SAC

2025-26 Season

DEMAR DEROZAN

Sacramento Kings | Guard-Forward | 6-6
DeMar DeRozan
18.6 PPG
3.0 RPG
4.2 APG
31.5 MPG
+1.0 Impact

DeRozan produces at an average rate for a 32-minute workload.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
+1.0
Scoring +12.5
Points 18.6 PPG × +1.00 = +18.6
Missed 2PT 5.3/g × -0.78 = -4.2
Missed 3PT 1.3/g × -0.87 = -1.1
Missed FT 0.8/g × -1.00 = -0.8
Creation +3.0
Assists 4.2/g × +0.50 = +2.1
Off. Rebounds 0.7/g × +1.26 = +0.9
Turnovers -2.3
Turnovers 1.2/g × -1.95 = -2.3
Defense +1.6
Steals 1.1/g × +2.30 = +2.5
Blocks 0.3/g × +0.90 = +0.3
Def. Rebounds 2.2/g × +0.30 = +0.7
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +2.6
Contested Shots 2.8/g × +0.20 = +0.6
Deflections 1.6/g × +0.65 = +1.0
Charges Drawn 0.1/g × +2.70 = +0.3
Loose Balls 0.5/g × +0.60 = +0.3
Off. Fouls Drawn 0.1/g uncredited × +2.70 = +0.4
Raw Impact +17.4
Baseline (game-average expected) −16.4
Net Impact
+1.0
80th 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 87th
18.6 PPG
Efficiency 73th
57.9% TS
Playmaking 78th
4.2 APG
Rebounding 53th
3.0 RPG
Rim Protection 29th
0.10/min
Hustle 18th
0.08/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 75th
0.04/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

DeMar DeRozan's first twenty games were defined by a maddening tug-of-war between brilliant isolation scoring and the hidden costs of his defensive apathy. When he fell in love with contested mid-range pull-ups, his value plummeted. This was perfectly illustrated on 10/26 vs LAL, where his 21 points yielded an ugly -8.4 impact score because he entirely bogged down the half-court offense. Similarly, his 29 points on 11/01 vs MIL masked a negative -3.5 impact, dragged into the red by glaring defensive lapses that completely negated his buckets. Yet, when DeRozan engaged without the ball, his advanced metrics exploded. Look no further than 11/22 vs DEN. Despite scoring a modest 17 points, he generated a massive +14.3 impact score driven entirely by high-level defensive rotations and consistent hustle metrics. He eventually achieved complete offensive dominance on 11/24 vs MIN, pouring in 33 points with masterful midrange execution and elite foul-drawing to post a staggering +19.2 impact.

Wild inconsistency and a Jekyll-and-Hyde approach to shot selection defined this turbulent stretch of the season for DeRozan. He occasionally found ways to influence winning without dominating the ball, like on 12/20 vs POR where a modest 15-point outing yielded a +9.1 impact score because he consistently blew up passing lanes to generate elite defensive value. Yet, raw scoring totals often masked underlying flaws in his game. During the 12/08 vs IND matchup, he dropped 20 points but posted a -0.1 impact, dragged down by glaring defensive lapses in isolation coverage. His shot diet was a constant tightrope walk. When he operated with patience, he was unstoppable, scorching the nets for 32 points on 14-of-19 shooting to drive a massive +19.4 impact on 01/12 vs LAL. He remains a lethal offensive weapon, but his overall value swings wildly depending on his defensive engagement and willingness to avoid empty-calorie jumpers.

This stretch was defined by a maddening tug-of-war between DeRozan's reliance on ball-stopping isolation and his flashes of clinical efficiency. When he leaned too heavily into his bag of tricks, the offense stagnated around him, as seen during his 23-point outing on 01/20 vs MIA. A steady diet of one-on-one play inflated his box score that night but stalled the broader offensive engine, resulting in a sluggish -2.1 impact score. Conversely, when he operated within the flow of the system, his surgical shot selection routinely punished defensive rotations. On 02/01 vs WAS, he poured in 32 points and generated a massive +9.0 impact score by taking exactly what the defense gave him. He even found ways to contribute when his jumper abandoned him entirely. During a brutal shooting night on 02/19 vs ORL, he salvaged a +1.4 impact rating alongside just 13 points by using his veteran savvy to draw contact and manufacture trips to the foul line.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Boom-or-bust player. DeRozan's impact swings wildly relative to his average — some nights dominant, others invisible. Scoring varies by ~9 points per game.

Middle-of-the-road efficiency — shoots 45%+ from the field in 64% of games. Not automatic, but not a problem either.

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

Small downward trend. First-half impact: +2.4, second-half: -0.3. Not alarming yet, but trending the wrong direction.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 8 games. Longest cold streak: 6 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. Brooks 85.6 poss
FG% 44.4%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 8
T. Camara 85.3 poss
FG% 52.9%
3P% 25.0%
PPP 0.23
PTS 20
K. Durant 80.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.21
PTS 17
J. Randle 79.3 poss
FG% 45.5%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 12
R. O'Neale 76.8 poss
FG% 72.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 20
L. Markkanen 71.5 poss
FG% 42.9%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.1
PTS 7
J. McDaniels 61.6 poss
FG% 53.8%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.28
PTS 17
L. Dort 58.0 poss
FG% 20.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 7
P. Watson 56.9 poss
FG% 54.5%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 17
A. Edwards 56.5 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.16
PTS 9

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

J. Smith Jr. 103.2 poss
FG% 28.6%
3P% 14.3%
PPP 0.09
PTS 9
J. McDaniels 99.5 poss
FG% 54.5%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.15
PTS 15
R. O'Neale 79.2 poss
FG% 22.2%
3P% 22.2%
PPP 0.08
PTS 6
J. Wells 77.8 poss
FG% 76.9%
3P% 83.3%
PPP 0.36
PTS 28
R. Hachimura 63.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.08
PTS 5
T. Camara 57.2 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 5
L. Dort 57.2 poss
FG% 33.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 4
A. Wiggins 54.3 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 50.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 7
C. Johnson 53.7 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.07
PTS 4
D. Brooks 52.8 poss
FG% 58.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 16

SEASON STATS

76
Games
18.6
PPG
3.0
RPG
4.2
APG
1.1
SPG
0.3
BPG
49.5
FG%
31.5
3P%
86.8
FT%
31.5
MPG

GAME LOG

76 games played