CHI

2025-26 Season

TRE JONES

Chicago Bulls | Guard | 6-1
Tre Jones
13.4 PPG
3.1 RPG
5.4 APG
27.0 MPG
+1.6 Impact

Jones produces at an above average rate for a 27-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
+1.6
Scoring +9.5
Points 13.4 PPG × +1.00 = +13.4
Missed 2PT 2.8/g × -0.78 = -2.2
Missed 3PT 1.3/g × -0.87 = -1.1
Missed FT 0.6/g × -1.00 = -0.6
Creation +3.7
Assists 5.4/g × +0.50 = +2.7
Off. Rebounds 0.8/g × +1.26 = +1.0
Turnovers -2.7
Turnovers 1.4/g × -1.95 = -2.7
Defense +1.8
Steals 1.2/g × +2.30 = +2.8
Blocks 0.2/g × +0.90 = +0.2
Def. Rebounds 2.3/g × +0.30 = +0.7
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +3.1
Contested Shots 2.5/g × +0.20 = +0.5
Deflections 2.3/g × +0.65 = +1.5
Charges Drawn 0.1/g × +2.70 = +0.3
Loose Balls 0.4/g × +0.60 = +0.2
Screen Assists 0.3/g × +0.30 = +0.1
Off. Fouls Drawn 0.2/g uncredited × +2.70 = +0.5
Raw Impact +15.4
Baseline (game-average expected) −13.8
Net Impact
+1.6
86th 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 70th
13.4 PPG
Efficiency 96th
62.8% TS
Playmaking 86th
5.4 APG
Rebounding 54th
3.1 RPG
Rim Protection 66th
0.13/min
Hustle 64th
0.11/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 55th
0.05/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Tre Jones spent the opening quarter of the 2025-26 campaign navigating a jarring mid-November demotion to the bench, transforming from a steady starter into a volatile second-unit sparkplug. When he played passively or shied away from physicality, his value quietly tanked. Look at the 11/08 vs CLE matchup, where he poured in 17 points but posted a negative -0.9 impact score because his inability to finish through contact at the rim dragged down the overall offense. Conversely, when Jones engaged his point-of-attack defense, he became an absolute menace. He posted a massive +13.2 impact score off the pine on 11/28 vs CHA, dominating defensively by consistently blowing up pick-and-roll action. He can also dictate games without heavy scoring, beautifully evidenced on 12/17 vs CLE where he racked up 11 assists and a +10.0 impact on just 11 points by making surgical pick-and-roll reads to carve up the defense. The difference between a liability and a game-changer for Jones entirely hinges on his willingness to attack.

This stretch was defined by a volatile tug-of-war between offensive mastery and crippling passivity as Jones bounced between the starting lineup and the bench. On 12/31 vs NOP, his promotion to the starting five resulted in an immaculate +10.8 impact score. He poured in 20 points and 12 assists on a perfect 7-for-7 shooting night, carving up the defense with surgical orchestration. Yet, that aggression routinely vanished. During an ugly -10.6 impact showing on 01/07 vs DET, his elite playmaking vision yielded 12 assists but was entirely negated by a severe inability to finish inside the arc on 1-for-7 shooting. He answered his critics just days later on 01/13 vs HOU with an absolute masterclass. Punishing drop coverage with blistering efficiency, Jones racked up 34 points on 11-for-12 shooting to post a staggering +22.1 impact score. When he attacked the rim, he looked like an elite floor general, but his overall value cratered the moment he deferred.

This stretch of basketball was defined by maddening volatility. Jones swung violently between masterful floor orchestration and baffling mental lapses. When he dialed in his decision-making, he was an absolute terror. He orchestrated a massive +12.5 impact score on 03/05 vs PHX by combining hyper-efficient shot creation with a flawless offensive rhythm. He even found ways to survive his own shooting slumps, scraping together a +0.6 impact score during a dismal six-point outing on 12/14 vs NOP purely through phenomenal defensive pressure. Yet, he routinely sabotaged his own scoring outbursts with hidden costs. An efficient 15-point night on 04/01 vs IND was completely derailed by a disastrous string of unforced passing errors, plummeting his impact to a brutal -6.0. He remains a highly capable playmaker, but his inability to consistently balance scoring efficiency with ball security keeps his true value in constant flux.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. Jones's impact swings wildly relative to his average — some nights dominant, others invisible. Scoring varies by ~6 points per game.

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 67% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

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

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 66 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 71.9 poss
FG% 45.5%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 14
D. Jenkins 64.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.03
PTS 2
T. Maxey 45.1 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 8
R. Rollins 41.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 6
T. Young 41.2 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 7
B. Miller 40.2 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 4
S. Merrill 39.0 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.31
PTS 12
A. Black 38.9 poss
FG% 14.3%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.08
PTS 3
D. Fox 37.4 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.32
PTS 12
J. Fears 37.4 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 7

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

J. Brunson 81.5 poss
FG% 42.1%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.27
PTS 22
D. Jenkins 66.0 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 6
T. Young 65.8 poss
FG% 42.9%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.29
PTS 19
R. Rollins 54.6 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 7
J. Fears 52.5 poss
FG% 42.9%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.21
PTS 11
A. Black 46.9 poss
FG% 71.4%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 12
T. Maxey 46.1 poss
FG% 46.7%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.37
PTS 17
R. Sheppard 45.8 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.04
PTS 2
V. Edgecombe 45.3 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 3
W. Clayton Jr. 39.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 4

SEASON STATS

60
Games
13.4
PPG
3.1
RPG
5.4
APG
1.2
SPG
0.2
BPG
55.2
FG%
32.2
3P%
82.2
FT%
27.0
MPG

GAME LOG

60 games played