LAC

2025-26 Season

ISAIAH JACKSON

LA Clippers | Forward | 6-8
Isaiah Jackson
6.7PPG
5.3RPG
0.9APG
16.5MPG
-1.0 Impact

Jackson produces at an below average rate for a 16-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
-1.0
Scoring +6.0
Points Scored 6.7 PPG = +6.7
Missed Shots difficulty-adjusted = -1.6
Shot Making above expected FG% = +0.9
Creation +0.6
Assists & Self-Creation 0.9 AST/g + self-creation = +0.6
Turnovers -2.6
Turnovers 1.1/g (live + dead blend) = -2.6
Defense -0.6
Steals 0.7/g = +1.6
Blocks 0.9/g = +0.8
Fouls + context committed fouls, matchup adj = -3.0
Hustle & Effort +5.5
Rebounds 5.3 RPG (OREB + DREB) = +2.6
Contested Shots 5.1/g = +1.0
Deflections 1.8/g = +1.2
Charges Drawn 0.0/g = +0.0
Loose Balls 0.3/g = +0.2
Screen Assists 1.7/g = +0.5
Raw Impact +8.9
Baseline (game-average expected) −9.9
Net Impact
-1.0
47th pctl vs Forwards

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 235 Forwards with 10+ games

Scoring 36th
7.2 PPG
Efficiency 74th
59.7% TS
Playmaking 20th
1.0 APG
Rebounding 77th
5.7 RPG
Defense 36th
+6.5/g
Hustle 69th
+14.3/g
Creation 67th
+2.88/g
Shot Making 8th
+2.52/g
TO Discipline 23th
0.06/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Isaiah Jackson's opening stretch of the season was defined by a maddening inconsistency that swung wildly between game-wrecking dominance and totally invisible minutes. He looked like an absolute force on 11/04 vs MIL, bullying his way to 21 points and 10 rebounds. That dominant interior effort and highly efficient 8-of-12 shooting drove a massive +26.2 Impact score. Even when his offensive touch vanished, he occasionally found ways to tilt the floor without filling up the bucket. Look at his performance on 11/09 vs DEN, where he managed a +4.2 Impact score despite scoring just 4 points because of his relentless rebounding and physical hustle plays. Yet, the hidden costs of his game often dragged him down just as quickly. During his 11/27 vs TOR start, Jackson provided decent offensive punch with 8 points on flawless 3-for-3 shooting, but he still registered a miserable -7.7 Impact score due to defensive lapses and a glaring failure to secure the glass. He remains a tantalizing athlete who can completely hijack a contest, but he desperately needs to iron out these wild fluctuations.

Isaiah Jackson's middle stretch of the season was defined by a rapid, puzzling erosion of coaching trust. He initially looked like an elite backup big, dominating the paint on 11/30 vs CHI with a flawless 5-for-5 shooting night that yielded 14 points, 11 rebounds, and a massive +18.4 impact score. He brought that same interior force on 12/14 vs WAS, bullying his way to 11 points and 12 boards for a +12.2 impact driven by relentless hustle on the glass. January brought a brutal reality check. His playing time simply vanished. By the time he logged just six scoreless minutes on 01/31 vs ATL, his -14.8 impact score reflected a big man completely out of sync with the defensive scheme. Even when he managed to grab five rebounds during that brief cameo, his severely negative impact stemmed from invisible costs like blown coverages, poor positioning, and entirely empty offensive possessions. He quickly devolved from a game-changing spark into an afterthought anchored to the end of the bench.

This mid-season stretch was defined by maddening inconsistency, as Isaiah Jackson oscillated wildly between high-energy paint enforcer and invisible rotation piece. When he actually engaged on the glass, he was a massive plus for the second unit. This was obvious during his rugged 12-point, 12-rebound effort on 03/07 vs MEM, which generated a stellar +11.9 Impact score. Yet, he frequently gave those gains right back with hollow scoring nights where his lack of rebounding dragged down his overall value. Look at his 03/16 vs SAS appearance, where he tallied 11 points on an efficient 4-for-5 from the floor but grabbed just a single rebound, resulting in a -1.4 Impact score. A big man cannot survive on scoring alone, and his inability to secure missed shots on those nights killed the second unit's momentum. He finally found the right balance during the 03/25 vs TOR matchup, putting together a flawless 6-for-6 shooting night for 12 points while adding six boards to earn a massive +14.0 Impact mark. If he wants consistent minutes, Jackson must realize that flashy finishing means nothing without the requisite grit in the trenches.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. Jackson's impact swings wildly relative to his average — some nights dominant, others invisible. Scoring varies by ~5 points per game.

Reliable shooter — hits 45%+ from the field in 83% of games. You can count on efficient nights more often than not.

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

Performance has dropped off. First-half impact: +1.1, second-half: -3.1. Worth watching whether it's fatigue, injury, or opponents adjusting.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 8 games. Longest cold streak: 7 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY ⚠ Updated 46 days ago

Based on 60 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. Duren 73.2 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 7
J. Poeltl 44.9 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 6
M. Turner 42.6 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 6
K. Filipowski 37.8 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.21
PTS 8
N. Jokić 35.9 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 3
M. Potter 34.4 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 6
D. Queen 33.9 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 6
M. Bagley III 33.6 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 4
E. Mobley 29.7 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 5
A. Sengun 29.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

J. Duren 76.3 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 21
J. Poeltl 49.1 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 8
M. Turner 38.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 7
K. Filipowski 37.8 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.21
PTS 8
N. Jokić 37.5 poss
FG% 70.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.37
PTS 14
D. Queen 35.4 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 6
M. Bagley III 31.5 poss
FG% 62.5%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.38
PTS 12
M. Potter 30.4 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.23
PTS 7
A. Sengun 30.1 poss
FG% 42.9%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 9
D. Green 28.7 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2

SEASON STATS

55
Games
6.7
PPG
5.3
RPG
0.9
APG
0.7
SPG
0.9
BPG
63.7
FG%
0.0
3P%
64.8
FT%
16.5
MPG

GAME LOG

55 games played