Interactive analysis

EXPLORE THE GAME

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

Lead over time · win-probability overlay
LEAD TRACKER
SAS lead NYK lead Win %
Every shot · colored by difficulty
SHOT CHART
Click shooters to compare their shots on the court
NYK 2P — 3P —
SAS 2P — 3P —
Tough make Easy make Blown miss Tough miss 167 attempts

NYK NYK Shot-making Δ

Brunson 7/25 -10.7
Bridges Hard 8/13 +7.1
Towns 8/12 +5.0
Shamet 5/12 -0.4
Anunoby 5/10 -0.6
McBride Hard 2/7 -1.4
Alvarado Hard 0/4 -4.1
Hart 0/4 -4.5
Robinson Open 2/2 +1.2

SAS SAS Shot-making Δ

Wembanyama 11/21 -0.5
Castle 5/14 -3.0
Fox 8/12 +4.5
Harper Open 6/12 -3.4
Vassell 4/9 +0.5
Champagnie Hard 2/6 -0.3
Johnson 1/4 -3.0
How the game was played
BY THE NUMBERS
NYK
SAS
37/89 Field Goals 37/78
41.6% Field Goal % 47.4%
15/38 3-Pointers 11/29
39.5% 3-Point % 37.9%
16/21 Free Throws 19/27
76.2% Free Throw % 70.4%
53.4% True Shooting % 57.9%
54 Total Rebounds 53
10 Offensive 5
34 Defensive 37
29 Assists 22
1.93 Assist/TO Ratio 1.38
12 Turnovers 16
11 Steals 7
6 Blocks 7
23 Fouls 20
38 Points in Paint 48
19 Fast Break Pts 11
16 Points off TOs 17
14 Second Chance Pts 9
27 Bench Points 19
14 Largest Lead 12
Biggest contributors
TOP NET IMPACT
1
Victor Wembanyama
29 PTS · 9 REB · 2 AST · 40.3 MIN
+23.29
2
Karl-Anthony Towns
21 PTS · 13 REB · 4 AST · 33.9 MIN
+22.03
3
Mikal Bridges
20 PTS · 6 REB · 6 AST · 40.9 MIN
+19.55
4
OG Anunoby
17 PTS · 4 REB · 3 AST · 36.8 MIN
+18.91
5
Devin Vassell
14 PTS · 9 REB · 5 AST · 38.0 MIN
+14.32
6
De'Aaron Fox
20 PTS · 3 REB · 5 AST · 33.8 MIN
+14.16
7
Jalen Brunson
20 PTS · 5 REB · 6 AST · 37.7 MIN
+12.98
8
Landry Shamet
13 PTS · 2 REB · 2 AST · 30.2 MIN
+9.65
9
Dylan Harper
15 PTS · 6 REB · 3 AST · 32.3 MIN
+9.44
10
Julian Champagnie
8 PTS · 4 REB · 1 AST · 36.0 MIN
+5.69
Play-by-play (most recent first)
PLAY FEED
Q4 0:02 TEAM offensive REBOUND 105–104
Q4 0:02 MISS V. Wembanyama 20' Jump Shot 105–104
Q4 0:07 L. Kornet REBOUND (Off:0 Def:3) 105–104
Q4 0:09 MISS J. Brunson Free Throw 2 of 2 105–104
Q4 0:09 J. Brunson Free Throw 1 of 2 (20 PTS) 105–104
Q4 0:09 V. Wembanyama personal FOUL (2 PF) (Brunson 2 FT) 104–104
Q4 0:09 J. Brunson STEAL (5 STL) 104–104
Q4 0:09 V. Wembanyama bad pass TURNOVER (4 TO) 104–104
Q4 0:11 V. Wembanyama REBOUND (Off:3 Def:6) 104–104
Q4 0:13 MISS J. Brunson 16' pullup Shot 104–104
Q4 0:24 S. Castle personal FOUL (4 PF) 104–104
Q4 0:30 O. Anunoby REBOUND (Off:0 Def:4) 104–104
Q4 0:30 MISS V. Wembanyama 16' pullup Shot 104–104
Q4 0:39 J. Brunson 13' fadeaway Jump Shot (19 PTS) 104–104
Q4 0:57 V. Wembanyama Free Throw 1 of 1 (29 PTS) 102–104

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
29
pts
9
reb
2
ast
Impact
+21.9

Massive two-way production drove his game, as he generated a +19.4 Scoring credit with 29 points and a +6.4 Defense credit with 4 blocks. However, this elite output was partially offset by 4 turnovers, which created a significant -8.9 Turnovers penalty.

Shooting
FG 11/21 (52.4%)
3PT 2/6 (33.3%)
FT 5/8 (62.5%)
Advanced
TS% 59.1%
USG% 30.8%
Net Rtg +3.4
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 40.3m
Scoring +19.4
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +4.8
Hustle +8.5
Defense +6.4
Turnovers -8.9
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 20
FGM Against 10
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 4
TO 4
S Devin Vassell 38.0m
14
pts
9
reb
5
ast
Impact
+6.5

A well-rounded offensive game drove his performance, as he exceeded his season averages in points (14.0), rebounds (9.0), and assists (5.0). His clean, zero-turnover line was anchored by a +9.9 Scoring credit.

Shooting
FG 4/9 (44.4%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 3/3 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 67.8%
USG% 10.1%
Net Rtg +2.1
+/- +6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 38.0m
Scoring +9.9
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +3.2
Hustle +2.7
Defense -1.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 15
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 53.3%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
8
pts
4
reb
1
ast
Impact
-2.3

His performance was defined by his struggles on the defensive end, where opponents shot a blistering 8/11 (73%) when he was the primary defender. This defensive liability overshadowed his quiet offensive night where he scored just 8 points, well below his 11.8 average.

Shooting
FG 2/6 (33.3%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 58.1%
USG% 8.6%
Net Rtg -10.8
+/- -8
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.0m
Scoring +5.2
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +1.9
Hustle +1.2
Defense -1.4
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 8
Opp FG% 72.7%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
S De'Aaron Fox 33.8m
20
pts
3
reb
5
ast
Impact
+7.9

Hyper-efficient scoring and lockdown defense defined his stellar two-way performance. He scored 20 points on just 12 shots (+16.9 Scoring) and suffocated his matchup, holding them to 2/12 (17%) shooting while logging 7 deflections.

Shooting
FG 8/12 (66.7%)
3PT 2/2 (100.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 77.6%
USG% 21.9%
Net Rtg +4.3
+/- +2
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.8m
Scoring +16.9
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +4.6
Hustle +0.9
Defense +2.3
Turnovers -8.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 12
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 16.7%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 4
S Stephon Castle 27.7m
14
pts
4
reb
4
ast
Impact
-9.3

Turnovers were the story of his night, as his 4 miscues resulted in a damaging -9.5 Turnovers credit. This negated much of his offensive production and solid defensive effort, where he held opponents to 5/14 (36%) shooting.

Shooting
FG 5/14 (35.7%)
3PT 2/4 (50.0%)
FT 2/4 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 44.4%
USG% 32.8%
Net Rtg -8.9
+/- -6
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 27.7m
Scoring +6.8
Creation +1.9
Shot Making +2.8
Hustle +1.2
Defense -2.6
Turnovers -9.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 35.7%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 4
Dylan Harper 32.3m
15
pts
6
reb
3
ast
Impact
+3.6

An efficient and impactful all-around game was driven by his scoring and defense. He tallied 15 points on 50% shooting for a +9.5 Scoring credit and was a positive on defense, holding his matchup to just 2/7 (29%) from the field.

Shooting
FG 6/12 (50.0%)
3PT 0/3 (0.0%)
FT 3/4 (75.0%)
Advanced
TS% 54.5%
USG% 20.8%
Net Rtg +15.8
+/- +12
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 32.3m
Scoring +9.5
Creation +1.8
Shot Making +2.1
Hustle +3.7
Defense +1.8
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 7
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 28.6%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 2
3
pts
4
reb
2
ast
Impact
-4.8

His impact came entirely from energy and defense rather than scoring. Despite scoring just 3 points in his 15 minutes, he generated a strong +4.1 Hustle credit and a +2.4 Defense credit, making his presence felt without needing the ball.

Shooting
FG 1/4 (25.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 30.7%
USG% 17.6%
Net Rtg -12.7
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 15.7m
Scoring +0.1
Creation +1.1
Shot Making +0.3
Hustle +4.1
Defense +2.4
Turnovers -3.1
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 8
FGM Against 3
Opp FG% 37.5%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
1
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-6.4

A quiet, defense-first shift defined his brief court time. In just under 8 minutes, he was a non-factor on offense (0 FGAs) but managed to contribute 3 rebounds and earn a +1.8 Defense credit.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 1/2 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 56.8%
USG% 5.0%
Net Rtg -33.0
+/- -7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 7.8m
Scoring +0.5
Creation +0.2
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.9
Defense +1.8
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-1.8

He was a non-factor in a brief, five-minute cameo. His only statistical contribution was a single deflection, which generated a minor +0.7 Hustle credit.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
USG% 0.0%
Net Rtg -41.7
+/- -5
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 4.8m
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0
0
pts
0
reb
0
ast
Impact
-12.8

A brief and damaging cameo was defined by a single costly mistake. In just 3:28 of action, his only significant contribution to the box score was a turnover that resulted in a -2.4 credit.

Shooting
FG 0/0
3PT 0/0
FT 0/0
Advanced
USG% 14.3%
Net Rtg +22.2
+/- 0
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 3.5m
Scoring +0.0
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +0.0
Defense -0.6
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 1
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 1
NYK New York Knicks
S Mikal Bridges 40.9m
20
pts
6
reb
6
ast
Impact
+12.6

A dominant two-way performance was the clear driver, as he paired hyper-efficient scoring with lockdown defense. He scored 20 points on 8/13 shooting (+16.4 Scoring) while holding his opponents to just 1/10 (10%) shooting when he was the primary defender.

Shooting
FG 8/13 (61.5%)
3PT 4/6 (66.7%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 76.9%
USG% 14.4%
Net Rtg +11.0
+/- +7
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 40.9m
Scoring +16.4
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +5.9
Hustle +1.8
Defense -0.8
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 1
Opp FG% 10.0%
STL 1
BLK 0
TO 1
S Jalen Brunson 37.7m
20
pts
5
reb
6
ast
Impact
+7.0

A bizarre stat line was driven by elite defensive disruption that offset his inefficient shooting. He shot just 7/25 from the field but generated a massive +10.0 Defense credit behind 5 steals and a charge drawn, though 4 turnovers created a damaging -8.2 penalty.

Shooting
FG 7/25 (28.0%)
3PT 2/8 (25.0%)
FT 4/5 (80.0%)
Advanced
TS% 36.8%
USG% 35.2%
Net Rtg -9.9
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 37.7m
Scoring +5.2
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +4.2
Hustle +4.4
Defense +10.0
Turnovers -8.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 11
FGM Against 9
Opp FG% 81.8%
STL 5
BLK 0
TO 4
S OG Anunoby 36.8m
17
pts
4
reb
3
ast
Impact
+10.5

Efficient, mistake-free offense was the story of his night, as he scored 17 points on just 10 shots and committed zero turnovers. His +12.8 Scoring credit reflects his ability to produce points without any corresponding giveaways, perfectly executing his role as a secondary option.

Shooting
FG 5/10 (50.0%)
3PT 2/5 (40.0%)
FT 5/5 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 69.7%
USG% 14.1%
Net Rtg -6.1
+/- -9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 36.8m
Scoring +12.8
Creation +1.4
Shot Making +2.9
Hustle +1.2
Defense +2.0
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 2
BLK 2
TO 0
21
pts
13
reb
4
ast
Impact
+17.5

Elite scoring efficiency and relentless energy on the glass drove his dominant performance. He poured in 21 points on 8/12 shooting for a +17.9 Scoring credit and generated a massive +9.7 Hustle credit, though 2 turnovers did create a -5.4 penalty.

Shooting
FG 8/12 (66.7%)
3PT 3/5 (60.0%)
FT 2/2 (100.0%)
Advanced
TS% 81.5%
USG% 18.8%
Net Rtg +15.5
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 33.9m
Scoring +17.9
Creation +1.3
Shot Making +4.7
Hustle +9.7
Defense -0.9
Turnovers -5.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 14
FGM Against 7
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
S Josh Hart 18.2m
0
pts
6
reb
4
ast
Impact
-14.6

An offensively invisible night defined his performance, as he failed to score on 0/4 shooting and generated a -3.3 Scoring credit. While he held his defensive matchup to 2/6 shooting, his value was tanked by the lack of scoring and two costly turnovers (-2.2).

Shooting
FG 0/4 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 0.0%
USG% 14.0%
Net Rtg +2.1
+/- -3
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.2m
Scoring -3.3
Creation +0.1
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +1.8
Defense -1.2
Turnovers -2.2
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 6
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 33.3%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 2
13
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
+2.4

He provided a crucial offensive spark off the bench, doubling his season scoring average with 13 points on 3/7 shooting from deep. This production, reflected in a +7.7 Scoring credit, was complemented by strong on-ball defense where he held his matchup to 2/10 (20%) shooting.

Shooting
FG 5/12 (41.7%)
3PT 3/7 (42.9%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 54.2%
USG% 16.7%
Net Rtg +18.2
+/- +9
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 30.2m
Scoring +7.7
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +3.4
Hustle +0.6
Defense +0.5
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 2
Opp FG% 20.0%
STL 0
BLK 1
TO 0
5
pts
2
reb
2
ast
Impact
-9.2

Defensive struggles and turnovers defined his rough outing in the rotation. Opponents shot a blistering 4/5 (80%) when he was the nearest defender, and his 2 turnovers in 18 minutes led to a significant -3.5 Turnovers credit.

Shooting
FG 2/7 (28.6%)
3PT 1/3 (33.3%)
FT 0/0
Advanced
TS% 35.7%
USG% 19.1%
Net Rtg +3.1
+/- -1
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 18.3m
Scoring +1.6
Creation +0.0
Shot Making +1.5
Hustle +2.5
Defense -1.6
Turnovers -3.5
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 5
FGM Against 4
Opp FG% 80.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 2
7
pts
3
reb
0
ast
Impact
-4.6

He was perfectly efficient in his limited minutes, making both of his field goals, but his impact was capped by below-average rebounding (3.0 vs 5.6 avg). His lone turnover was costly in a 14-minute stint, resulting in a -2.4 Turnovers credit.

Shooting
FG 2/2 (100.0%)
3PT 0/0
FT 3/6 (50.0%)
Advanced
TS% 75.4%
USG% 17.1%
Net Rtg -20.3
+/- -10
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 14.0m
Scoring +5.5
Creation +0.7
Shot Making +0.4
Hustle +1.9
Defense -0.9
Turnovers -2.4
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 10
FGM Against 5
Opp FG% 50.0%
STL 1
BLK 1
TO 1
2
pts
3
reb
2
ast
Impact
-9.0

A complete lack of offensive production defined his minutes, going scoreless from the field on 0/4 shooting. While he posted a positive +2.8 Hustle credit, he failed to record a single defensive event and generated a -1.4 Scoring credit.

Shooting
FG 0/4 (0.0%)
3PT 0/2 (0.0%)
FT 2/3 (66.7%)
Advanced
TS% 18.8%
USG% 19.2%
Net Rtg +57.9
+/- +11
Impact Breakdown
vs game-average production for 10.1m
Scoring -1.4
Creation +1.0
Shot Making +0.0
Hustle +2.8
Defense -1.6
Turnovers +0.0
Defensive Matchups
FGA Against 2
FGM Against 0
Opp FG% 0.0%
STL 0
BLK 0
TO 0