MIL

2025-26 Season

JERICHO SIMS

Milwaukee Bucks | Center | 6-10
Jericho Sims
4.5 PPG
5.4 RPG
1.3 APG
18.9 MPG
-1.6 Impact

Sims produces at an below average rate for a 19-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
-1.6
Scoring +3.8
Points 4.5 PPG × +1.00 = +4.5
Missed 2PT 0.5/g × -0.78 = -0.4
Missed 3PT 0.0/g × -0.87 = -0.0
Missed FT 0.3/g × -1.00 = -0.3
Creation +2.5
Assists 1.3/g × +0.50 = +0.7
Off. Rebounds 1.4/g × +1.26 = +1.8
Turnovers -2.1
Turnovers 1.1/g × -1.95 = -2.1
Hustle & Effort +1.7
Contested Shots 3.4/g × +0.20 = +0.7
Deflections 0.6/g × +0.65 = +0.4
Loose Balls 0.2/g × +0.60 = +0.1
Screen Assists 1.8/g × +0.30 = +0.5
Raw Impact +5.9
Baseline (game-average expected) −7.5
Net Impact
-1.6
4th pctl vs Centers

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 92 Centers with 10+ games

Scoring 18th
4.9 PPG
Efficiency 97th
74.8% TS
Playmaking 51th
1.5 APG
Rebounding 51th
6.1 RPG
Rim Protection 2th
0.09/min
Hustle 1th
0.07/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 33th
0.06/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Extreme offensive passivity and disastrous spot starts defined Jericho Sims's early season, rendering him a massive liability whenever his minutes crept up. He occasionally thrived in microscopic doses. During a scoreless eight-minute shift on 11/15 vs LAL, his bone-crushing screens and flawless defensive rotations generated a stellar +3.7 impact score without a single shot attempt. But exposing him to heavier workloads routinely invited disaster. When thrust into the starting lineup on 12/06 vs DET, a catastrophic turnover rate absolutely tanked his value, saddling him with a brutal -11.3 impact score despite perfect shooting from the floor. He did manage one brilliant outlier on 12/03 vs DET, dominating the painted area with flawless finishing to post 15 points, 14 rebounds, and a +9.4 impact. Unfortunately, that aggression was painfully rare. Far too often, his total lack of rim pressure allowed opposing frontcourts to completely ignore him and roam the paint with impunity.

This stretch was defined by maddening passivity and empty efficiency, as Jericho Sims routinely converted his looks at the rim while bleeding value through poor interior positioning. The nadir arrived on 12/26 vs MEM. Despite missing just one shot, he posted a disastrous -9.6 impact score. His complete offensive invisibility and terrible pick-and-roll spacing allowed defenders to completely ignore him. He occasionally flipped the script when he actually engaged physically, logging a massive +8.1 impact score on 02/11 vs ORL. During that rare start, flawless finishing and elite offensive rebounding turned him into a genuine weapon. Yet he immediately regressed the very next night on 02/12 vs OKC, sinking to a -6.4 impact score despite converting four of his five field goal attempts. Complete invisibility on the margins and a glaring lack of rim deterrence erased his tidy box score numbers, exposing the harsh reality that easy dunks mean nothing if you fail to command the paint.

Jericho Sims spent this stretch oscillating wildly between high-flying rim enforcer and completely invisible passenger. His value peaked during a 03/21 vs PHX matchup, where he managed just 5 points but generated a massive +8.3 impact score. Instead of demanding touches, he wrecked the interior through relentless positioning on the glass, grabbing 11 rebounds and creating immense value through pure vertical spacing. Yet, when that physical edge vanished, his overall effectiveness completely cratered. On 03/14 vs ATL, Sims shot a perfect 2-for-2 for 7 points but posted a disastrous -11.4 impact score. He floated aimlessly on both ends during that contest, failing to leverage his elite athleticism into meaningful rim deterrence. Even a massive 20-rebound effort on 04/01 vs HOU couldn't salvage his advanced metrics, as a brutal 1-for-5 shooting night dragged him to a -2.9 impact and highlighted exactly how fragile his utility becomes when he forces awkward offense.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Below-average consistency. Sims is negative impact in 72% of games, with scoring moving ~4 points game-to-game.

Reliable shooter — hits 45%+ from the field in 91% of games. You can count on efficient nights more often than not.

Good defender on his best nights, but it comes and goes. Some games Sims locks in defensively, others he gets picked apart.

Flat trajectory all season — first-half impact -2.1, second-half -1.1. No major shifts, which fits with the overall steadiness.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 5 games. Longest cold streak: 10 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

J. Duren 59.1 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 11
J. Huff 58.2 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 5
W. Carter Jr. 55.0 poss
FG% 85.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 13
B. Lopez 53.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 4
M. Wagner 52.2 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 8
K. Ware 46.1 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 4
D. Clingan 45.3 poss
FG% 80.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 9
I. Stewart 45.2 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 6
S. Mamukelashvili 43.7 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 4
D. Sharpe 37.8 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.11
PTS 4

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

P. Banchero 52.5 poss
FG% 44.4%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.23
PTS 12
J. Duren 42.4 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 5
J. Jaquez Jr. 39.6 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.05
PTS 2
Z. Williamson 38.7 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 11
P. Siakam 37.4 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 7
D. Clingan 33.5 poss
FG% 83.3%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.33
PTS 11
K. Ware 33.1 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 4
S. Mamukelashvili 32.1 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 9
D. Sharpe 31.3 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.29
PTS 9
I. Stewart 30.8 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.06
PTS 2

SEASON STATS

61
Games
4.5
PPG
5.4
RPG
1.3
APG
0.2
SPG
0.2
BPG
79.3
FG%
0.0
3P%
63.6
FT%
18.9
MPG

GAME LOG

61 games played