MEM

2025-26 Season

WALTER CLAYTON JR.

Memphis Grizzlies | Guard | 6-4
Walter Clayton Jr.
7.5 PPG
2.0 RPG
4.0 APG
20.3 MPG
-3.8 Impact

Jr. produces at an below average rate for a 20-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
-3.8
Scoring +3.9
Points 7.5 PPG × +1.00 = +7.5
Missed 2PT 1.6/g × -0.78 = -1.3
Missed 3PT 2.4/g × -0.87 = -2.1
Missed FT 0.2/g × -1.00 = -0.2
Creation +2.6
Assists 4.0/g × +0.50 = +2.0
Off. Rebounds 0.5/g × +1.26 = +0.6
Turnovers -3.3
Turnovers 1.7/g × -1.95 = -3.3
Defense +0.5
Steals 0.7/g × +2.30 = +1.6
Blocks 0.3/g × +0.90 = +0.3
Def. Rebounds 1.5/g × +0.30 = +0.5
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +2.2
Contested Shots 4.2/g × +0.20 = +0.8
Deflections 1.3/g × +0.65 = +0.8
Charges Drawn 0.1/g × +2.70 = +0.3
Loose Balls 0.3/g × +0.60 = +0.2
Screen Assists 0.2/g × +0.30 = +0.1
Raw Impact +5.9
Baseline (game-average expected) −9.7
Net Impact
-3.8
9th 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 36th
7.5 PPG
Efficiency 20th
48.7% TS
Playmaking 74th
4.0 APG
Rebounding 21th
2.0 RPG
Rim Protection 65th
0.13/min
Hustle 43th
0.10/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 19th
0.08/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Maddening volatility defined Walter Clayton Jr.’s first twenty games. He occasionally controlled the floor without dominating the box score. On 11/03 vs BOS, a modest seven-point outing yielded a massive +10.0 impact score because his elite defensive execution and crisp playmaking fueled the second unit. Yet, hidden costs frequently wrecked his floor value even when his jumper was falling. During his 12/05 vs NYK appearance, Clayton tallied 11 points but still posted a -2.0 impact because prolonged, quiet stretches off the ball dragged down his overall effectiveness. When his shot vanished entirely, the results were disastrous. Look no further than 11/24 vs GSW, where a complete offensive blank—missing all five of his shots—destroyed his net impact and left him with a miserable -8.1 mark. To survive in a modern NBA rotation, he must figure out how to stay engaged and eliminate these passive disappearing acts.

A maddening inconsistency defined Walter Clayton Jr.'s mid-season stretch, where erratic decision-making frequently sabotaged his minutes. Even when he found the bottom of the net, hidden costs often dragged his value into the red. During the 01/10 vs CHA matchup, he scored a respectable 13 points but posted a dismal -6.5 impact score because constant defensive miscommunications routinely left shooters wide open. Conversely, he occasionally found ways to drive winning basketball without a heavy scoring load. On 01/01 vs LAC, Clayton managed just 9 points but generated a +4.0 impact thanks to outstanding defensive engagement and high-motor hustle plays. His absolute ceiling emerged on 12/27 vs SAS, where flawless shot selection resulted in a perfect 6/6 from the floor and a massive +12.4 impact. Yet, those decisive attacking moments were fleeting. Too often, as seen in his -11.8 impact disaster on 01/17 vs DAL, severe spacing issues crippled the offense as defenders aggressively sagged off his perimeter presence.

This grueling twenty-game stretch was defined by a severe crisis of offensive identity, as Walter Clayton Jr. repeatedly derailed possessions with forced looks and contested isolations. His 03/09 vs BKN outing captured this frustrating dynamic perfectly. Despite scoring 13 points, he posted a brutal -12.5 impact score because he bogged down the offense by heavily relying on contested isolation plays that yielded terrible returns. The bottom fell out completely on 02/25 vs GSW. During that game, a disastrous 1-for-8 shooting performance and relentless shot-forcing tanked his overall impact to a staggering -13.4. Yet, a brief glimpse of his actual value emerged on 03/01 vs IND when he finally embraced a pure facilitator role. Sacrificing his own scoring to hand out 14 assists, Clayton picked apart the defense to earn a +3.9 impact score despite scoring just 7 points, revealing exactly how effective he can be when he stops hunting bad jumpers.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Struggling. Jr. has posted negative impact in 77% of games this season. The production rarely outweighs the cost.

Streaky shooter — only cracks 45% from the field in 24% of games. Efficiency is all over the place night-to-night.

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

Performance has dropped off. First-half impact: -1.7, second-half: -5.8. Worth watching whether it's fatigue, injury, or opponents adjusting.

In a rough stretch — 5 straight games with negative impact. Longest cold streak this season: 13 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

R. Nembhard 57.7 poss
FG% 37.5%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.14
PTS 8
T. Jones 39.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 4
C. Gillespie 38.3 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.05
PTS 2
D. Harper 37.0 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 5
K. Sanders 36.4 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.11
PTS 4
A. Holiday 30.9 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 4
T. Camara 30.8 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 5
A. Mitchell 29.6 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2
J. McDaniels 29.4 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 5
C. Love 28.5 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

R. Nembhard 49.8 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.16
PTS 8
D. Harper 36.7 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 6
C. Sexton 32.2 poss
FG% 11.1%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 4
C. Gillespie 31.1 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 5
V. Krejčí 29.9 poss
FG% 83.3%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.43
PTS 13
S. Castle 28.8 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.31
PTS 9
A. Holiday 27.2 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 40.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 6
D. DiVincenzo 26.6 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 4
D. Fox 26.5 poss
FG% 80.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.38
PTS 10
T. Jones 26.4 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 2

SEASON STATS

66
Games
7.5
PPG
2.0
RPG
4.0
APG
0.7
SPG
0.3
BPG
37.7
FG%
29.4
3P%
89.5
FT%
20.3
MPG

GAME LOG

66 games played