ORL

2025-26 Season

DESMOND BANE

Orlando Magic | Guard | 6-6
Desmond Bane
20.4 PPG
4.2 RPG
4.2 APG
34.2 MPG
+1.3 Impact

Bane produces at an above average rate for a 34-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
+1.3
Scoring +13.8
Points 20.4 PPG × +1.00 = +20.4
Missed 2PT 4.5/g × -0.78 = -3.5
Missed 3PT 3.2/g × -0.87 = -2.8
Missed FT 0.3/g × -1.00 = -0.3
Creation +3.4
Assists 4.2/g × +0.50 = +2.1
Off. Rebounds 1.0/g × +1.26 = +1.3
Turnovers -3.9
Turnovers 2.0/g × -1.95 = -3.9
Defense +1.7
Steals 1.0/g × +2.30 = +2.3
Blocks 0.4/g × +0.90 = +0.4
Def. Rebounds 3.1/g × +0.30 = +0.9
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +2.8
Contested Shots 4.7/g × +0.20 = +0.9
Deflections 1.8/g × +0.65 = +1.2
Loose Balls 0.7/g × +0.60 = +0.4
Screen Assists 0.4/g × +0.30 = +0.1
Off. Fouls Drawn 0.1/g uncredited × +2.70 = +0.2
Raw Impact +17.8
Baseline (game-average expected) −16.5
Net Impact
+1.3
84th 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 91th
20.4 PPG
Efficiency 84th
60.0% TS
Playmaking 79th
4.2 APG
Rebounding 79th
4.2 RPG
Rim Protection 22th
0.09/min
Hustle 22th
0.08/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 44th
0.06/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Desmond Bane opened the 2025-26 campaign trapped in a maddening cycle of erratic shot selection and defensive indifference. Even when his jumper found the net, hidden costs routinely drained his actual value on the floor. Look no further than 10/27 vs PHI, where he poured in 24 points but still posted a -0.6 impact score because opposing ball-handlers repeatedly targeted him as a glaring defensive liability. He repeated this frustrating pattern on 11/12 vs NYK, finishing with a -1.0 impact despite tallying 22 points and 8 assists due to costly perimeter lapses that surrendered easy straight-line drives. He was leaking oil on one end while trying to bail out the offense on the other. Thankfully, he finally flipped the script on 11/28 vs DET. Erupting for 37 points and a staggering +18.2 impact, Bane delivered an absolute masterclass in downhill and mid-range scoring to salvage a bleak opening stretch.

Desmond Bane’s second quarter of the season was defined by extreme volatility, oscillating wildly between scoring masterclasses and frustrating defensive lapses. He opened the stretch looking utterly unstoppable on 12/01 vs CHI, generating a massive +19.2 impact score by pouring in 37 points on a hyper-efficient 12-of-17 from the floor. But high scoring totals didn't always guarantee positive value. Take his 24-point outing on 12/27 vs DEN; despite the heavy offensive usage, glaring defensive concessions yielded a -5.3 defensive score that dragged his overall impact into the red at -0.3. Conversely, he occasionally found ways to dominate the margins without needing to carry the scoring load. On 12/07 vs NYK, aggressive slashing and steady two-way play kept his impact comfortably in the green at +2.6 despite a quiet 16-point night. When Bane balances his shot selection with locked-in defense, he is a devastating force. Unfortunately, his tendency to bleed value on the other end makes him a frustratingly inconsistent weapon.

Desmond Bane’s midseason run was a Jekyll-and-Hyde tightrope walk where elite perimeter flamethrowing constantly warred with hidden, self-inflicted wounds. When his focus waned, the underlying metrics punished him heavily. Look at the 01/24 vs CLE matchup, where a respectable 20-point night was completely hijacked by live-ball turnovers and lazy transition defense, dragging his impact to a disappointing -1.2. Conversely, Bane could also flip the script and alter a game without his jumper falling. During the 02/05 vs BKN contest, he clanked his way to 1-for-7 from deep but still engineered a massive +12.8 impact score purely through exceptional defensive anticipation and relentless hustle. When the outside shot actually connected, he was an absolute terror. He systematically dismantled drop coverages on 02/22 vs LAC, pouring in 36 points on 13-of-19 shooting to generate a towering +19.4 impact rating. He remains a lethal offensive weapon, but this volatile stretch reveals how quickly his total value fluctuates based on defensive engagement and shot selection.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. Bane's impact swings wildly relative to his average — some nights dominant, others invisible. Scoring varies by ~8 points per game.

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

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

Getting better as the season goes on. First-half impact: -0.7, second-half: +3.4. That's a significant jump — could be a role change, confidence, or development clicking.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 5 games. Longest cold streak: 8 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

M. Bridges 114.0 poss
FG% 35.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 14
A. Nembhard 101.8 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.19
PTS 19
D. Mitchell 93.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.31
PTS 29
FG% 50.0%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.17
PTS 15
P. Larsson 71.2 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.1
PTS 7
D. White 69.8 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.14
PTS 10
T. Johnson 67.3 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 11
K. Knueppel 65.0 poss
FG% 53.3%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.29
PTS 19
D. Wade 59.8 poss
FG% 41.7%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 13
A. Dosunmu 56.8 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 15

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

M. Bridges 84.6 poss
FG% 56.2%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 22
D. White 81.8 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 37.5%
PPP 0.18
PTS 15
P. Larsson 81.5 poss
FG% 44.4%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 11
N. Powell 72.7 poss
FG% 43.8%
3P% 12.5%
PPP 0.22
PTS 16
A. Nesmith 69.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 9
T. Johnson 68.2 poss
FG% 20.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.06
PTS 4
FG% 38.5%
3P% 22.2%
PPP 0.23
PTS 13
D. Wade 54.5 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 7
M. Christie 53.9 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
V. Edgecombe 52.7 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.21
PTS 11

SEASON STATS

76
Games
20.4
PPG
4.2
RPG
4.2
APG
1.0
SPG
0.4
BPG
48.5
FG%
39.0
3P%
92.2
FT%
34.2
MPG

GAME LOG

76 games played