CHI

2025-26 Season

ROB DILLINGHAM

Chicago Bulls | Guard | 6-2
Rob Dillingham
5.5 PPG
1.8 RPG
2.2 APG
14.0 MPG
-3.6 Impact

Dillingham produces at an below average rate for a 14-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
-3.6
Scoring +2.4
Points 5.5 PPG × +1.00 = +5.5
Missed 2PT 2.4/g × -0.78 = -1.9
Missed 3PT 1.2/g × -0.87 = -1.0
Missed FT 0.2/g × -1.00 = -0.2
Creation +1.6
Assists 2.2/g × +0.50 = +1.1
Off. Rebounds 0.4/g × +1.26 = +0.5
Turnovers -2.7
Turnovers 1.4/g × -1.95 = -2.7
Defense +0.2
Steals 0.7/g × +2.30 = +1.6
Blocks 0.1/g × +0.90 = +0.1
Def. Rebounds 1.3/g × +0.30 = +0.4
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +1.5
Contested Shots 1.7/g × +0.20 = +0.3
Deflections 1.2/g × +0.65 = +0.8
Loose Balls 0.3/g × +0.60 = +0.2
Off. Fouls Drawn 0.1/g uncredited × +2.70 = +0.2
Raw Impact +3.0
Baseline (game-average expected) −6.6
Net Impact
-3.6
13th pctl vs Guards

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 235 Guards with 10+ games

Scoring 21th
6.1 PPG
Efficiency 7th
42.5% TS
Playmaking 42th
2.3 APG
Rebounding 16th
1.9 RPG
Rim Protection 31th
0.10/min
Hustle 56th
0.11/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 11th
0.09/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Rob Dillingham’s early season was defined by a jarring inability to read NBA defenses, resulting in a chaotic string of wild drives and empty bench minutes. Even when the ball actually went through the hoop, hidden costs severely dragged him down. He tallied a stretch-high 11 points on 11/09 vs SAC, yet forced the issue so badly on drives that he posted a dismal -3.0 impact score. His longest leash came on 11/03 vs BKN, where poor shot selection and an utter lack of rhythm tanked his overall rating to a staggering -9.2. The offensive game simply looked completely broken. Yet, Dillingham occasionally found ways to survive on the floor without scoring at all. During a scoreless nine-minute run on 11/24 vs SAC, exceptional defensive engagement and high-energy hustle miraculously generated a +4.0 impact mark. Until he stops over-dribbling and cleans up his erratic finishing, those scrappy defensive plays will be his only saving grace.

This brutal mid-season stretch was defined by erratic shot selection and glaring defensive frailties that kept Rob Dillingham anchored to the bench. He occasionally managed to spark the offense without filling the stat sheet, like when he posted a +2.2 impact score on 12/31 vs ATL by injecting immediate pace and decisive decision-making into the late-game rotation. Those flashes were incredibly rare. Far more often, his minutes were an unmitigated disaster. Look no further than 01/04 vs WAS, where he logged an abysmal -11.5 impact score while producing 0 points, 0 rebounds, and 0 assists due to completely empty possessions and defensive breakdowns. Even when he managed to put the ball in the basket, his underlying value remained severely compromised by terrible habits on the other end of the floor. During 02/07 vs DEN, Dillingham scored 9 points and dished 4 assists, but his defensive frailties at the point of attack allowed opposing guards to consistently collapse the defense, dragging his impact score down to a poor -6.2. Unless he learns to navigate physical matchups and stops rushing off-balance floaters, he will remain a massive liability for the second unit.

A brutal slump defined by tunnel vision and defensive bleeding turned Rob Dillingham into a massive liability for the second unit during this stretch. Even when the box score looked respectable, the underlying metrics painted a grim picture of his actual value. Take his Mar 12 vs LAL performance, where he tallied 12 points, 5 rebounds, and 7 assists but still posted a -7.1 impact score. Defensive frailties at the point of attack allowed opposing guards to dictate the tempo, completely erasing his offensive contributions. The bottom fell out entirely on Mar 30 vs SAS, as he logged a disastrous -12.5 impact score while shooting a dismal 3-for-12 from the floor. He severely damaged the team's rhythm by forcing contested jumpers early in the shot clock rather than initiating the offense. His lone bright spot arrived on Mar 19 vs CLE, where an aggressive scoring mentality yielded 17 points and a +2.9 impact score. Unfortunately, that efficient outing was a rare anomaly in a frustrating stretch of erratic shot selection and costly defensive lapses.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Struggling. Dillingham has posted negative impact in 83% of games this season. The production rarely outweighs the cost.

Streaky shooter — only cracks 45% from the field in 27% of games. Efficiency is all over the place night-to-night.

Average defender. Dillingham doesn't hurt you defensively, but he's not making opponents uncomfortable either.

Performance has dropped off. First-half impact: -2.1, second-half: -5.2. Worth watching whether it's fatigue, injury, or opponents adjusting.

In a rough stretch — 7 straight games with negative impact. Longest cold streak this season: 24 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

D. Schröder 45.8 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 4
I. Joe 42.4 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 5
W. Clayton Jr. 24.7 poss
FG% 42.9%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 7
C. Payne 24.0 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
I. Quickley 23.6 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 2
N. Traore 22.8 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 2
J. Alvarado 21.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 2
P. Pritchard 20.4 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 2
K. Ellis 19.5 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 5
L. Shamet 19.4 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.31
PTS 6

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

D. Schröder 45.8 poss
FG% 16.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 9
I. Joe 39.6 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 28.6%
PPP 0.33
PTS 13
J. Alvarado 35.1 poss
FG% 42.9%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 7
L. Kennard 29.4 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 4
W. Clayton Jr. 27.0 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
C. Payne 24.4 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 3
P. Spencer 24.1 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 4
C. Wallace 23.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 2
B. Brown 23.1 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 3
I. Quickley 22.9 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 6

SEASON STATS

60
Games
5.5
PPG
1.8
RPG
2.2
APG
0.7
SPG
0.1
BPG
38.0
FG%
30.8
3P%
75.6
FT%
14.0
MPG

GAME LOG

60 games played