BKN

2025-26 Season

NOAH CLOWNEY

Brooklyn Nets | Forward-Center | 6-10
Noah Clowney
12.3 PPG
4.1 RPG
1.6 APG
27.0 MPG
-2.0 Impact

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

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
-2.0
Scoring +6.7
Points 12.3 PPG × +1.00 = +12.3
Missed 2PT 1.8/g × -0.78 = -1.4
Missed 3PT 4.0/g × -0.87 = -3.5
Missed FT 0.7/g × -1.00 = -0.7
Creation +2.1
Assists 1.6/g × +0.50 = +0.8
Off. Rebounds 1.0/g × +1.26 = +1.3
Turnovers -2.9
Turnovers 1.5/g × -1.95 = -2.9
Defense +1.4
Steals 0.8/g × +2.30 = +1.8
Blocks 0.7/g × +0.90 = +0.6
Def. Rebounds 3.1/g × +0.30 = +0.9
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +3.2
Contested Shots 6.2/g × +0.20 = +1.2
Deflections 1.6/g × +0.65 = +1.0
Charges Drawn 0.1/g × +2.70 = +0.3
Loose Balls 0.4/g × +0.60 = +0.2
Screen Assists 0.3/g × +0.30 = +0.1
Off. Fouls Drawn 0.2/g uncredited × +2.70 = +0.4
Raw Impact +10.5
Baseline (game-average expected) −12.5
Net Impact
-2.0
21st pctl vs Forwards

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 228 Forwards with 10+ games

Scoring 67th
12.3 PPG
Efficiency 28th
53.6% TS
Playmaking 52th
1.6 APG
Rebounding 50th
4.1 RPG
Rim Protection 38th
0.13/min
Hustle 66th
0.12/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 27th
0.06/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Noah Clowney’s first twenty games were defined by a chaotic transition into the starting lineup, where his trigger-happy shot selection frequently sabotaged his own production. Even when the counting stats looked impressive, his actual value wildly fluctuated based on his perimeter discipline. During the 11/23 vs TOR matchup, Clowney poured in 22 points but registered a dismal -5.9 impact score because he stubbornly bricked six attempts from beyond the arc. He flipped the script entirely on 11/21 vs BOS, generating a stellar +6.0 impact alongside his 19 points by anchoring the paint and leaning on a massive defensive presence rather than just hunting outside shots. Yet, his floor awareness remains incredibly fragile. On 11/29 vs MIL, he took only three shots and scored just 6 points, but severe defensive lapses and hidden mistakes completely tanked his overall impact to a catastrophic -11.5. When Clowney ignores his defensive responsibilities to force contested looks on the perimeter, he actively bleeds value on the court.

Noah Clowney’s mid-season stretch was defined by maddening volatility, oscillating wildly between brilliant two-way enforcer and erratic perimeter chucker. His absolute worst tendencies hijacked the offense on 01/02 vs WAS. A stubborn refusal to stop forcing heavily contested jumpers resulted in an 0-for-8 night from deep, cratering his overall value with a disastrous -11.6 impact score. Yet, he completely flipped the script just two days later on 01/04 vs DEN. By abandoning the bad shots and blending decisive rim-running with mistake-free positioning, he poured in 22 points to earn a massive +13.2 impact. He even found ways to salvage value when his jumper abandoned him entirely. During the 01/11 vs MEM matchup, Clowney hoisted a brutal 15 three-point attempts, making only four. Despite that offensive wreckage, he still posted a +3.0 impact score because his relentless activity on the margins yielded a stellar +7.2 hustle rating.

A wildly erratic shooting rollercoaster defined this stretch for Noah Clowney, as he oscillated between lethal floor-spacing and crippling inefficiency. Look no further than the 03/07 vs DET matchup, where an aggressive 16-point outing masked an ugly reality. His atrocious shot selection and forced perimeter attempts dragged his impact score down to a dismal -5.5, actively hurting the team's half-court flow despite the scoring spike. Yet, when he actually let the game come to him, the results were spectacular. During the 02/09 vs CHI contest, Clowney erupted for 22 points on 4-of-6 shooting from deep. This generated a massive +10.6 impact because his unexpected floor-spacing completely broke the opposing defensive scheme. Conversely, he dropped 11 points and hit three triples on 02/26 vs SAS, but his overall impact still tanked to -6.5. That negative return stemmed entirely from poor defensive rotations, revealing the hidden costs of his game when his situational awareness wanes.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. Clowney's impact swings wildly relative to his average — some nights dominant, others invisible. Scoring varies by ~7 points per game.

Streaky shooter — only cracks 45% from the field in 31% of games. Efficiency is all over the place night-to-night.

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

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 3 games. Longest cold streak: 7 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 66 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. Brown 103.9 poss
FG% 35.7%
3P% 16.7%
PPP 0.13
PTS 13
B. Ingram 87.3 poss
FG% 46.2%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.17
PTS 15
J. Johnson 86.2 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 6
P. Banchero 66.0 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.06
PTS 4
K. Middleton 63.9 poss
FG% 20.0%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.05
PTS 3
M. Buzelis 56.9 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 16
J. Randle 55.3 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 14.3%
PPP 0.13
PTS 7
P. Larsson 54.8 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 10
I. Okoro 47.0 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.11
PTS 5
T. Harris 46.2 poss
FG% 20.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 7

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

J. Brown 88.6 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.29
PTS 26
J. Johnson 65.4 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 16.7%
PPP 0.29
PTS 19
P. Banchero 43.7 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.23
PTS 10
B. Ingram 43.6 poss
FG% 38.5%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.25
PTS 11
N. Marshall 40.2 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.4
PTS 16
M. Buzelis 38.3 poss
FG% 44.4%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.31
PTS 12
P. Larsson 36.0 poss
FG% 37.5%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 7
J. Jaquez Jr. 35.6 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.25
PTS 9
N. Queta 35.1 poss
FG% 71.4%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 10
C. Flagg 34.1 poss
FG% 54.5%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.35
PTS 12

SEASON STATS

66
Games
12.3
PPG
4.1
RPG
1.6
APG
0.8
SPG
0.7
BPG
39.6
FG%
32.9
3P%
80.4
FT%
27.0
MPG

GAME LOG

66 games played