OKC

2025-26 Season

SHAI GILGEOUS-ALEXANDER

Oklahoma City Thunder | Guard | 6-6
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander
31.6 PPG
4.4 RPG
6.5 APG
33.4 MPG
+14.3 Impact

Gilgeous-Alexander produces at an elite rate for a 33-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
+14.3
Scoring +23.3
Points 31.6 PPG × +1.00 = +31.6
Missed 2PT 6.1/g × -0.78 = -4.8
Missed 3PT 2.8/g × -0.87 = -2.4
Missed FT 1.1/g × -1.00 = -1.1
Creation +4.6
Assists 6.5/g × +0.50 = +3.2
Off. Rebounds 1.1/g × +1.26 = +1.4
Turnovers -4.3
Turnovers 2.2/g × -1.95 = -4.3
Defense +3.0
Steals 1.4/g × +2.30 = +3.2
Blocks 0.8/g × +0.90 = +0.7
Def. Rebounds 3.3/g × +0.30 = +1.0
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +3.7
Contested Shots 4.4/g × +0.20 = +0.9
Deflections 3.0/g × +0.65 = +2.0
Loose Balls 0.8/g × +0.60 = +0.5
Screen Assists 0.3/g × +0.30 = +0.1
Off. Fouls Drawn 0.1/g uncredited × +2.70 = +0.2
Raw Impact +30.3
Baseline (game-average expected) −16.0
Net Impact
+14.3
100th 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 99th
31.6 PPG
Efficiency 100th
68.2% TS
Playmaking 93th
6.5 APG
Rebounding 81th
4.4 RPG
Rim Protection 83th
0.16/min
Hustle 53th
0.11/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 33th
0.06/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

An unrelenting barrage of surgical rim pressure and elite isolation execution defined Shai Gilgeous-Alexander's opening stretch of the 2025-26 campaign. He absolutely broke the back of opposing defenses with his downhill attacks, culminating in a monstrous +24.5 impact score on 10/23 vs IND where astronomical offensive usage fueled a 55-point explosion. That momentum carried into an absolute masterclass on 11/26 vs MIN, where his uncanny ability to dissect the defense with mid-range jumpers generated a staggering +30.2 impact. His sky-high box metrics across these matchups stemmed directly from flawless foul-drawing mechanics and an innate talent for collapsing schemes into constant rotation. However, his aggressive approach occasionally carried hidden efficiency costs. During 11/05 vs POR, he poured in 35 points, but a brutal 10-for-26 shooting night dragged his overall impact down to a modest +5.7. Even when a heavy diet of contested pull-ups hampered his field goal percentages, his sheer volume of paint touches and defensive disruption kept his overall value firmly in the green.

This stretch was defined by surgical, hyper-efficient isolation mastery that occasionally collapsed into frustrating passivity and lazy defense. During the 11/23 vs POR matchup, Gilgeous-Alexander was an absolute two-way terror. He posted a monstrous +36.5 impact score in that contest, driven by flawless decision-making on offense and a suffocating +21.1 defensive metric. However, when his engagement waned, his overall value plummeted regardless of his raw scoring totals. On 01/02 vs GSW, he poured in 30 points but managed a pedestrian +6.3 impact score because a complete lack of defensive resistance erased his offensive creation. The regression hit rock bottom on 01/15 vs HOU. Despite scoring 20 points on highly efficient shooting, uncharacteristic passivity and a refusal to attack his matchups sank him to a -5.6 impact score. When he dictates the pace and plays both ends, he is unstoppable, but coasting quickly turns his minutes into empty calories.

This mid-season stretch was defined by absolute isolation dominance that occasionally bled into stubborn hero-ball. When dialed in, his offensive initiation was flawless. He carved up drop coverage on 01/21 vs MIL, posting a massive +23.7 impact score behind 40 points and 11 assists. Yet, raw point totals often masked underlying apathy. During a 40-point outburst on 03/21 vs WAS, his impact score was dragged down to +8.8 because hidden costs like live-ball turnovers and a dismal -5.2 defensive rating bled value. That hero-ball turned disastrous on 03/27 vs CHI, where he posted a -4.5 impact score despite dropping 25 points because his stubborn insistence on forcing heavily contested threes (0-for-10) completely derailed his efficiency. Conversely, he found ways to win on the margins when his scoring completely dried up. Despite shooting a miserable 7-for-22 for just 20 points on 03/15 vs MIN, he salvaged a +6.2 impact score by generating extra possessions with a +3.8 hustle rating and stout defensive effort.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Very consistent. Gilgeous-Alexander posts positive impact in 92% of games — you almost always get a productive night. Scoring varies by ~7 points, but the overall contribution stays positive.

Reliable shooter — hits 45%+ from the field in 84% of games. You can count on efficient nights more often than not.

Defensive difference-maker. Gilgeous-Alexander consistently forces tough shots and protects the rim — opponents shoot worse when he's guarding them.

Small downward trend. First-half impact: +15.5, second-half: +13.2. Not alarming yet, but trending the wrong direction.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 24 games. Longest cold streak: 2 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 64 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

T. Camara 138.2 poss
FG% 65.5%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.37
PTS 51
S. Castle 109.9 poss
FG% 31.6%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 24
C. Braun 102.3 poss
FG% 53.3%
3P% 28.6%
PPP 0.41
PTS 42
J. McDaniels 98.8 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.32
PTS 32
A. Edwards 77.0 poss
FG% 55.6%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 17
H. Jones 75.3 poss
FG% 45.5%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.21
PTS 16
D. Daniels 70.8 poss
FG% 64.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.27
PTS 19
R. Westbrook 63.8 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.27
PTS 17
A. Thompson 59.6 poss
FG% 53.8%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.3
PTS 18
J. Wells 59.4 poss
FG% 64.3%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.4
PTS 24

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

T. Camara 97.5 poss
FG% 30.0%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 7
J. McDaniels 88.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 42.9%
PPP 0.21
PTS 19
H. Jones 68.7 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 42.9%
PPP 0.22
PTS 15
D. Vassell 66.7 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 8
S. Mykhailiuk 59.6 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 14.3%
PPP 0.08
PTS 5
C. Braun 56.8 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.09
PTS 5
R. O'Neale 56.0 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
J. Champagnie 54.3 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.04
PTS 2
P. Larsson 52.1 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.21
PTS 11
D. DiVincenzo 51.4 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 22.2%
PPP 0.19
PTS 10

SEASON STATS

64
Games
31.6
PPG
4.4
RPG
6.5
APG
1.4
SPG
0.8
BPG
55.3
FG%
38.0
3P%
88.3
FT%
33.4
MPG

GAME LOG

64 games played