2025-26 Season
ROB DILLINGHAM
2025-26 Season
ROB DILLINGHAM
Dillingham produces at an poor rate for a 15-minute workload.
Dillingham produces at an poor rate for a 15-minute workload.
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
TEAM COMPARISON
of 21 teammates (10+ games, 10+ min)
Similar Players
Same position, closest production profile this season.
SKILL DNA
Percentile rank vs 246 Guards with 10+ games
THE SEASON SO FAR
Rob Dillingham’s first 22 games of the season were defined by a brutal failure to adapt to NBA pacing, as he bled value in almost every brief stint off the bench. Even when he managed to generate double-digit offense, like his 11-point outing on 11/10 vs SAC, his -6.6 Impact score revealed a guard whose hidden costs—namely erratic decision-making and defensive lapses—negated his scoring. The structural problems with his game became glaringly obvious on 11/18 vs DAL. He hoisted up 12 shots in just 13 minutes to score a meager eight points, dragging his Impact down to -9.0 due to sheer offensive tunnel vision and inefficiency. His floor time eventually devolved into empty cardio. By 12/03 vs NOP, Dillingham posted a catastrophic -17.1 Impact score while failing to score a single point in seven minutes of action. He looks entirely overwhelmed. Until he learns to process the floor instead of just gunning the moment he touches the ball, his minutes will remain a severe liability.
Rob Dillingham spent the middle of his season drowning at the end of the bench, struggling to find any sort of rhythm in sporadic minutes. His absolute nadir arrived on 01/04 vs WAS. He logged seven minutes of pure cardio to finish with zero points, zero rebounds, and zero assists for a catastrophic -19.9 Impact score. When a player runs around without contributing a single counting stat, the underlying metrics will ruthlessly punish their mere presence on the floor. A sudden spike in playing time in February briefly revived his campaign, highlighted by a gritty effort on 02/09 vs BKN. He scored a modest 8 points, but his aggressive work on the glass yielded 7 rebounds, earning him a +0.5 Impact score through sheer hustle. That fleeting competence vanished completely by 02/24 vs CHA. Despite grabbing 5 rebounds and dishing 5 assists, his abysmal 2-for-9 shooting wasted too many offensive trips, dragging his Impact score down to a brutal -12.9.
This brutal late-season stretch was defined by erratic shot selection and a catastrophic inability to positively influence the game. Even when his shots actually dropped, hidden costs routinely dragged down his overall value. Look at his performance on 03/19 vs CLE, where he scored 17 points but still posted a -1.8 Impact score because his tunnel vision—yielding just one assist—and defensive lapses bled points on the other end. He finally put together a complete game on 04/07 vs WAS, pouring in 26 points and grabbing seven rebounds to earn a rare +9.5 Impact score. The relief was fleeting. On 04/09 vs WAS, he immediately reverted to his worst habits, clanking his way to a 2-for-10 shooting performance that yielded a staggering -22.6 Impact score. For a bench guard expected to provide a reliable spark, these massive negative swings made him a severe liability to the second unit.
IMPACT TIMELINE
Game-by-game performance vs average. Green = above average, red = below.
Struggling. Dillingham has posted negative impact in 94% of games this season. The production rarely outweighs the cost.
Streaky shooter — only cracks 45% from the field in 32% of games. Efficiency is all over the place night-to-night.
Slight upward trend. First-half impact: -11.2, second-half: -8.3. Modest improvement — possibly settling into a rhythm.
Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 2 games. Longest cold streak: 36 games.
MATCHUP HISTORY ⚠ Updated 46 days ago
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
ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED
How opponents shot when he was the primary defender. Lower FG% = better defense.
SEASON STATS
GAME LOG
65 games played
