SAC

2025-26 Season

MALIK MONK

Sacramento Kings | Guard | 6-3
Malik Monk
12.7 PPG
1.9 RPG
3.1 APG
22.5 MPG
-1.8 Impact

Monk produces at an below average rate for a 22-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
-1.8
Scoring +7.5
Points 12.7 PPG × +1.00 = +12.7
Missed 2PT 2.8/g × -0.78 = -2.2
Missed 3PT 3.2/g × -0.87 = -2.8
Missed FT 0.2/g × -1.00 = -0.2
Creation +2.2
Assists 3.1/g × +0.50 = +1.6
Off. Rebounds 0.5/g × +1.26 = +0.6
Turnovers -2.7
Turnovers 1.4/g × -1.95 = -2.7
Defense +0.3
Steals 0.6/g × +2.30 = +1.4
Blocks 0.4/g × +0.90 = +0.4
Def. Rebounds 1.5/g × +0.30 = +0.4
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +2.1
Contested Shots 2.6/g × +0.20 = +0.5
Deflections 1.3/g × +0.65 = +0.8
Loose Balls 0.4/g × +0.60 = +0.2
Screen Assists 0.3/g × +0.30 = +0.1
Off. Fouls Drawn 0.2/g uncredited × +2.70 = +0.5
Raw Impact +9.4
Baseline (game-average expected) −11.2
Net Impact
-1.8
41st pctl vs Guards

About this model: Net Impact can't measure floor spacing, help defense rotations, or playmaking gravity — so wings and guards are slightly undervalued vs bigs. How Net Impact works

SKILL DNA

Percentile rank vs 235 Guards with 10+ games

Scoring 66th
12.9 PPG
Efficiency 38th
53.0% TS
Playmaking 59th
3.2 APG
Rebounding 18th
2.0 RPG
Rim Protection 16th
0.08/min
Hustle 39th
0.09/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 35th
0.06/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Malik Monk's opening stretch was defined by a maddening inconsistency that swung entirely on his shot selection. When his jumper fell, he was an absolute flamethrower. On 10/24 vs UTA, Monk completely flipped the game's momentum with a barrage of deep threes, racking up 20 points and a massive +11.5 impact score. However, his tendency to force the issue often punished his own team. Look at 11/26 vs PHX, where he poured in 15 points but still posted a -6.6 impact score because he bled value defensively while chasing buckets. His erratic decision-making hit rock bottom on 11/09 vs MIN, yielding just 2 points and a staggering -13.8 impact score as wild, contested jumpers killed the second unit's rhythm. He remains a highly potent scoring punch, but his refusal to attack the paint when his perimeter touch vanishes makes him a dangerously volatile rotation piece.

Malik Monk's midseason stretch was a wildly erratic rollercoaster where brilliant scoring explosions were constantly undermined by disastrous shot selection. He looked like the league's most lethal sixth man on 01/18 vs POR, pouring in 23 points and posting a +12.9 impact score because his perimeter shot-making completely broke the opposing defensive shell. Yet, high scoring totals often masked deeper flaws in his overall floor game. During his 18-point outing on 01/20 vs MIA, Monk registered a -5.5 impact because his decision-making devolved into heavy contested pull-ups. Even when the shots fell flawlessly on 01/21 vs TOR, his 17 points on 6-for-7 shooting still yielded a -2.9 impact score due to a glaring inability to navigate defensive screens on the other end of the floor. When the jumper abandoned him entirely, things got truly ugly; a scoreless, nine-minute stint on 12/08 vs IND resulted in a brutal -11.8 impact score driven entirely by forced, out-of-rhythm jumpers early in the shot clock. This maddening inconsistency turned him into a volatile wildcard who could shoot his team into a game just as quickly as he could shoot them out of it.

IMPACT TIMELINE

Game-by-game performance vs average. Green = above average, red = below.

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. Monk's impact swings wildly relative to his average — some nights dominant, others invisible. Scoring varies by ~8 points per game.

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 51% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

Good defender on his best nights, but it comes and goes. Some games Monk locks in defensively, others he gets picked apart.

In a rough stretch — 4 straight games with negative impact. Longest cold streak this season: 6 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 66 games with tracking data. Shows who guarded this player on offense and who he guarded on defense, with their shooting stats in those matchups.

ON OFFENSE: WHO GUARDED HIM

His shooting stats against each primary defender this season

A. Mitchell 41.2 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 7
J. Clark 38.8 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
J. LaRavia 37.8 poss
FG% 44.4%
3P% 44.4%
PPP 0.32
PTS 12
T. Hardaway Jr. 37.5 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
B. Brown 37.1 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 9
J. Suggs 35.6 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 5
FG% 57.1%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.23
PTS 8
D. DiVincenzo 35.4 poss
FG% 22.2%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 7
A. Thompson 35.2 poss
FG% 42.9%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.23
PTS 8
M. Smart 28.2 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 75.0%
PPP 0.53
PTS 15

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

How opponents shot when he was the primary defender. Lower FG% = better defense.

T. Hardaway Jr. 46.2 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.11
PTS 5
D. DiVincenzo 45.3 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 10
A. Holiday 42.0 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 3
A. Mitchell 39.3 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 5
J. LaRavia 36.3 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.25
PTS 9
G. Vincent 36.2 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
B. Brown 36.1 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
S. Fontecchio 33.8 poss
FG% 37.5%
3P% 28.6%
PPP 0.24
PTS 8
J. Clark 30.7 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
J. Suggs 28.4 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.11
PTS 3

SEASON STATS

59
Games
12.7
PPG
1.9
RPG
3.1
APG
0.6
SPG
0.4
BPG
43.4
FG%
39.2
3P%
87.9
FT%
22.5
MPG

GAME LOG

59 games played