SAS

2025-26 Season

DYLAN HARPER

San Antonio Spurs | Guard | 6-5
Dylan Harper
11.7 PPG
3.4 RPG
3.9 APG
22.4 MPG
0.0 Impact

Harper produces at an average rate for a 22-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
+0.0
Scoring +7.4
Points 11.7 PPG × +1.00 = +11.7
Missed 2PT 2.9/g × -0.78 = -2.3
Missed 3PT 1.8/g × -0.87 = -1.6
Missed FT 0.4/g × -1.00 = -0.4
Creation +2.9
Assists 3.9/g × +0.50 = +1.9
Off. Rebounds 0.8/g × +1.26 = +1.0
Turnovers -2.7
Turnovers 1.4/g × -1.95 = -2.7
Defense +1.0
Steals 0.8/g × +2.30 = +1.8
Blocks 0.3/g × +0.90 = +0.3
Def. Rebounds 2.5/g × +0.30 = +0.8
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +2.1
Contested Shots 2.8/g × +0.20 = +0.6
Deflections 1.2/g × +0.65 = +0.8
Loose Balls 0.6/g × +0.60 = +0.4
Screen Assists 0.2/g × +0.30 = +0.1
Off. Fouls Drawn 0.1/g uncredited × +2.70 = +0.2
Raw Impact +10.7
Baseline (game-average expected) −10.7
Net Impact
+0.0
69th 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 61th
11.7 PPG
Efficiency 57th
55.7% TS
Playmaking 72th
3.9 APG
Rebounding 60th
3.4 RPG
Rim Protection 44th
0.11/min
Hustle 28th
0.09/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 37th
0.06/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Dylan Harper’s first twenty games off the bench were defined by a chaotic pendulum swing between surgical offensive orchestration and frustrating defensive lapses. When he dialed in his focus, he was virtually unguardable. Look at 10/26 vs BKN, where elite playmaking and 20 points on 8-of-11 shooting drove a massive +19.7 impact score. Yet, even when he filled the scoring column, hidden costs frequently torpedoed his overall value. On 10/22 vs DAL, Harper tallied 15 points but posted a dismal -8.5 impact because getting repeatedly caught on screens completely derailed his defensive rating. Thankfully, he also found ways to salvage his minutes when his jump shot took a back seat. During 12/23 vs OKC, he scored just 4 points on three shot attempts but still generated a brilliant +11.9 impact by dishing out 10 assists and applying relentless point-of-attack defensive pressure. If he wants to become a trusted rotation fixture, he must abandon his reckless habits and embrace the gritty execution that actually wins basketball games.

A brutal mid-winter shooting slump defined this deeply inconsistent stretch for Dylan Harper before he finally rescued his rhythm through ruthless shot selection. The nadir arrived on 01/10 vs BOS, where a catastrophic string of turnovers and forced decisions dragged his impact down to a dismal -11.2. Even when he managed to generate raw points, hidden offensive costs often negated his overall value. During the 01/15 vs MIL matchup, Harper tallied 13 points but still posted a -2.3 impact because a glaring 0-for-5 goose egg from three-point range allowed defenders to sag off and completely clog his driving lanes. Eventually, he stopped forcing the issue. This stylistic pivot clicked perfectly on 01/31 vs CHA, where he ruthlessly broke down the defense for 20 points, generating a massive +8.2 impact score fueled by pure, surgical scoring efficiency.

Dylan Harper’s midseason stretch was defined by a volatile tug-of-war between his lethal scoring punch and frustrating defensive lapses. When he poured in 17 points on 02/19 vs PHX, his overall impact still sank to a disappointing -2.3. That negative mark was a direct result of getting repeatedly beaten on the defensive end, a hidden cost that completely erased his hot shooting. Conversely, he found ways to win his minutes even when his jumper abandoned him. During a quiet eight-point outing on 03/01 vs NYK, Harper posted a +1.1 impact score simply by locking down the point of attack and providing high-level perimeter containment. As March progressed, his offensive processing finally caught up to his raw talent. He dismantled the opposition with surgical precision on 03/23 vs MIA, generating a massive +10.7 impact score while dropping 21 points. By slicing through the primary line of defense to create high-value looks at the rim, Harper morphed into a devastating half-court weapon.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. Harper's impact swings wildly relative to his average — some nights dominant, others invisible. Scoring varies by ~6 points per game.

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 63% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

Good defender on his best nights, but it comes and goes. Some games Harper locks in defensively, others he gets picked apart.

Getting better as the season goes on. First-half impact: -1.5, second-half: +1.6. That's a significant jump — could be a role change, confidence, or development clicking.

Hot right now — 7 straight games with positive impact. Longest positive run this season: 7 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 64 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. Sheppard 40.4 poss
FG% 61.5%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.42
PTS 17
W. Clayton Jr. 36.7 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 6
A. Nembhard 32.2 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 4
A. Mitchell 29.9 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2
I. Collier 28.4 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 4
J. Shead 27.2 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.33
PTS 9
K. Durant 26.8 poss
FG% 80.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.34
PTS 9
C. Wallace 26.6 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 8
T. Johnson 25.8 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 5
J. Fears 25.4 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 7

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

R. Sheppard 62.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.18
PTS 11
I. Collier 39.6 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.05
PTS 2
C. Wallace 38.6 poss
FG% 25.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.05
PTS 2
W. Clayton Jr. 37.0 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.14
PTS 5
J. Fears 32.8 poss
FG% 40.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 6
M. Christie 30.7 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
C. Spencer 29.1 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.27
PTS 8
J. Small 27.8 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
J. Alvarado 27.1 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 8
E. Dëmin 26.3 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0

SEASON STATS

64
Games
11.7
PPG
3.4
RPG
3.9
APG
0.8
SPG
0.3
BPG
50.3
FG%
32.7
3P%
75.0
FT%
22.4
MPG

GAME LOG

64 games played