LAL

2025-26 Season

LUKA DONČIĆ

Los Angeles Lakers | Forward-Guard | 6-8
Luka Dončić
33.5 PPG
7.7 RPG
8.3 APG
35.8 MPG
+10.0 Impact

Dončić produces at an elite rate for a 36-minute workload. 4.0 turnovers per game cost 7.8 points of value nightly. Elite defensive value (+4.0/game) is a major strength.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
+10.0
Scoring +21.3
Points 33.5 PPG × +1.00 = +33.5
Missed 2PT 5.1/g × -0.78 = -4.0
Missed 3PT 6.9/g × -0.87 = -6.0
Missed FT 2.2/g × -1.00 = -2.2
Creation +6.6
Assists 8.3/g × +0.50 = +4.2
Off. Rebounds 1.9/g × +1.26 = +2.4
Turnovers -7.8
Turnovers 4.0/g × -1.95 = -7.8
Defense +4.0
Steals 1.6/g × +2.30 = +3.7
Blocks 0.5/g × +0.90 = +0.5
Def. Rebounds 5.8/g × +0.30 = +1.7
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +3.9
Contested Shots 5.0/g × +0.20 = +1.0
Deflections 3.1/g × +0.65 = +2.0
Charges Drawn 0.2/g × +2.70 = +0.5
Loose Balls 0.6/g × +0.60 = +0.4
Raw Impact +28.0
Baseline (game-average expected) −18.0
Net Impact
+10.0
98th pctl vs Forwards

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 227 Forwards with 10+ games

Scoring 100th
33.5 PPG
Efficiency 80th
61.1% TS
Playmaking 100th
8.3 APG
Rebounding 94th
7.7 RPG
Rim Protection 80th
0.18/min
Hustle 61th
0.11/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 1th
0.11/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

This opening stretch of the season was defined by a tug-of-war between transcendent offensive mastery and stubborn isolation habits. When the ball moved, the superstar guard was utterly unstoppable. Look no further than 10/24 vs MIN, where he posted a massive +23.0 impact by tearing apart defensive blitzes and manipulating geometry to the tune of 49 points. Yet, when he fell in love with his own step-back, the entire system ground to a frustrating halt. He registered a -2.2 impact on 11/12 vs OKC because a barrage of clanked isolation threes completely derailed their offensive rhythm. Even his massive scoring outbursts occasionally carried hidden costs. During 12/01 vs PHX, he poured in 38 points but managed a meager +0.1 impact, as his isolation masterclass was entirely undone by the team bleeding points on the defensive end. Thankfully, he also found ways to win on the margins; on 11/05 vs SAS, he shot a miserable 9-for-27 from the floor but still drove a +19.7 impact through staggering defensive engagement and relentless loose-ball recovery.

This stretch was defined by the exhausting burden of total offensive control, oscillating wildly between masterful pick-and-roll manipulation and stagnant isolation traps. Sometimes, gaudy scoring totals completely masked terrible basketball. On 12/30 vs DET, he tallied 30 points and 11 assists but dragged the team down to a dismal -9.0 impact score. Ball-dominant isolation sets bogged down the pace, leading to a barrage of low-percentage jumpers that created hidden transition costs for his own defense. He flipped the script entirely on 01/12 vs SAC. Operating with surgical precision inside the arc, he buried 16 of his 25 field goals to generate a monstrous +26.2 impact score. Even when his three-point shot abandoned him on 01/06 vs NOP, his elite +7.2 hustle rating and playmaking gravity secured a +5.7 impact. When he avoids the hero-ball temptation, his offensive engine remains utterly terrifying.

This twenty-game stretch was defined by sheer, unapologetic offensive volume, a chaotic blend of historic scoring peaks and brutal shot-selection valleys. When his step-back jumper actually fell, the results were apocalyptic for opposing defenses. He peaked during 03/19 vs MIA, where a 60-point explosion drove a staggering +41.1 impact score. Yet, his insatiable appetite for contested threes often sabotaged his own brilliance. Look at 03/14 vs DEN; despite logging a massive 30-point, 11-rebound, 13-assist line, his high-volume inefficiency from beyond the arc created enough empty possessions to drag his impact down to a negative -1.9. Conversely, during a brutal 11-for-29 shooting night in 03/23 vs DET, Dončić salvaged a solid +11.0 impact score entirely through incredible hustle (+8.3) and relentless defensive engagement. He remains the ultimate high-wire act, a singular force who breaks the math of the sport but occasionally sinks his own offense with stubborn habits.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Very consistent. Dončić posts positive impact in 80% of games — you almost always get a productive night. Scoring varies by ~9 points, but the overall contribution stays positive.

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 58% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

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

Slight upward trend. First-half impact: +8.6, second-half: +11.3. Modest improvement — possibly settling into a rhythm.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 8 games. Longest cold streak: 1 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 65 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

K. Dunn 106.9 poss
FG% 46.7%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.41
PTS 44
J. Wells 101.1 poss
FG% 55.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.32
PTS 32
H. Jones 98.7 poss
FG% 46.7%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.19
PTS 19
S. Castle 97.3 poss
FG% 38.1%
3P% 28.6%
PPP 0.23
PTS 22
C. Braun 91.2 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 37.5%
PPP 0.29
PTS 26
D. Daniels 83.6 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.22
PTS 18
T. Eason 71.0 poss
FG% 38.5%
3P% 28.6%
PPP 0.23
PTS 16
R. Westbrook 65.4 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.21
PTS 14
A. Thompson 63.6 poss
FG% 42.1%
3P% 16.7%
PPP 0.33
PTS 21
P. Banchero 63.4 poss
FG% 29.4%
3P% 12.5%
PPP 0.21
PTS 13

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

H. Jones 102.1 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 28.6%
PPP 0.11
PTS 11
J. Wells 74.7 poss
FG% 35.7%
3P% 27.3%
PPP 0.17
PTS 13
K. Dunn 74.3 poss
FG% 71.4%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 12
C. Braun 62.7 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 5
J. Champagnie 49.8 poss
FG% 37.5%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 7
S. Mykhailiuk 47.9 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.21
PTS 10
J. McDaniels 45.8 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 10
P. Larsson 44.5 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 6
J. Smith Jr. 42.4 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 60.0%
PPP 0.31
PTS 13
H. Barnes 41.6 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 5

SEASON STATS

64
Games
33.5
PPG
7.7
RPG
8.3
APG
1.6
SPG
0.5
BPG
47.6
FG%
36.6
3P%
78.0
FT%
35.8
MPG

GAME LOG

64 games played