SAC

2025-26 Season

DYLAN CARDWELL

Sacramento Kings | Center | 6-10
Dylan Cardwell
5.1 PPG
7.6 RPG
1.4 APG
20.4 MPG
+2.0 Impact

Cardwell produces at an above average rate for a 20-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
+2.0
Scoring +3.2
Points 5.1 PPG × +1.00 = +5.1
Missed 2PT 1.6/g × -0.78 = -1.3
Missed 3PT 0.0/g × -0.87 = -0.0
Missed FT 0.6/g × -1.00 = -0.6
Creation +3.1
Assists 1.4/g × +0.50 = +0.7
Off. Rebounds 1.9/g × +1.26 = +2.4
Turnovers -1.8
Turnovers 0.9/g × -1.95 = -1.8
Defense +2.5
Steals 0.6/g × +2.30 = +1.4
Blocks 1.4/g × +0.90 = +1.3
Def. Rebounds 5.7/g × +0.30 = +1.7
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +3.2
Contested Shots 6.7/g × +0.20 = +1.3
Deflections 1.2/g × +0.65 = +0.8
Loose Balls 0.5/g × +0.60 = +0.3
Screen Assists 1.9/g × +0.30 = +0.6
Off. Fouls Drawn 0.1/g uncredited × +2.70 = +0.2
Raw Impact +10.2
Baseline (game-average expected) −8.2
Net Impact
+2.0
38th pctl vs Centers

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 92 Centers with 10+ games

Scoring 19th
5.1 PPG
Efficiency 46th
58.1% TS
Playmaking 47th
1.4 APG
Rebounding 71th
7.6 RPG
Rim Protection 44th
0.18/min
Hustle 74th
0.13/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 68th
0.04/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Dylan Cardwell’s opening stretch of the 2025-26 campaign was defined by a quiet evolution from a clunky liability into an indispensable, dirty-work anchor off the bench. Early on, his offensive limitations dragged down his overall value. This was glaringly obvious on 10/22 vs PHX, when clunky finishing around the basket undermined a passable defensive shift and earned him a bleak -3.6 impact score. He eventually realized that generating tangible advantages did not require shooting the basketball. Look at his performance on 12/20 vs POR, where he managed just four points but posted a +5.3 impact score by serving as an impenetrable brick wall in drop coverage. He took that glue-guy mentality to its absolute peak on 01/21 vs TOR. Despite scoring a mere two points, Cardwell ripped down 13 rebounds and logged a massive +9.6 impact mark simply by dominating the dirty work for the frontcourt. By abandoning forced offense and strictly capitalizing on his relentless activity on the glass, he carved out a highly effective niche.

Dylan Cardwell’s midseason stretch was defined by extreme volatility, swinging wildly between game-changing interior dominance and total offensive invisibility. When fully engaged, he was a wrecking ball in the paint, erupting for 14 points and 14 rebounds on 02/06 vs LAC to generate a massive +15.4 impact score through sheer physicality and a relentless motor. He did not always need to score to swing a game, as seen on 02/09 vs NOP where just six points yielded a +8.8 impact thanks to exceptional defensive positioning and elite rebounding efficiency. However, his extreme limitations on the other end of the floor often dragged his overall value into the red. During the 02/04 vs MEM matchup, he pulled down 11 boards but still posted a -1.1 impact because his complete lack of offensive involvement created severe spacing issues. The floor fell out completely on 01/29 vs PHI. Failing to attempt a single shot in 14 minutes, his absolute offensive invisibility doomed him to a brutal -9.1 impact. Cardwell is a highly effective bruiser when crashing the glass, but his complete lack of a scoring threat makes him a wildly unpredictable rotation piece.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Steady role player. Cardwell's impact doesn't swing much in absolute terms, and he's positive in 62% of games. You know what you're getting.

Reliable shooter — hits 45%+ from the field in 73% of games. You can count on efficient nights more often than not.

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

Small downward trend. First-half impact: +2.8, second-half: +1.2. Not alarming yet, but trending the wrong direction.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 8 games. Longest cold streak: 5 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 51 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

I. Stewart 41.2 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 5
D. Clingan 39.0 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 6
J. Allen 37.4 poss
FG% 83.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.27
PTS 10
R. Williams III 35.4 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.25
PTS 9
M. Robinson 33.5 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.06
PTS 2
B. Lopez 33.1 poss
FG% 60.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.18
PTS 6
D. Ayton 32.0 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
A. Sengun 30.3 poss
FG% 100.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.2
PTS 6
J. Duren 29.8 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
K. Towns 29.5 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

D. Clingan 46.6 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.19
PTS 9
J. Allen 41.6 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.05
PTS 2
M. Robinson 41.5 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 4
R. Williams III 34.9 poss
FG% 0.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.0
PTS 0
D. Ayton 34.5 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.17
PTS 6
J. Duren 31.5 poss
FG% 42.9%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.22
PTS 7
I. Stewart 29.5 poss
FG% 75.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.24
PTS 7
A. Sengun 28.1 poss
FG% 62.5%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.39
PTS 11
B. Lopez 27.4 poss
FG% 20.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 2
Z. Williamson 24.3 poss
FG% 16.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 2

SEASON STATS

39
Games
5.1
PPG
7.6
RPG
1.4
APG
0.6
SPG
1.4
BPG
57.3
FG%
0.0
3P%
53.1
FT%
20.4
MPG

GAME LOG

39 games played