IND

2025-26 Season

AARON NESMITH

Indiana Pacers | Guard-Forward | 6-5
Aaron Nesmith
13.8 PPG
4.2 RPG
1.9 APG
29.7 MPG
-2.2 Impact

Nesmith produces at an below average rate for a 30-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
-2.2
Scoring +7.9
Points 13.8 PPG × +1.00 = +13.8
Missed 2PT 2.8/g × -0.78 = -2.2
Missed 3PT 3.8/g × -0.87 = -3.3
Missed FT 0.4/g × -1.00 = -0.4
Creation +2.2
Assists 1.9/g × +0.50 = +0.9
Off. Rebounds 1.0/g × +1.26 = +1.3
Turnovers -2.7
Turnovers 1.4/g × -1.95 = -2.7
Defense +0.9
Steals 0.6/g × +2.30 = +1.4
Blocks 0.5/g × +0.90 = +0.5
Def. Rebounds 3.1/g × +0.30 = +0.9
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +3.8
Contested Shots 5.6/g × +0.20 = +1.1
Deflections 1.1/g × +0.65 = +0.7
Charges Drawn 0.1/g × +2.70 = +0.3
Loose Balls 0.6/g × +0.60 = +0.4
Screen Assists 0.6/g × +0.30 = +0.2
Off. Fouls Drawn 0.4/g uncredited × +2.70 = +1.1
Raw Impact +12.1
Baseline (game-average expected) −14.3
Net Impact
-2.2
33th 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 72th
13.8 PPG
Efficiency 51th
55.0% TS
Playmaking 33th
1.9 APG
Rebounding 78th
4.2 RPG
Rim Protection 25th
0.09/min
Hustle 70th
0.12/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 64th
0.05/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Aaron Nesmith’s opening stretch of the season was defined by a maddening Jekyll-and-Hyde routine, oscillating violently between lethal perimeter marksmanship and disastrous shot selection. When his jumper abandoned him, he stubbornly tried to shoot his way out of slumps, racking up hidden costs that tanked his value. Look no further than 10/26 vs MIN, where he scored a respectable 18 points but posted a -0.9 impact score because a heavy volume of clanked perimeter looks completely negated his floor-spacing presence. His shot selection hit rock bottom shortly after on 10/29 vs DAL. During that absolute crater of an offensive performance, a barrage of forced, contested threes resulted in a 2-for-16 shooting nightmare and a catastrophic -17.9 impact score. Yet, Nesmith occasionally found ways to salvage his nightly grade without filling the scoring column. On 12/31 vs ORL, he managed just 9 points on brutal 3-for-11 shooting, but he hauled in 10 rebounds and generated elite hustle metrics to grind out a +4.0 impact score. To become a reliable nightly weapon, he must stop letting errant shooting hijack his overall utility.

A catastrophic shooting slump defined the start of this stretch for Aaron Nesmith, as erratic perimeter execution repeatedly tanked his on-court value. During the 01/19 vs PHI matchup, a glacial 1-for-9 shooting performance from the floor dragged his impact score down to a staggering -16.6, completely erasing the value of his 11 rebounds. Even when his jumper eventually started falling, hidden costs often sabotaged his bottom line. He poured in an efficient 14 points on 4-for-6 from deep on 03/17 vs NYK, but off-ball defensive struggles eroded his foundation, resulting in a disappointing -5.1 impact score. He finally broke through the malaise on 03/10 vs SAC. Relentless downhill attacking and elite hustle metrics fueled a 29-point outburst that generated a massive +12.9 impact score. Ultimately, Nesmith spent most of these twenty games battling his own shot selection, needing blistering offensive nights just to keep his head above water.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. Nesmith'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 44% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

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

Small downward trend. First-half impact: -0.8, second-half: -3.5. Not alarming yet, but trending the wrong direction.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 3 games. Longest cold streak: 7 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 55 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

D. Bane 69.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 9
M. Bridges 58.7 poss
FG% 54.5%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.27
PTS 16
L. Shamet 52.1 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 60.0%
PPP 0.21
PTS 11
A. Green 45.2 poss
FG% 42.9%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.29
PTS 13
FG% 60.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 8
J. Johnson 40.7 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 8
D. White 38.5 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 4
L. Dončić 38.1 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 16.7%
PPP 0.13
PTS 5
K. Leonard 36.3 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.11
PTS 4
T. da Silva 34.3 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.23
PTS 8

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

K. Leonard 66.9 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.43
PTS 29
FG% 46.7%
3P% 42.9%
PPP 0.31
PTS 19
J. Johnson 55.7 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.31
PTS 17
J. Brunson 51.0 poss
FG% 37.5%
3P% 28.6%
PPP 0.35
PTS 18
D. White 49.4 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 13
L. Dončić 49.0 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 42.9%
PPP 0.37
PTS 18
M. Bridges 48.7 poss
FG% 62.5%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.23
PTS 11
A. Green 45.5 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 6
A. Black 41.0 poss
FG% 36.4%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 10
L. Shamet 40.8 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 3

SEASON STATS

45
Games
13.8
PPG
4.2
RPG
1.9
APG
0.6
SPG
0.5
BPG
41.4
FG%
37.9
3P%
82.9
FT%
29.7
MPG

GAME LOG

45 games played