CHI

2025-26 Season

NICK RICHARDS

Chicago Bulls | Center | 6-11
Nick Richards
5.9PPG
5.2RPG
0.3APG
14.9MPG
-4.2 Impact

Richards produces at an below average rate for a 15-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
-4.2
Scoring +4.5
Points Scored 5.9 PPG = +5.9
Missed Shots difficulty-adjusted = -2.1
Shot Making above expected FG% = +0.7
Creation +0.5
Assists & Self-Creation 0.3 AST/g + self-creation = +0.5
Turnovers -2.9
Turnovers 1.3/g (live + dead blend) = -2.9
Defense -0.7
Steals 0.2/g = +0.5
Blocks 0.7/g = +0.6
Fouls + context committed fouls, matchup adj = -1.8
Hustle & Effort +4.7
Rebounds 5.2 RPG (OREB + DREB) = +2.7
Contested Shots 4.1/g = +0.8
Deflections 0.7/g = +0.5
Charges Drawn 0.0/g = +0.0
Loose Balls 0.1/g = +0.1
Screen Assists 1.9/g = +0.6
Raw Impact +6.1
Baseline (game-average expected) −10.3
Net Impact
-4.2
13th pctl vs Centers

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 93 Centers with 10+ games

Scoring 31th
6.2 PPG
Efficiency 19th
54.8% TS
Playmaking 3th
0.3 APG
Rebounding 44th
5.6 RPG
Defense 7th
+2.4/g
Hustle 44th
+16.5/g
Creation 44th
+2.07/g
Shot Making 31th
+2.89/g
TO Discipline 12th
0.08/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Nick Richards spent the first sixteen games of the 2025-26 season trapped in a brutal cycle of empty minutes and negative floor impact. His absolute nadir arrived on 10/30 vs MEM. During that contest, he logged zero points and just two rebounds over 12 minutes to post a disastrous -15.5 impact score. When a center burns a dozen minutes without making a single field goal or heavily protecting the glass, the resulting offensive stagnation actively sinks the team. He occasionally flashed utility on the boards, grabbing ten rebounds to go with six points on 10/27 vs UTA, but his poor 2-for-6 shooting still dragged his impact down to -0.3. A brief promotion to the starting lineup changed absolutely nothing. During his lone start on 11/14 vs IND, Richards scraped together four points but failed to attempt a single field goal, securing just one rebound across 15 minutes to generate a bleak -6.3 impact score. A big man simply cannot survive in a modern rotation when he consistently acts as a passenger on both ends of the court.

A brutal stretch of irrelevance defined this bleak midseason run for Nick Richards, as he languished deep on the bench and routinely bled points during his brief rotational cameos. Even when given extended run on 12/30 vs WAS, his abysmal 1-for-8 shooting touch dragged his impact down to -4.3. That dismal offensive execution completely negated the value of his nine rebounds. He briefly flipped the script on 02/07 vs DEN, erupting for 15 points and seven boards to post a stellar +11.1 impact score. That rare positive mark stemmed entirely from hyper-efficient shot selection, as he knocked down five of his eight attempts and unexpectedly drained a three-pointer. However, any built-up goodwill vanished completely by 02/21 vs DET. Despite logging 19 minutes, Richards bricked multiple ill-advised perimeter shots to finish with a catastrophic -19.6 impact score. You simply cannot survive in a modern rotation when your baseline production actively harms the team.

Nick Richards spent this fifteen-game stretch devolving from a highly effective bench bruiser into an overexposed spot-starter. Operating primarily as a reserve early on, he routinely dominated the glass to generate immense value without demanding offensive touches. During a gritty tilt vs PHX on 03/05, Richards scored just 9 points but still posted a +3.8 impact score by swallowing up 11 rebounds and doing the necessary dirty work inside. Unfortunately, his overall effectiveness cratered whenever his scoring volume increased at the expense of his rebounding. Look no further than his outing vs LAL on 03/12. He tallied 15 points on highly efficient shooting, yet registered a dismal -5.4 impact score because he grabbed a meager four boards and gave up easy baskets on the other end. By the time he was thrust into the starting lineup in late March, the physical toll was obvious. A brutal start vs PHI on 03/25 yielded just two points and a disastrous -13.9 impact score, forcing an early hook after a mere nine minutes of action.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Struggling. Richards has posted negative impact in 77% of games this season. The production rarely outweighs the cost.

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 57% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

Average defender. Richards doesn't hurt you defensively, but he's not making opponents uncomfortable either.

Getting better as the season goes on. First-half impact: -6.3, second-half: -2.2. That's a significant jump — could be a role change, confidence, or development clicking.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 6 games. Longest cold streak: 27 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY ⚠ Updated 46 days ago

Based on 73 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

B. Lopez 63.1 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.21
PTS 13
A. Sengun 39.3 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 7
J. Williams 35.1 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 6
N. Jokić 33.6 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
E. Mobley 31.2 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 4
M. Bagley III 27.7 poss
FG% 16.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2
O. Ighodaro 26.9 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2
R. Williams III 26.1 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 4
N. Claxton 23.9 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 2
J. Poeltl 23.0 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.

B. Lopez 50.6 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 6
A. Sengun 48.7 poss
FG% 73.7%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.6
PTS 29
N. Jokić 39.8 poss
FG% 80.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 12
E. Mobley 39.6 poss
FG% 62.5%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 11
R. Williams III 36.8 poss
FG% 83.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.27
PTS 10
O. Ighodaro 30.4 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2
D. Ayton 29.8 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 6
J. Sims 29.4 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2
J. Williams 28.9 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.17
PTS 5
J. Poeltl 24.4 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.33
PTS 8

SEASON STATS

47
Games
5.9
PPG
5.2
RPG
0.3
APG
0.2
SPG
0.7
BPG
51.2
FG%
27.8
3P%
64.4
FT%
14.9
MPG

GAME LOG

47 games played