MIN

2025-26 Season

AYO DOSUNMU

Minnesota Timberwolves | Guard | 6-4
Ayo Dosunmu
14.7 PPG
3.5 RPG
3.7 APG
27.1 MPG
+0.4 Impact

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

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
+0.4
Scoring +10.0
Points 14.7 PPG × +1.00 = +14.7
Missed 2PT 3.0/g × -0.78 = -2.4
Missed 3PT 2.3/g × -0.87 = -2.0
Missed FT 0.3/g × -1.00 = -0.3
Creation +3.0
Assists 3.7/g × +0.50 = +1.9
Off. Rebounds 0.9/g × +1.26 = +1.1
Turnovers -2.5
Turnovers 1.3/g × -1.95 = -2.5
Defense +1.0
Steals 0.8/g × +2.30 = +1.8
Blocks 0.3/g × +0.90 = +0.3
Def. Rebounds 2.6/g × +0.30 = +0.8
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +2.2
Contested Shots 3.7/g × +0.20 = +0.7
Deflections 1.2/g × +0.65 = +0.8
Charges Drawn 0.1/g × +2.70 = +0.3
Loose Balls 0.6/g × +0.60 = +0.4
Raw Impact +13.7
Baseline (game-average expected) −13.3
Net Impact
+0.4
73th 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 76th
14.7 PPG
Efficiency 94th
62.1% TS
Playmaking 68th
3.7 APG
Rebounding 62th
3.5 RPG
Rim Protection 47th
0.11/min
Hustle 15th
0.08/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 60th
0.05/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Ayo Dosunmu’s opening twenty games were defined by maddening volatility, swinging wildly between ruthless bench efficiency and erratic decision-making once promoted to the starting lineup. You can see this paradox clearly in the 11/21 vs MIA matchup, where he poured in 23 points but posted a -1.0 impact score because a staggering volume of turnovers and defensive lapses completely erased his offensive production. He consistently struggled to balance scoring with game management. Even when his perimeter stroke was pure, as it was during an 18-point outing on 12/01 vs ORL, his -6.5 impact score revealed the ugly truth of costly hidden mistakes dragging the team down. Conversely, when he embraced high-value shot selection and relentless rim pressure, the results were spectacular. He torched the defense for 28 points on 11/24 vs NOP, earning a +7.9 impact score by simply attacking the paint rather than settling for contested jumpers. If Dosunmu wants to survive as a starter, he must trim the ill-advised gambles and empty possessions that currently plague his game.

A blistering January hot streak defined Ayo Dosunmu's mid-season run, briefly transforming him into an elite two-way terror off the bench. He reached his absolute ceiling during the 01/10 vs DAL matchup. Pouring in 20 points and 8 assists, he posted a massive +14.6 impact score. That nearly perfect rating stemmed from suffocating perimeter defense and hyper-efficient shot-making, as he missed just two attempts from the floor all night. Just days earlier in the 01/07 vs DET game, aggressive downhill drives and decisive catch-and-shoot execution fueled a +9.0 impact score alongside 24 points. Yet, when his jumper abandoned him, his value cratered. Look no further than the 12/29 vs MIN contest, where a brutal 0-for-4 night from beyond the arc crippled his offensive efficiency. Despite logging seven assists and six rebounds in that game, his inability to stretch the floor allowed defenders to sag off, dragging him to a dismal -5.0 impact mark.

Ayo Dosunmu's midseason stretch was defined by a jarring Jekyll-and-Hyde regression, opening with brilliant two-way initiation before devolving into a string of empty-calorie performances. He initially caught fire as a starter during the 01/30 vs MIA matchup, posting 29 points, eight rebounds, and nine assists to generate a massive +10.4 impact score driven by elite shot selection. That momentum quickly evaporated. Glaring defensive lapses began sabotaging his overall value, turning solid box scores into net negatives. Look no further than the 03/15 vs OKC contest, where a highly efficient 18-point night resulted in a dismal -4.6 impact score. His blistering perimeter efficiency simply could not mask underlying struggles with transition containment and blown defensive rotations. A similar story unfolded during the 03/13 vs GSW game, where his 12 points, eight rebounds, and seven assists were completely undone by poor rotational awareness, dragging him to a -3.0 impact. When Dosunmu locks in at the point of attack, he is a dangerous weapon, but this frustrating stretch revealed exactly how quickly his on-court value plummets when his defensive focus wanes.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. Dosunmu'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. Dosunmu consistently forces tough shots and protects the rim — opponents shoot worse when he's guarding them.

Hot right now — 4 straight games with positive impact. Longest positive run this season: 6 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 67 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

A. Thompson 50.6 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 5
S. Henderson 44.5 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 9
P. Larsson 42.9 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 6
K. Sanders 41.1 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 5
D. Bane 40.7 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.25
PTS 10
B. Mathurin 39.5 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.38
PTS 15
T. Maxey 38.0 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 3
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.27
PTS 10
D. Smith 37.4 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 6
J. Suggs 34.4 poss
FG% 16.7%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.09
PTS 3

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

D. Bane 56.8 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 15
E. Dëmin 52.9 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.06
PTS 3
V. Edgecombe 51.8 poss
FG% 22.2%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.1
PTS 5
A. Thompson 50.6 poss
FG% 37.5%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 7
P. Larsson 48.3 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 6
T. Maxey 43.7 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 8
A. Black 41.6 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.02
PTS 1
T. Camara 41.5 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.05
PTS 2
S. Henderson 41.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.05
PTS 2
B. Mathurin 37.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 5

SEASON STATS

66
Games
14.7
PPG
3.5
RPG
3.7
APG
0.8
SPG
0.3
BPG
51.5
FG%
44.6
3P%
86.8
FT%
27.1
MPG

GAME LOG

66 games played