POR

2025-26 Season

CALEB LOVE

Portland Trail Blazers | Guard | 6-3
Caleb Love
10.4PPG
2.3RPG
2.5APG
20.7MPG
-2.3 Impact

Love produces at an below average rate for a 21-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
-2.3
Scoring +8.4
Points Scored 10.4 PPG = +10.4
Missed Shots difficulty-adjusted = -4.8
Shot Making above expected FG% = +2.8
Creation +0.7
Assists & Self-Creation 2.5 AST/g + self-creation = +0.7
Turnovers -3.0
Turnovers 1.3/g (live + dead blend) = -3.0
Defense +0.5
Steals 0.6/g = +1.4
Blocks 0.1/g = +0.1
Fouls + context committed fouls, matchup adj = -1.0
Hustle & Effort +1.6
Rebounds 2.3 RPG (OREB + DREB) = +0.4
Contested Shots 1.7/g = +0.3
Deflections 1.2/g = +0.8
Charges Drawn 0.0/g = +0.0
Loose Balls 0.2/g = +0.1
Screen Assists 0.1/g = +0.0
Raw Impact +8.2
Baseline (game-average expected) −10.5
Net Impact
-2.3
47th pctl vs Guards

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 246 Guards with 10+ games

Scoring 60th
11.2 PPG
Efficiency 6th
43.7% TS
Playmaking 53th
2.7 APG
Rebounding 41th
2.5 RPG
Defense 41th
+6.8/g
Hustle 41th
+7.9/g
Creation 48th
+2.74/g
Shot Making 60th
+7.15/g
TO Discipline 43th
0.06/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Caleb Love's first 17 games were defined by a maddeningly erratic shot selection that swung wildly between game-breaking outbursts and offensive black holes. When his jumper fell, he looked like an absolute steal. He erupted for 26 points and seven rebounds on 11/22 vs GSW, riding a hot hand from deep to generate a massive +18.6 Impact score. However, that brilliant performance followed pure chaos just two nights prior. On 11/20 vs CHI, Love clanked his way to a brutal 1-for-12 shooting night, resulting in a -10.1 Impact because his sheer volume of missed threes completely derailed the bench offense. Even when he dialed back the volume, his inability to contribute elsewhere punished the second unit. During an ugly stint on 11/27 vs SAS, he managed just a single point and one assist in 12 minutes, posting a catastrophic -15.8 Impact due to his total lack of playmaking and defensive resistance. He remains a fascinating spark plug, but his refusal to affect the game without scoring makes him a volatile liability.

This stretch captured Caleb Love’s chaotic transition from a buried bench liability into a legitimate offensive weapon who eventually forced his way into the starting lineup. After spending mid-December bleeding value through forced jumpers and defensive apathy, he finally caught fire. His peak arrived on 12/30 vs DAL, where he buried six threes en route to 24 points, posting a massive +15.1 impact because he paired his elite shot-making with active defense. Yet, the empty-calorie scoring that has always haunted his scouting report still reared its ugly head. Look at 12/27 vs LAC: Love dropped 14 points on an efficient 5-for-10 from the floor, but dragged the team down with a -1.1 impact because he grabbed zero rebounds and offered zero defensive resistance. Fortunately, he started learning how to salvage his floor game when his jumper went cold. Earning his first start on 01/14 vs GSW, he bricked 11 of his 16 shots but still managed a +2.0 impact by grinding out seven assists and playing relentless perimeter defense.

This brutal midseason stretch defined Caleb Love as a textbook irrational confidence guard whose erratic shot selection eventually exiled him from the rotation. Look at his 02/07 vs MEM performance. He stuffed the box score with 17 points and 8 assists, yet still posted a dismal -4.4 Impact score. The hidden cost of those counting stats was his relentless chucking, as he bricked 11 of his 18 shot attempts and completely hijacked the offensive flow. He occasionally found other ways to contribute, like during the 01/30 vs NYK game. Despite inefficient scoring on a miserable 5-for-15 from the floor, he salvaged a +4.0 Impact score by digging in defensively when his jumper abandoned him. Sadly, those gritty moments vanished quickly. By the time he logged just eight scoreless minutes on 02/03 vs PHX, his total lack of execution yielded a catastrophic -18.3 Impact score, permanently relegating him to garbage-time duty.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

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

Streaky shooter — only cracks 45% from the field in 33% of games. Efficiency is all over the place night-to-night.

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

Slight upward trend. First-half impact: -3.8, second-half: -0.9. Modest improvement — possibly settling into a rhythm.

In a rough stretch — 7 straight games with negative impact. Longest cold streak this season: 7 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY ⚠ Updated 46 days ago

Based on 48 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. Mitchell 47.9 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.23
PTS 11
B. Podziemski 45.1 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.11
PTS 5
B. Williams 31.4 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.25
PTS 8
P. Pritchard 30.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 4
C. Porter Jr. 29.2 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 7
C. Gillespie 27.8 poss
FG% 20.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2
D. Schröder 26.8 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.26
PTS 7
D. Fox 26.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.19
PTS 5
W. Clayton Jr. 25.8 poss
FG% 20.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 2
A. Simons 24.4 poss
FG% 11.1%
3P% 14.3%
PPP 0.12
PTS 3

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

B. Podziemski 51.1 poss
FG% 80.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.25
PTS 13
P. Pritchard 45.2 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.11
PTS 5
A. Mitchell 37.7 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 6
G. Trent Jr. 37.5 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 5
W. Clayton Jr. 28.5 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2
J. Small 27.3 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 7
B. Williams 25.5 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 2
I. Joe 25.5 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.12
PTS 3
M. McBride 25.4 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
D. Schröder 24.9 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 6

SEASON STATS

49
Games
10.4
PPG
2.3
RPG
2.5
APG
0.6
SPG
0.1
BPG
38.8
FG%
31.8
3P%
73.5
FT%
20.7
MPG

GAME LOG

49 games played