CLE

2025-26 Season

DEAN WADE

Cleveland Cavaliers | Forward-Center | 6-9
Dean Wade
5.6PPG
4.1RPG
1.3APG
22.3MPG
-2.1 Impact

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

·
Embed this player card

Copy & paste this HTML into any page:

The widget updates automatically whenever our data does.

IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
-2.1
Scoring +4.8
Points Scored 5.6 PPG = +5.6
Missed Shots difficulty-adjusted = -2.2
Shot Making above expected FG% = +1.4
Creation +0.3
Assists & Self-Creation 1.3 AST/g + self-creation = +0.3
Turnovers -0.8
Turnovers 0.3/g (live + dead blend) = -0.8
Defense +0.4
Steals 0.7/g = +1.6
Blocks 0.3/g = +0.3
Fouls + context committed fouls, matchup adj = -1.5
Hustle & Effort +3.3
Rebounds 4.1 RPG (OREB + DREB) = +1.2
Contested Shots 3.9/g = +0.8
Deflections 1.5/g = +1.0
Charges Drawn 0.0/g = +0.0
Loose Balls 0.2/g = +0.1
Screen Assists 0.6/g = +0.2
Raw Impact +8.0
Baseline (game-average expected) −10.1
Net Impact
-2.1
40th pctl vs Forwards

PBP Credit: Every play is analyzed from play-by-play data. Scorers get difficulty-adjusted credit, assisters get creation value based on the shot opportunity they created, and turnovers are classified by type. Shot difficulty is derived from 1M+ shots across 4 seasons. Full methodology

SKILL DNA

Percentile rank vs 235 Forwards with 10+ games

Scoring 22th
5.8 PPG
Efficiency 61th
58.1% TS
Playmaking 36th
1.3 APG
Rebounding 52th
4.2 RPG
Defense 61th
+7.8/g
Hustle 53th
+12.7/g
Creation 45th
+2.26/g
Shot Making 22th
+3.87/g
TO Discipline 100th
0.02/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Dean Wade's opening stretch of the 2025-26 season was defined by a frustrating offensive slump where his true value lived entirely on the margins. When he embraced the dirty work, he thrived, which was perfectly captured on 10/31 vs TOR. Despite scoring just 5 points on an abysmal 1/7 from the floor, Wade generated a stellar +6.6 Impact by crashing the glass for 4 rebounds, dishing 4 assists, and anchoring the team's defensive hustle. Conversely, when those peripheral contributions vanished, his overall value tanked regardless of his shooting touch. During his 11/11 vs MIA appearance, Wade knocked down 3 of his 4 three-point attempts for a near season-high 9 points, yet still posted a -3.7 Impact because he offered zero playmaking and grabbed just three rebounds. The ugliest moments arrived when he forced poor shots without contributing elsewhere. On 10/26 vs MIL, he bricked all four of his deep attempts to finish with 4 points, resulting in a disastrous -11.9 Impact. Wade is a fringe rotation piece who must realize that hitting outside shots is only a fraction of his actual job.

Dean Wade’s midseason transition from reserve forward to full-time starter was defined by maddening inconsistency. He flashed his ideal two-way ceiling early on 12/06 vs SAS, racking up 12 points, eight rebounds, and five assists to post a stellar +13.4 Impact score. Once promoted to the starting five, however, his offensive aggression frequently vanished. This passivity hit rock bottom on 01/19 vs OKC, where he went scoreless on just two shot attempts to generate a dreadful -14.3 Impact score. That massive negative rating stemmed directly from his total refusal to shoot, which destroyed his floor-spacing value and bogged down the entire offense. Yet, he could still swing games without filling the scoring column. On 01/22 vs CHA, Wade scored a mere four points but secured a +2.8 Impact score. He salvaged his overall value by grabbing nine rebounds and dishing four assists, keeping the half-court machinery humming with smart connective play and effort on the glass.

Dean Wade spent this mid-season stretch defining the concept of a low-usage rollercoaster. When he actually engaged offensively, the results were stellar, like on 02/24 vs NYK when he managed a massive +19.1 impact score despite scoring a modest 11 points. That elite rating stemmed directly from his relentless effort on the glass—grabbing eight rebounds—and smart ball movement that kept the offense humming without demanding touches. However, his tendency to fade into the background often crippled the floor spacing, perfectly illustrated by a brutal outing on 03/11 vs ORL where he posted a dismal -14.8 impact score while failing to log a single point or assist. His extreme passivity and refusal to pull the trigger on open looks allowed the defense to completely sag off him, dragging down the entire unit. Yet, he could suddenly flip the switch again, as seen on 03/09 vs PHI when he tallied 13 points and 10 boards for a +17.4 impact driven by confident perimeter shooting. Ultimately, Wade is a vital connector when he crashes the boards and trusts his stroke, but a total ghost when he hesitates.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. Wade's impact swings wildly relative to his average — some nights dominant, others invisible. Scoring varies by ~4 points per game.

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 43% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

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

Slight upward trend. First-half impact: -3.5, second-half: -0.7. Modest improvement — possibly settling into a rhythm.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 5 games. Longest cold streak: 6 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY ⚠ Updated 46 days ago

Based on 59 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

J. Brunson 56.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.09
PTS 5
D. Bane 54.5 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 7
B. Miller 51.0 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.18
PTS 9
J. Giddey 48.1 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
M. Bridges 46.0 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 75.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 9
M. Buzelis 42.6 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.05
PTS 2
S. Sharpe 37.2 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
B. Portis 33.9 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.06
PTS 2
C. Flagg 33.8 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 8
B. Ingram 32.5 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

K. Knueppel 65.2 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 12
D. Bane 59.8 poss
FG% 41.7%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 13
P. Banchero 54.7 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 10
J. Brunson 52.1 poss
FG% 6.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 6
J. Giddey 48.5 poss
FG% 36.4%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.19
PTS 9
M. Turner 36.4 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
B. Portis 36.0 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.06
PTS 2
N. Powell 33.2 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.33
PTS 11
Z. Williamson 30.8 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 8
B. Miller 30.7 poss
FG% 55.6%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.39
PTS 12

SEASON STATS

72
Games
5.6
PPG
4.1
RPG
1.3
APG
0.7
SPG
0.3
BPG
44.4
FG%
36.2
3P%
67.5
FT%
22.3
MPG

GAME LOG

72 games played