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

PLAYER PERFORMANCE

SAS San Antonio Spurs
S De'Aaron Fox 37.9m
7
pts
4
reb
5
ast
Impact
-13.0

An ice-cold shooting performance completely defined Fox's night, as he managed just 7 points on 3-of-13 shooting and missed all four of his three-point attempts. This offensive struggle (-4.4 Offense credit), combined with 3 turnovers, negated his solid defensive effort.

Shooting
FG 3/13 (23.1%)
3PT 0/4 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 25.2%
USG% 18.3%
Net Rtg +1.3
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.9m
Scoring -1.0
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +0.8
Hustle +1.2
Defense -0.4
Turnovers -7.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 22.2%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 3
26
pts
12
reb
2
ast
Impact
+14.4

Despite a rough shooting night (6/21 FG), Wembanyama's performance was driven by his sheer defensive dominance and ability to manufacture points at the line. His +12.5 Defense credit, fueled by 17 contests and 3 blocks, anchored the team, while going 12/13 on free throws salvaged an offensive outing marred by 6 turnovers.

Shooting
FG 6/21 (28.6%)
3PT 2/9 (22.2%)
FT 12/13 (92.3%)
Advanced
TS% 48.7%
USG% 35.5%
Net Rtg -2.6
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.8m
Scoring +14.3
Creation +2.8
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +10.4
Defense +3.5
Turnovers -13.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 21
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 3
TO 6
S Devin Vassell 36.0m
9
pts
9
reb
3
ast
Impact
+6.0

Vassell's performance was defined by a cold shooting night, as he scored just 9 points on 4-of-11 from the field and struggled from deep (1/6). While he contributed unusually well on the glass with 9 rebounds, his offensive inefficiency and defensive struggles where opponents shot 62% against him limited his overall value.

Shooting
FG 4/11 (36.4%)
3PT 1/6 (16.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 40.9%
USG% 13.2%
Net Rtg -15.6
+/- -13
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.0m
Scoring +3.5
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +11.4
Defense +0.0
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 13
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 61.5%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
S Stephon Castle 34.5m
17
pts
8
reb
3
ast
Impact
+10.6

Castle's value was almost entirely on the defensive end, where he was exceptional, holding his matchups to just 3-of-18 (17%) shooting. Offensively, he was a volume-dependent scorer, needing 16 shots for his 17 points, but he contributed on the glass with 8 rebounds and kept his turnovers low.

Shooting
FG 7/16 (43.8%)
3PT 1/5 (20.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 50.4%
USG% 22.9%
Net Rtg -7.4
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.5m
Scoring +10.4
Creation +0.5
Shot Making +4.1
Hustle +10.2
Defense -0.9
Turnovers -4.7
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 18
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
16
pts
10
reb
1
ast
Impact
+17.9

A hot hand from three-point range drove Champagnie's entire performance, as he connected on 5-of-10 from deep to score 16 points. This offensive explosion (+15.2 Offense credit) and a surprising 10 rebounds were crucial, but they were offset by major defensive issues where opponents shot 10/16 (62%) when he was guarding them.

Shooting
FG 5/11 (45.5%)
3PT 5/10 (50.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.3%
USG% 15.8%
Net Rtg -9.0
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.2m
Scoring +10.9
Creation +0.3
Shot Making +4.7
Hustle +12.7
Defense -1.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 16
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 62.5%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
Dylan Harper 27.5m
16
pts
8
reb
1
ast
Impact
+8.9

Harper's performance was driven by highly efficient scoring and rebounding from the wing position. He scored 16 points on just 10 shots and pulled down 8 rebounds (well above his 6.3 average), providing a strong offensive contribution (+12.1 Offense) without needing high volume.

Shooting
FG 6/10 (60.0%)
3PT 1/4 (25.0%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 70.7%
USG% 17.9%
Net Rtg -8.3
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.5m
Scoring +12.8
Creation +0.9
Shot Making +3.3
Hustle +2.4
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
2
reb
1
ast
Impact
-12.0

Barnes provided no offensive production in his 12 minutes, going scoreless on 0-of-2 shooting and even missing a free throw. His time on the floor was defined by a complete lack of offensive contribution.

Shooting
FG 0/2 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 6.7%
Net Rtg -4.0
+/- -2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 12.1m
Scoring -2.1
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.6
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
Luke Kornet 10.2m
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.6

Kornet was a non-factor in his 10 minutes on the court, failing to score and grabbing just a single rebound. He provided little presence on either end, resulting in an invisible performance.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -24.2
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.2m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense -2.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
3
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-10.1

In a very limited eight-minute run, Johnson was unable to make a positive impact, scoring just 3 points on 1-of-4 shooting. His brief appearance was largely forgettable and didn't allow him to find any sort of rhythm.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 1/2 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 37.5%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg +5.3
+/- +1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 8.3m
Scoring +0.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -2.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 40.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
1
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-11.7

Bryant's 4 minutes on the court were uneventful, as he scored a single point from the free-throw line and had little other statistical impact. His performance was limited to a brief, end-of-game cameo.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 26.6%
USG% 20.0%
Net Rtg -44.4
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.4m
Scoring -0.3
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 60.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
NYK New York Knicks
S Jalen Brunson 37.0m
30
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
+6.9

This was a high-volume, score-first performance defined by sheer offensive will, as Brunson put up 31 shots to get his 30 points. While the scoring was there, it came at the cost of efficiency (39% FG) and ball security (4.0 turnovers). His playmaking also took a backseat, finishing with just 2.0 assists, well below his 6.3 average.

Shooting
FG 12/31 (38.7%)
3PT 2/9 (22.2%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 45.8%
USG% 40.2%
Net Rtg +6.3
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.0m
Scoring +16.6
Creation +1.2
Shot Making +6.7
Hustle +1.9
Defense -1.9
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 6.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 4
18
pts
12
reb
4
ast
Impact
+12.4

While his three-point shot was absent (0/2), Towns dominated the interior on both ends of the floor. His performance was defined by a powerful combination of efficient interior scoring and rebounding (18 points, 12 boards) and lockdown paint defense, holding opponents to just 3/15 (20%) shooting as the nearest defender.

Shooting
FG 7/15 (46.7%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 53.7%
USG% 20.9%
Net Rtg +14.5
+/- +14
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 34.4m
Scoring +11.7
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +2.7
Hustle +15.2
Defense -4.2
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 2
S OG Anunoby 31.1m
17
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
+11.2

Anunoby operated purely as a 3-and-D weapon, contributing almost nothing as a playmaker (0.0 assists) or rebounder (3.0). His value was driven by efficient spot-up scoring, including 3-of-6 from deep, and a strong defensive showing where opponents shot just 3/11 when he was the primary defender.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 4/4 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 61.8%
USG% 17.9%
Net Rtg -15.0
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 31.1m
Scoring +12.0
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +3.6
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.9
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 27.3%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 0
S Mikal Bridges 28.2m
9
pts
3
reb
3
ast
Impact
+3.5

Bridges took a backseat offensively, attempting just 6 shots and zero three-pointers in a departure from his usual role. His value was instead driven by defensive activity, where he held matchups to 4/12 shooting and recorded 2 steals, contributing to a +4.0 defensive credit.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.0%
USG% 12.7%
Net Rtg +13.8
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 28.2m
Scoring +6.5
Creation +0.8
Shot Making +1.6
Hustle +2.8
Defense +2.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 2
BLK 0
TO 1
S Josh Hart 26.8m
3
pts
15
reb
6
ast
Impact
+19.3

Hart's scoring was a complete non-factor on 1/5 shooting, but he generated immense value elsewhere on the floor. His performance was driven by elite defensive activity (+11.3 Defense credit) and dominant rebounding with 15 boards, nearly double his 8.2 average. He also protected the ball perfectly, finishing with 0 turnovers.

Shooting
FG 1/5 (20.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 1/1 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 27.6%
USG% 8.2%
Net Rtg +40.0
+/- +22
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 26.8m
Scoring -0.3
Creation +1.7
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +19.1
Defense +7.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 4
BLK 1
TO 0
13
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
+0.2

Shamet provided a much-needed scoring punch off the bench, exceeding his scoring average with 13 points on efficient 3-of-6 shooting from deep. This offensive spark (+9.6 Offense credit) defined his role, as he offered little else and struggled defensively, with opponents shooting 8/14 (57%) against him.

Shooting
FG 5/9 (55.6%)
3PT 3/6 (50.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 72.2%
USG% 10.7%
Net Rtg -12.6
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.3m
Scoring +10.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.5
Hustle +0.3
Defense -3.7
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 57.1%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
6
pts
1
reb
4
ast
Impact
-5.2

McBride's value came from his playmaking and ball control rather than his scoring in this bench outing. Despite inefficient 2-of-7 shooting, he distributed 4 assists (well above his 1.3 average) and committed zero turnovers, effectively running the second unit.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 42.9%
USG% 14.9%
Net Rtg +24.5
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 19.5m
Scoring +2.0
Creation +0.4
Shot Making +1.8
Hustle +0.3
Defense +0.2
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 9
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 44.4%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
2
pts
6
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.5

In his limited 13-minute role, Robinson's performance was defined by his work on the glass. He provided a quick rebounding boost by grabbing 6 boards, while remaining a non-factor in the offense with just 2 shot attempts.

Shooting
FG 1/2 (50.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 0/1 (0.0%)
Advanced
TS% 41.0%
USG% 6.3%
Net Rtg -13.3
+/- -4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 13.2m
Scoring +0.3
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.1
Hustle +5.7
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
7
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-5.9

Alvarado provided an efficient and energetic spark in just 11 minutes off the bench. He scored a quick 7 points on 3-of-6 shooting and surprisingly chipped in with 4 rebounds, well above his average, making the most of his limited court time.

Shooting
FG 3/6 (50.0%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 58.3%
USG% 25.9%
Net Rtg +4.3
+/- +4
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.9m
Scoring +4.8
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +1.7
Hustle +1.2
Defense -1.1
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
0
pts
1
reb
0
ast
Impact
-12.3

Clarkson was a complete non-factor in his 6 minutes of action, failing to score on a single shot attempt. His brief appearance was defined by a lack of any meaningful contribution on either end of the floor.

Shooting
FG 0/1 (0.0%)
3PT 0/1 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 7.7%
Net Rtg +28.0
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 5.7m
Scoring -0.8
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.3
Defense -0.3
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 3
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 66.7%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0