MIN

2025-26 Season

NAZ REID

Minnesota Timberwolves | Center-Forward | 6-9
Naz Reid
13.6 PPG
6.3 RPG
2.2 APG
26.1 MPG
+1.3 Impact

Reid produces at an above average rate for a 26-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
+1.3
Scoring +8.1
Points 13.6 PPG × +1.00 = +13.6
Missed 2PT 2.4/g × -0.78 = -1.9
Missed 3PT 3.7/g × -0.87 = -3.2
Missed FT 0.4/g × -1.00 = -0.4
Creation +3.1
Assists 2.2/g × +0.50 = +1.1
Off. Rebounds 1.6/g × +1.26 = +2.0
Turnovers -3.1
Turnovers 1.6/g × -1.95 = -3.1
Defense +2.7
Steals 1.0/g × +2.30 = +2.3
Blocks 1.0/g × +0.90 = +0.9
Def. Rebounds 4.7/g × +0.30 = +1.4
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +3.0
Contested Shots 5.7/g × +0.20 = +1.1
Deflections 1.6/g × +0.65 = +1.0
Charges Drawn 0.1/g × +2.70 = +0.3
Loose Balls 0.5/g × +0.60 = +0.3
Screen Assists 0.6/g × +0.30 = +0.2
Off. Fouls Drawn 0.1/g uncredited × +2.70 = +0.1
Raw Impact +13.8
Baseline (game-average expected) −12.5
Net Impact
+1.3
27th pctl vs Centers

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 92 Centers with 10+ games

Scoring 77th
13.8 PPG
Efficiency 23th
55.4% TS
Playmaking 76th
2.3 APG
Rebounding 54th
6.3 RPG
Rim Protection 48th
0.18/min
Hustle 31th
0.11/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 27th
0.06/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

A wildly volatile rollercoaster of shot selection defined Naz Reid's first twenty games, swinging violently between lethal floor-spacing and self-sabotaging tunnel vision. When dialed in, he was unstoppable, like on 11/19 vs WAS where he dropped 28 points and generated a massive +16.9 impact score by torching drop coverage. Conversely, he tallied a respectable 13 points during the 12/25 vs DEN matchup, but still suffered a brutal -8.3 impact score. That negative rating stemmed directly from forcing ugly looks early in the shot clock, a hidden cost that completely disrupted the team's offensive rhythm. He did occasionally find ways to contribute when his jumper abandoned him, notably on 11/10 vs UTA. Reid scored just 7 points that night, yet salvaged a +2.5 impact score through elite hustle metrics (+6.2) and high-level defensive rotations. When he plays within the flow of the offense, Reid is a mismatch nightmare. But the moment he starts hunting contested jumpers, his overall value plummets.

Naz Reid's midseason stretch was defined by maddening volatility, swinging wildly between game-breaking flamethrower and trigger-happy liability. The duality of his offensive game peaked at the end of December. He incinerated the nets on 12/29 vs CHI, dropping 33 points with a massive +16.6 impact by completely breaking the opponent's defensive scheme with scorching perimeter efficiency. Conversely, his box score production frequently masked hidden costs on the other end of the floor. During the 12/02 vs NOP matchup, Reid tallied a healthy 18 points but dragged his overall impact down to -1.0 because poor defensive execution bled points away. Yet, even when his jumper abandoned him, he could occasionally salvage his minutes through sheer grit. Look at 01/04 vs WAS. He managed just nine points, but still posted a +0.3 impact because his secondary rim protection and relentless energy on loose balls kept the second unit afloat.

Extreme volatility as a boom-or-bust bench weapon defined this midseason stretch for Naz Reid. His effectiveness swung wildly from night to night, leading to games where hidden costs completely erased his box score production. During the 01/29 vs OKC matchup, he poured in 18 points but posted a negative -2.6 impact score because frustrating defensive lapses dragged down his overall value. Conversely, he occasionally found ways to generate non-scoring value when his jump shot abandoned him. In the 02/08 vs LAC contest, despite managing just 8 points on a frigid shooting night, his relentless interior work and nine rebounds salvaged a +0.9 impact score. When his shot clicked, he was lethal. He torched the defense on 01/28 vs DAL, racking up 23 points and a staggering +11.4 impact score through an aggressive scoring outburst. Reid is a matchup nightmare when dialed in, but his tendency to settle for contested perimeter looks keeps his nightly reliability on a frustrating rollercoaster.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. Reid's impact swings wildly relative to his average — some nights dominant, others invisible. Scoring varies by ~7 points per game.

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 54% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

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

Small downward trend. First-half impact: +2.1, second-half: +0.5. Not alarming yet, but trending the wrong direction.

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

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 75 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

P. Washington 57.2 poss
FG% 46.7%
3P% 42.9%
PPP 0.33
PTS 19
B. Brown 57.0 poss
FG% 45.5%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.23
PTS 13
N. Jović 51.9 poss
FG% 53.3%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.35
PTS 18
A. Caruso 47.8 poss
FG% 37.5%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 8
N. Batum 46.4 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.11
PTS 5
B. Portis 46.0 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 10
P. Achiuwa 43.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.21
PTS 9
G. Santos 38.1 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 9
J. Grant 36.4 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 3
G. Jackson 35.1 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 6

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

P. Washington 66.8 poss
FG% 9.1%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.03
PTS 2
P. Achiuwa 62.3 poss
FG% 85.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 14
N. Jović 59.2 poss
FG% 20.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 5
N. Batum 53.2 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.11
PTS 6
C. Holmgren 48.3 poss
FG% 71.4%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.31
PTS 15
B. Portis 44.7 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 7
G. Santos 43.6 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.21
PTS 9
K. Filipowski 40.3 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 7
A. Gordon 40.0 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 4
G. Jackson 39.4 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 6

SEASON STATS

74
Games
13.6
PPG
6.3
RPG
2.2
APG
1.0
SPG
1.0
BPG
45.6
FG%
36.4
3P%
73.3
FT%
26.1
MPG

GAME LOG

74 games played