DEN

2025-26 Season

NIKOLA JOKIĆ

Denver Nuggets | Center | 6-11
Nikola Jokić
27.7 PPG
12.9 RPG
10.9 APG
34.9 MPG
+14.3 Impact

Jokić produces at an elite rate for a 35-minute workload. 3.9 turnovers per game cost 7.6 points of value nightly. Elite defensive value (+4.9/game) is a major strength.

NET IMPACT BREAKDOWN
Every stat, every credit, every cost — per game average
+14.3
Scoring +20.5
Points 27.7 PPG × +1.00 = +27.7
Missed 2PT 4.5/g × -0.78 = -3.5
Missed 3PT 2.8/g × -0.87 = -2.4
Missed FT 1.3/g × -1.00 = -1.3
Creation +9.5
Assists 10.9/g × +0.50 = +5.5
Off. Rebounds 3.2/g × +1.26 = +4.0
Turnovers -7.6
Turnovers 3.9/g × -1.95 = -7.6
Defense +4.9
Steals 1.4/g × +2.30 = +3.2
Blocks 0.8/g × +0.90 = +0.7
Def. Rebounds 9.7/g × +0.30 = +2.9
Fouls Committed 2.5/g × -0.75 = -1.9
Hustle & Effort +4.3
Contested Shots 5.6/g × +0.20 = +1.1
Deflections 2.7/g × +0.65 = +1.8
Loose Balls 0.6/g × +0.60 = +0.4
Screen Assists 3.3/g × +0.30 = +1.0
Raw Impact +31.6
Baseline (game-average expected) −17.3
Net Impact
+14.3
99th 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 99th
27.7 PPG
Efficiency 92th
69.0% TS
Playmaking 99th
10.9 APG
Rebounding 99th
12.9 RPG
Rim Protection 70th
0.21/min
Hustle 17th
0.09/min
Shot Creation 50th
0% pullup
TO Discipline 1th
0.11/min

THE SEASON SO FAR

Nikola Jokić’s opening stretch of the 2025-26 campaign was defined by wild swings between offensive perfection and defensive apathy. He dictated terms without even looking at the rim during the 10/25 vs PHX matchup. Despite scoring a meager 14 points, his masterful offensive orchestration and elite defensive rebounding drove a +6.1 impact score. Then came the scoring binges. He peaked with a historic explosion on 11/12 vs LAC, systematically dismantling the defense for 55 points on 18-of-23 shooting to generate an off-the-charts +36.1 impact score. Yet, hidden costs occasionally ravaged his bottom line. Look no further than the 11/19 vs NOP game. Despite pouring in 28 points and 12 assists, his overall impact sank to -3.9 because defensive transition vulnerabilities bled points the other way.

This stretch of the season was defined by extreme volatility, where Nikola Jokić toggled between absolute basketball nirvana and bizarre defensive apathy. Look no further than 12/05 vs ATL, where he dropped 40 points but managed a meager +1.1 impact score because his atrocious -19.4 defensive rating gave back nearly everything his scoring created. Similarly, a massive 30-point triple-double on 02/04 vs NYK yielded just a +1.9 impact, heavily taxed by an abysmal 1-for-13 shooting night from beyond the arc and lazy defensive rotations. Yet, when he engaged as a pure facilitator, his value skyrocketed even without looking at the rim. On 12/22 vs UTA, he scored just 14 points on seven shots, but generated a +15.3 impact through brilliant playmaking and active effort on the margins (+5.0 hustle score). When his defensive intensity finally matched his offensive intellect, as it did on 02/07 vs CHI, he was entirely untouchable. He orchestrated a staggering +34.1 impact in that contest, pairing 17 assists with flawless decision-making and a dominant +12.4 defensive score to completely break the opponent's spirit.

A bizarre tug-of-war between offensive mastery and glaring defensive apathy defined this baffling stretch of the season. Look no further than 03/27 vs UTA, where he posted a monstrous 33 points, 15 rebounds, and 12 assists on hyper-efficient shooting, yet suffered a staggering -11.1 impact score. The hidden cost was a catastrophic -27.1 defensive mark that completely bled away his surgical high-post precision. His aggression could swing wildly the other way, as seen on 03/17 vs PHI. He fell into an extreme passive streak, attempting just seven shots for 8 points, which severely hindered the starting unit's ceiling and dragged his impact down to -7.8. Conversely, when he actually engaged his physical tools without needing a heavy scoring load, the results were elite. During the 03/11 vs HOU matchup, he only tallied 16 points but generated a robust +13.6 impact score because masterful playmaking and dominant defensive positioning anchored the lineup. He remains the smartest player in basketball, but these wild fluctuations reveal a superstar occasionally bored by the daily grind.

IMPACT TIMELINE

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

PATTERNS

Very consistent. Jokić posts positive impact in 90% of games — you almost always get a productive night. Scoring varies by ~9 points, but the overall contribution stays positive.

Reliable shooter — hits 45%+ from the field in 88% of games. You can count on efficient nights more often than not.

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

Performance has dropped off. First-half impact: +17.8, second-half: +10.7. Worth watching whether it's fatigue, injury, or opponents adjusting.

Tends to go on runs. Longest hot streak: 33 games. Longest cold streak: 2 games.

MATCHUP HISTORY

Based on 59 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

A. Sengun 119.9 poss
FG% 52.4%
3P% 41.7%
PPP 0.42
PTS 50
J. Randle 117.9 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.36
PTS 43
R. Gobert 103.1 poss
FG% 65.0%
3P% 42.9%
PPP 0.33
PTS 34
J. Williams 90.9 poss
FG% 52.0%
3P% 27.3%
PPP 0.34
PTS 31
W. Carter Jr. 78.2 poss
FG% 44.4%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.26
PTS 20
O. Ighodaro 75.9 poss
FG% 70.0%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.26
PTS 20
N. Vučević 71.7 poss
FG% 52.2%
3P% 33.3%
PPP 0.45
PTS 32
E. Harkless 71.1 poss
FG% 80.0%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.44
PTS 31
A. Horford 69.0 poss
FG% 35.3%
3P% 22.2%
PPP 0.22
PTS 15
A. Davis 68.6 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 28.6%
PPP 0.23
PTS 16

ON DEFENSE: WHO HE GUARDED

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

R. Gobert 120.9 poss
FG% 46.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.12
PTS 15
O. Ighodaro 92.5 poss
FG% 66.7%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.09
PTS 8
A. Sengun 92.0 poss
FG% 43.3%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 28
W. Carter Jr. 85.7 poss
FG% 47.4%
3P% 42.9%
PPP 0.25
PTS 21
D. Clingan 80.8 poss
FG% 53.3%
3P% 66.7%
PPP 0.25
PTS 20
J. Randle 72.8 poss
FG% 57.1%
3P% 28.6%
PPP 0.49
PTS 36
A. Davis 72.4 poss
FG% 47.4%
3P% 100.0%
PPP 0.33
PTS 24
D. Sabonis 69.7 poss
FG% 69.2%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.3
PTS 21
I. Hartenstein 69.2 poss
FG% 50.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.13
PTS 9
L. Kornet 66.9 poss
FG% 80.0%
3P% 0.0%
PPP 0.15
PTS 10

SEASON STATS

60
Games
27.7
PPG
12.9
RPG
10.9
APG
1.4
SPG
0.8
BPG
57.3
FG%
38.3
3P%
82.6
FT%
34.9
MPG

GAME LOG

60 games played