ATL

2025-26 Season

ZACCHARIE RISACHER

Atlanta Hawks | Forward | 6-8
Zaccharie Risacher
9.7 PPG
3.8 RPG
1.1 APG
22.7 MPG
-1.6 Impact

Risacher produces at an below average rate for a 23-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
-1.6
Scoring +5.6
Points 9.7 PPG × +1.00 = +9.7
Missed 2PT 1.9/g × -0.78 = -1.5
Missed 3PT 2.4/g × -0.87 = -2.1
Missed FT 0.5/g × -1.00 = -0.5
Creation +1.7
Assists 1.1/g × +0.50 = +0.6
Off. Rebounds 0.9/g × +1.26 = +1.1
Turnovers -1.8
Turnovers 0.9/g × -1.95 = -1.8
Defense +1.6
Steals 0.9/g × +2.30 = +2.1
Blocks 0.5/g × +0.90 = +0.5
Def. Rebounds 2.8/g × +0.30 = +0.9
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +2.5
Contested Shots 4.4/g × +0.20 = +0.9
Deflections 2.1/g × +0.65 = +1.4
Loose Balls 0.3/g × +0.60 = +0.2
Raw Impact +9.6
Baseline (game-average expected) −11.2
Net Impact
-1.6
27th 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 53th
9.7 PPG
Efficiency 48th
56.6% TS
Playmaking 27th
1.1 APG
Rebounding 41th
3.8 RPG
Rim Protection 42th
0.13/min
Hustle 61th
0.11/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 71th
0.04/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Zaccharie Risacher’s first twenty games were defined by maddening inconsistency, swinging wildly between explosive offensive peaks and disastrous shooting valleys. His floor completely bottomed out on 11/20 vs SAS. A horrific 1-for-10 shooting night yielded just 2 points, cratering his offensive value and resulting in a catastrophic -18.9 impact score. Interestingly, scoring efficiently didn't always guarantee a positive night for the rookie. On 11/28 vs CLE, Risacher shot a blistering 5-for-6 from the field for 14 points, but his total impact sank to -3.3 because hidden negatives completely unraveled his value on the floor. Conversely, he occasionally found ways to stay in the green when his jumper abandoned him. During his 12/03 vs LAC matchup, he shot a miserable 4-for-11 to finish with 11 points, but still squeaked out a +1.7 impact rating because relentless hustle and elite defensive activity salvaged the erratic offensive performance. He clearly has the raw tools to swing games, but until he smooths out his wild fluctuations, his nightly value remains a total coin flip.

This stretch was defined by maddening inconsistency, oscillating violently between scorching perimeter explosions and absolute offensive disappearing acts. Look at his 12/21 vs CHI performance. While 17 points and four triples usually translate to a net positive, his -5.1 impact score reveals how constant defensive lapses completely erased his offensive production. The floor then fell out entirely during a 02/05 vs UTA tilt. An abysmal 0-for-8 shooting night and a nasty habit of forcing early contested looks cratered his value to a brutal -16.7 impact. Yet, he immediately flipped the script on 02/07 vs CHA, draining all four of his three-point attempts to post a +11.3 impact because his searing efficiency finally broke the opponent's defensive shell. Risacher clearly possesses the raw shot-making tools to swing games. Unfortunately, his tendency to float passively or bleed points on the defensive end keeps his overall influence firmly in the red.

This stretch was defined by a permanent demotion to the second unit, forcing Zaccharie Risacher to navigate wild swings between lethal shooting outbursts and passive, negative-impact duds. The growing pains were glaring early on, epitomized by an ugly -8.7 impact score on 02/24 vs WAS where his errant 0-for-5 perimeter shooting completely derailed the offense despite him grabbing nine rebounds. Yet, he eventually found ways to influence winning without filling the bucket. During a quiet five-point outing on 03/01 vs POR, he generated a +3.0 impact mark almost entirely through exceptional weak-side defensive rotations and disciplined closeouts. When his jumper actually fell, he looked like a genuine weapon. He exploded for a massive +15.0 impact score on 03/12 vs BKN, combining decisive straight-line drives with spot-up shooting to pour in 19 points and nine boards. Ultimately, Risacher remains a volatile prospect who needs to eradicate his bouts of perimeter floating to become a reliable nightly rotation piece.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

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

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 52% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

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

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 71 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

B. Ingram 87.5 poss
FG% 37.5%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 17
L. Ball 65.8 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 13
I. Quickley 47.0 poss
FG% 63.6%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 14
A. Edwards 43.2 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.07
PTS 3
T. Maxey 43.0 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 6
M. Buzelis 40.0 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 4
A. Bailey 39.3 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 5
T. Harris 38.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.05
PTS 2
P. George 36.0 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.06
PTS 2
D. Hunter 33.4 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 6

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

P. George 64.7 poss
FG% 36.4%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.26
PTS 17
R. Barrett 64.6 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 20.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 14
B. Ingram 48.3 poss
FG% 53.8%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.37
PTS 18
K. Middleton 48.1 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 9
D. Hunter 47.3 poss
FG% 80.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 8
J. McDaniels 45.6 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 3
K. Knueppel 43.3 poss
FG% 62.5%
3P% 83.3%
PPP 0.35
PTS 15
B. Miller 40.5 poss
FG% 36.4%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 12
A. Thompson 39.7 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.05
PTS 2
W. Riley 39.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 6

SEASON STATS

64
Games
9.7
PPG
3.8
RPG
1.1
APG
0.9
SPG
0.5
BPG
45.8
FG%
37.6
3P%
64.0
FT%
22.7
MPG

GAME LOG

64 games played