7/14 -0.6
McDaniels Hard 6/13 +1.4
Edwards 6/13 0.0
Reid Hard 4/10 0.0
Shannon Jr. 0/5 -5.9
Gobert Open 1/4 -3.6
Conley Hard 2/3 +1.9
Anderson Hard 0/1 -0.8
Hyland Hard 0/1 -1.1

SAS SAS Shot-making Δ

Wembanyama 9/16 +1.3
Fox 6/15 -4.5
Johnson 8/11 +4.3
Castle Open 8/11 +2.8
Vassell Hard 4/10 -0.3
Harper Open 5/10 -2.4
Champagnie Hard 3/9 -1.9
Waters III Hard 1/2 +1.1
Biyombo Open 1/2 -0.8
Bryant Hard 1/1 +2.1
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
MIN
SAS
32/83 Field Goals 47/89
38.6% Field Goal % 52.8%
9/33 3-Pointers 11/32
27.3% 3-Point % 34.4%
24/30 Free Throws 21/27
80.0% Free Throw % 77.8%
50.4% True Shooting % 62.5%
45 Total Rebounds 60
10 Offensive 11
32 Defensive 39
17 Assists 25
1.06 Assist/TO Ratio 1.67
13 Turnovers 15
7 Steals 9
4 Blocks 8
24 Fouls 24
36 Points in Paint 68
15 Fast Break Pts 19
18 Points off TOs 19
12 Second Chance Pts 13
23 Bench Points 44
2 Largest Lead 30
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Victor Wembanyama
27 PTS · 17 REB · 5 AST · 32.6 MIN
+22.92
2
Keldon Johnson
21 PTS · 2 REB · 0 AST · 22.3 MIN
+19.35
3
Ayo Dosunmu
16 PTS · 9 REB · 4 AST · 33.3 MIN
+15.74
4
Dylan Harper
12 PTS · 10 REB · 2 AST · 25.3 MIN
+13.86
5
Stephon Castle
17 PTS · 4 REB · 6 AST · 27.1 MIN
+12.21
6
Julius Randle
17 PTS · 10 REB · 1 AST · 36.4 MIN
+12.09
7
De'Aaron Fox
18 PTS · 4 REB · 5 AST · 34.5 MIN
+10.92
8
Jaden McDaniels
17 PTS · 6 REB · 2 AST · 29.6 MIN
+9.57
9
Anthony Edwards
20 PTS · 2 REB · 2 AST · 39.2 MIN
+8.13
10
Naz Reid
12 PTS · 5 REB · 2 AST · 30.6 MIN
+7.74
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:13 C. Bryant REBOUND (Off:0 Def:4) 97–126
Q4 0:15 MISS J. Phillips running 3PT 97–126
Q4 0:20 B. Hyland REBOUND (Off:0 Def:1) 97–126
Q4 0:21 J. Beringer BLOCK (1 BLK) 97–126
Q4 0:21 MISS B. Biyombo reverse Layup - blocked 97–126
Q4 0:29 B. Biyombo REBOUND (Off:0 Def:1) 97–126
Q4 0:31 MISS J. Beringer Free Throw 2 of 2 97–126
Q4 0:31 J. Beringer Free Throw 1 of 2 (3 PTS) 97–126
Q4 0:31 B. Biyombo personal FOUL (2 PF) (Beringer 2 FT) 96–126
Q4 0:38 K. Olynyk 3PT (3 PTS) (C. Bryant 2 AST) 96–126
Q4 0:47 C. Bryant REBOUND (Off:0 Def:3) 96–123
Q4 0:50 MISS K. Anderson Free Throw 2 of 2 96–123
Q4 0:50 K. Anderson Free Throw 1 of 2 (1 PTS) 96–123
Q4 0:50 C. Bryant shooting personal FOUL (1 PF) (Anderson 2 FT) 95–123
Q4 0:54 J. Beringer REBOUND (Off:1 Def:2) 95–123

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

SAS San Antonio Spurs
S De'Aaron Fox 34.5m
18
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
+5.2

Fox navigated a clunky shooting night (6-of-15) by consistently attacking the rim, earning a perfect 5-of-5 trip to the foul line to buoy his +12.3 offensive credit. He complemented his scoring with sharp point-of-attack defense, limiting his matchups to just 3-of-9 (33%) from the field.

Shooting
FG 6/15 (40.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 52.3%
USG% 21.7%
Net Rtg +31.6
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.5m
Scoring +10.6
Creation +2.0
Shot Making +3.2
Hustle +1.2
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
27
pts
17
reb
5
ast
Impact
+34.6

Wembanyama completely monopolized the paint on both ends, pairing a dominant 17-rebound performance with a massive +12.2 defensive credit. He contested a staggering 14 shots and suffocated his matchups into 7-of-20 (35%) shooting, while also anchoring the offense efficiently (9-of-16) to earn a +19.6 offensive credit.

Shooting
FG 9/16 (56.2%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 7/9 (77.8%)
Advanced
TS% 67.6%
USG% 28.6%
Net Rtg +36.7
+/- +24
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.6m
Scoring +20.9
Creation +2.5
Shot Making +4.6
Hustle +21.6
Defense +1.5
Turnovers -8.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 35.0%
STL 0
BLK 3
TO 4
S Devin Vassell 32.4m
12
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-0.7

Vassell locked down his primary assignments on the perimeter, stifling opponents to a miserable 1-of-5 (20%) shooting when he was the nearest defender. While his own shot wasn't falling consistently (2-of-7 from deep), his active hands produced 3 deflections and helped secure a +3.0 hustle credit.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 2/7 (28.6%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 53.0%
USG% 15.6%
Net Rtg +31.0
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.4m
Scoring +6.8
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +2.6
Hustle +1.9
Defense -2.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
8
pts
4
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.6

Champagnie struggled to find his stroke from the perimeter, clanking his way to a 2-of-8 showing from beyond the arc. Despite the cold shooting, he salvaged his night with relentless defensive activity, racking up 4 deflections and 2 steals to generate a +3.8 hustle credit and a +3.1 defensive credit.

Shooting
FG 3/9 (33.3%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 44.4%
USG% 13.0%
Net Rtg +26.2
+/- +15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.2m
Scoring +3.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +1.2
Defense -0.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 6
Opp FG% 46.2%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 0
S Stephon Castle 27.1m
17
pts
4
reb
6
ast
Impact
+6.0

Castle operated as a highly efficient slasher, converting a blistering 8-of-11 (73%) from the floor to drive a +9.0 offensive credit. He also made his presence felt on the less glamorous end, racking up 2 steals and contesting 6 shots to secure a robust +7.6 defensive credit despite 4 turnovers.

Shooting
FG 8/11 (72.7%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/3 (33.3%)
Advanced
TS% 69.0%
USG% 25.4%
Net Rtg +4.9
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.1m
Scoring +13.8
Creation +2.9
Shot Making +2.5
Hustle +1.2
Defense +3.4
Turnovers -10.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 46.7%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 4
Dylan Harper 25.3m
12
pts
10
reb
2
ast
Impact
+7.4

Harper crashed the glass with authority, pulling down 10 rebounds to secure a double-double off the bench. His efficient interior finishing (5-of-10 shooting) fueled a strong +12.7 offensive credit, though his defensive matchups did find success by converting 4-of-6 (67%) of their attempts against him.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 55.1%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +23.6
+/- +13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 25.3m
Scoring +7.7
Creation +1.6
Shot Making +1.4
Hustle +10.8
Defense -1.8
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
21
pts
2
reb
0
ast
Impact
+16.5

Johnson operated as an absolute wrecking ball off the bench, torching the nets for 21 points on highly efficient 8-of-11 (73%) shooting to drive a massive +17.5 offensive credit. He paired this scoring outburst with disruptive perimeter defense, recording 3 deflections and holding his matchups to just 2-of-6 (33%) from the field.

Shooting
FG 8/11 (72.7%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 79.5%
USG% 27.8%
Net Rtg +38.2
+/- +17
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.3m
Scoring +18.3
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +3.9
Hustle +2.5
Defense +3.7
Turnovers -6.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 2
3
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-6.3

Bryant made the most of his limited touches, burying his lone three-point attempt to secure a +2.0 offensive credit. He chipped in 4 rebounds and 2 assists during his 12 minutes, though he struggled slightly in isolation as opponents shot 3-of-5 (60%) when he was the primary defender.

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 6.3%
Net Rtg +32.4
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.5m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +1.2
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
Luke Kornet 11.0m
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-5.2

Kornet was completely blanked on the stat sheet offensively, failing to score or grab a single rebound in his 11 minutes of action. However, he managed to salvage his stint entirely through rim protection and positioning, generating a massive +9.0 defensive credit by contesting 5 shots and collecting 2 steals.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 3.6%
Net Rtg -4.0
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 11.0m
Scoring -1.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +3.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.6

Barnes was a virtual ghost during his brief three-minute appearance, failing to attempt a single shot from the field. He managed to grab one rebound and dish out one assist, resulting in a modest +1.8 offensive credit without leaving any defensive footprint.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg 0.0
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.6m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.3
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
2
ast
Impact
-7.1

McLaughlin operated strictly as a quick-hit facilitator during his three minutes of action, dishing out 2 assists without attempting a shot. He kept a clean sheet defensively, preventing his lone matchup from scoring to earn a +1.1 defensive credit.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg +87.5
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.1m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.2

Waters III capitalized on a brief garbage-time cameo, knocking down his only three-point attempt to generate a +2.2 offensive credit. He recorded zero other counting stats across his two minutes, serving purely as a momentary floor-spacer.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 75.0%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg +53.3
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.1m
Scoring +2.4
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-3.6

Olynyk provided instant value during his two minutes on the floor, sinking his lone three-point attempt to secure a +3.0 offensive credit. He also flashed solid positional awareness on the other end, contesting 2 shots and completely shutting down his matchups (0-of-3 shooting).

Shooting
FG 1/1 (100.0%)
3PT 1/1 (100.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 150.0%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +53.3
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.1m
Scoring +3.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
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
2
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.9

Biyombo managed to convert one of his two shot attempts in the paint, chipping in 2 points and a single rebound during his brief two-minute stint. His defensive presence was entirely negligible, resulting in a slight -0.6 defensive credit.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 50.0%
USG% 33.3%
Net Rtg +53.3
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 2.1m
Scoring +1.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.2
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
MIN Minnesota Timberwolves
S Anthony Edwards 39.2m
20
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+4.5

Edwards generated consistent rim pressure to earn a perfect 7-of-7 trip to the foul line, but his playmaking decisions frequently short-circuited the offense. He leaked value through 4 live-ball turnovers while dishing out just 2 assists, and his defensive matchups found success by hitting 9-of-18 (50%) of their looks against him.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 7/7 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 62.2%
USG% 21.1%
Net Rtg -13.1
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 39.2m
Scoring +15.2
Creation +2.3
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
S Julius Randle 36.4m
17
pts
10
reb
1
ast
Impact
+11.5

Randle struggled to find his touch from the floor, clanking all four of his three-point attempts during an inefficient 6-of-17 shooting night. Despite the scoring woes, he managed to secure a clean +14.4 offensive credit by completely avoiding turnovers and dominating the glass for 10 rebounds.

Shooting
FG 6/17 (35.3%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 5/7 (71.4%)
Advanced
TS% 42.3%
USG% 22.7%
Net Rtg -29.7
+/- -22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.4m
Scoring +7.5
Creation +2.6
Shot Making +2.2
Hustle +8.8
Defense -2.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
S Ayo Dosunmu 33.3m
16
pts
9
reb
4
ast
Impact
+7.9

Dosunmu stuffed the stat sheet with a relentless two-way motor, pulling down 9 rebounds and generating a massive +9.8 defensive credit. His defensive playmaking was particularly disruptive, as he racked up 3 steals and 2 blocks to complement an efficient 7-of-14 shooting performance on the other end.

Shooting
FG 7/14 (50.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.8%
USG% 22.4%
Net Rtg -29.0
+/- -20
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.3m
Scoring +9.7
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +3.0
Hustle +2.7
Defense +4.4
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 3
BLK 2
TO 2
S Jaden McDaniels 29.6m
17
pts
6
reb
2
ast
Impact
+9.4

McDaniels anchored the perimeter defense effectively, smothering his assignments to the tune of 4-of-13 (31%) shooting when he was the nearest defender. He paired this containment with reliable floor-spacing, hitting 3-of-7 from deep to generate a +10.7 offensive credit, though foul trouble (5 PFs) limited his overall rhythm.

Shooting
FG 6/13 (46.2%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 61.2%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg -18.2
+/- -12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 29.6m
Scoring +11.9
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +4.4
Hustle +5.7
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 30.8%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
S Rudy Gobert 22.6m
4
pts
5
reb
0
ast
Impact
+2.5

Gobert was virtually invisible on the offensive end, managing just 4 points on a mere four shot attempts as his interior gravity completely vanished. His typical rim-deterrence was also lacking, evidenced by opponents shooting a comfortable 7-of-11 (64%) against him, though he still managed to scrape together a +5.2 defensive credit through 8 shot contests and a pair of steals.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.0%
USG% 11.8%
Net Rtg -35.4
+/- -15
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 22.6m
Scoring +0.9
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +6.3
Defense +4.6
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 63.6%
STL 2
BLK 1
TO 1
Naz Reid 30.6m
12
pts
5
reb
2
ast
Impact
+5.2

Reid provided a reliable floor-spacing spark off the bench, knocking down 3-of-7 from beyond the arc to fuel a +7.4 offensive credit. He paired this perimeter shooting with active hands on the other end, recording 3 deflections and holding his defensive assignments to a respectable 4-of-9 (44%) from the field.

Shooting
FG 4/10 (40.0%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 55.1%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg -31.3
+/- -21
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.6m
Scoring +6.9
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +3.3
Hustle +1.5
Defense +0.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
2
pts
0
reb
4
ast
Impact
-20.2

Shannon Jr. endured a brutal offensive outing, missing all five of his shot attempts (including 0-of-4 from deep) to post a -3.1 offensive credit. His struggles extended to the defensive end, where he was consistently targeted and allowed his matchups to scorch him for 9-of-13 (69%) shooting, though he did salvage some value through sheer effort (+4.4 hustle credit).

Shooting
FG 0/5 (0.0%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 17.0%
USG% 18.2%
Net Rtg -9.6
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 17.4m
Scoring -2.2
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -6.2
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 69.2%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
Mike Conley 15.2m
5
pts
1
reb
2
ast
Impact
-3.1

Conley operated as a low-usage game manager during his 15 minutes of action, taking just three shots but converting efficiently (2-of-3) to secure a +5.7 offensive credit. He avoided mistakes completely with zero turnovers, though his defensive presence was minimal as opponents converted 3-of-5 looks against him.

Shooting
FG 2/3 (66.7%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 83.3%
USG% 8.8%
Net Rtg -18.8
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.2m
Scoring +4.2
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.5

Beringer made the most of his brief three-minute cameo, drawing contact to earn three points at the charity stripe. He also provided a quick defensive spark, rejecting a shot and completely shutting down his matchups (0-of-2 shooting) to earn a +2.4 defensive credit.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.3%
USG% 44.4%
Net Rtg -87.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.1m
Scoring +1.5
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +2.8
Defense +0.5
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 1
1
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-7.4

Anderson was a complete non-factor during his three minutes of garbage time, failing to register a single rebound, assist, or defensive stat. His only offensive contribution was a split pair of free throws, resulting in a flat -0.3 offensive credit.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 26.6%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg -87.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.1m
Scoring -0.1
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.4

Hyland's brief appearance was marred by empty offensive production, missing his lone three-point attempt to sink his offensive credit to -2.8. He also offered little resistance defensively, allowing his assignments to convert 2-of-3 shots during his three minutes on the floor.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 22.2%
Net Rtg -87.5
+/- -7
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 -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-8.4

Phillips logged three empty minutes at the end of the bench, failing to record a single counting stat outside of a missed three-pointer. His defensive impact was equally invisible, as he allowed his only defended matchup to score, resulting in a flatline performance across the board.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 11.1%
Net Rtg -87.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.1m
Scoring -0.9
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense +0.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.7

Clark operated as a mere spectator during his brief three-minute stint, failing to attempt a shot or record a single box-score statistic. His only tangible involvement was surrendering a basket on his lone defended matchup, leaving him with a completely neutral +0.0 offensive credit.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -87.5
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.1m
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 100.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0