Brooklyn Nets

Eastern Conference

Brooklyn
Nets

20-62
L3

ROSTER — IMPACT RANKINGS

Michael Porter Jr.
Forward Yr 6 52G (52S)
+15.9
24.2 pts
7.1 reb
3.0 ast
32.5 min

This midseason stretch was defined by maddening volatility, oscillating wildly between unstoppable scoring binges and total offensive black holes. The absolute peak arrived on 01/29 vs DEN, where Porter unleashed a barrage of deep shots to hang 38 points and 10 rebounds on his opponent. That relentless offensive aggression and heavy rebounding workload earned him a staggering +39.9 Impact score. But when his jumper abandoned him, the floor completely fell out. Look no further than 03/03 vs MIA, where he bricked all nine of his three-point attempts en route to just 9 points. That disastrous shot selection actively killed offensive possessions, resulting in a brutal -10.0 Impact score. Even when he managed to score 21 points on 02/03 vs LAL, another 0-for-9 night from beyond the arc limited him to a modest +12.0 Impact score, a rating he only kept in the green by salvaging possessions with 10 crucial rebounds.

Nic Claxton
Center Yr 6 69G (68S)
+6.4
11.7 pts
6.9 reb
3.7 ast
27.8 min

This late-season stretch was defined by maddening inconsistency, oscillating between dominant offensive flashes and baffling bouts of passivity. Claxton looked like an absolute force during the 02/09 vs CHI matchup. He erupted for 28 points and 10 rebounds on 12-of-15 shooting to earn a massive +24.3 Impact score. That elite rating stemmed directly from his relentless rim-running and aggressive finishing, constantly punishing Chicago's interior defense. He even flashed surprising court vision during the 02/24 vs DAL contest, dishing out 9 assists alongside 16 points for a stellar +15.3 Impact score. Yet, the aggressive version of Claxton would inexplicably vanish. During the 03/10 vs DET game, he attempted a mere two shots and posted a dismal -5.1 Impact score. When he stopped demanding the basketball and failed to generate his usual volume of hustle plays on the glass, his overall value plummeted into the negatives.

Josh Minott
Forward Yr 3 16G (1S)
+3.4
10.8 pts
2.5 reb
0.8 ast
19.3 min

Josh Minott’s mid-season stretch was defined by a violent awakening, transforming him from a buried benchwarmer into a lethal rotational sparkplug. He completely flipped the script on 03/12 vs ATL, pouring in 24 points on blistering 4-of-7 shooting from deep to generate a staggering +23.6 Impact score. That elite mark stemmed directly from decisive shot selection and high-energy offensive execution. However, his overall value wasn't always strictly tied to his shooting volume. On 03/18 vs OKC, Minott managed just 9 points but still registered a strong +6.5 Impact score. He salvaged that quiet offensive night through sheer hustle and relentless defensive effort that constantly disrupted the opposing backcourt. Conversely, during the 03/25 vs GSW matchup, he tallied 8 points on an efficient 3-of-5 from the floor but posted an ugly -5.2 Impact score, as hidden costs like blown defensive assignments and poor positioning severely dragged down his effectiveness.

Day'Ron Sharpe
Center Yr 4 62G (7S)
+1.6
8.7 pts
6.7 reb
2.3 ast
18.7 min

This midseason stretch was defined by a chaotic pendulum swing between dominant interior bruising and puzzling disappearing acts. When fully engaged, Sharpe was an absolute terror around the basket. He bullied his way to 19 points, 14 rebounds, and five assists on 02/03 vs LAL, generating a massive +28.2 Impact by combining hyper-efficient finishing at the rim with brilliant passing out of the post. He didn't even need a heavy offensive workload to tilt the floor. On 01/28 vs PHX, Sharpe tallied just seven points but still posted a +10.6 Impact because his relentless rebounding and disruptive defensive rotations suffocated the opposition. Yet, that physical edge vanished just as quickly in certain matchups. Despite grabbing eight rebounds during a start on 03/01 vs CLE, he bled value with a disastrous -17.9 Impact, dragged down by sluggish defensive closeouts and empty offensive possessions. He remains a volatile weapon who dictates the game's physicality on his best nights and entirely loses the plot on his worst.

Chaney Johnson
Guard-Forward Yr 0 17G (1S)
+0.6
8.2 pts
4.6 reb
2.1 ast
20.4 min
Malachi Smith
Guard Yr 0 15G (4S)
+0.6
8.3 pts
3.4 reb
3.3 ast
23.9 min
Cam Thomas
Guard Yr 4 24G (8S)
+0.4
15.6 pts
1.8 reb
3.1 ast
24.2 min

This mid-season stretch was defined by a brutal offensive slump that saw Cam Thomas marginalized at the end of the bench. During the 02/24 vs MIA matchup, his erratic shot selection resulted in a dismal 2-for-10 shooting night and a staggering -11.3 Impact score. Even when he managed to put points on the board, like his 15-point outing on 03/01 vs CHI, the hidden costs of his tunnel vision dragged him down. The sheer inefficiency of his 3-for-11 chucking in that contest yielded a disappointing -0.5 Impact score. He briefly found a better rhythm on 03/08 vs ORL. By trading forced jumpers for actual offensive flow, he dished out six assists to go with an efficient 17 points, earning a rare +3.2 Impact score. Ultimately, when a one-dimensional volume scorer loses his touch, the resulting empty possessions make him an absolute liability.

Ziaire Williams
Forward Yr 4 56G (13S)
-0.3
10.2 pts
2.4 reb
1.1 ast
22.9 min

This stretch was defined by a radical mid-season turnaround, as Ziaire Williams clawed his way out of a brutal shooting slump to seize a starting role. Early on, he looked completely lost. During the 02/19 vs CLE matchup, he posted a dreadful -11.1 Impact score while scoring just two points on 1-for-9 shooting, actively hurting the offense with forced, inaccurate looks from beyond the arc. Eventually, the cold spell broke. He caught fire on 03/07 vs DET, burying five threes en route to 23 points and a stellar +14.2 Impact score driven by elite perimeter efficiency. That scoring surge pushed him into the starting five, where he continued to thrive. On 03/25 vs GSW, Williams tallied 19 points on crisp 6-of-11 shooting to record a massive +14.7 Impact score, blending reliable shot-making with intense defensive hustle. When his outside jumper actually connects, his raw athleticism translates into highly effective two-way basketball.

Trevon Scott
Forward Yr 1 6G (4S)
-0.5
8.0 pts
5.2 reb
1.7 ast
30.4 min
Noah Clowney
Forward-Center Yr 2 66G (60S)
-0.6
12.3 pts
4.1 reb
1.6 ast
27.0 min

This stretch was defined by extreme volatility, with Noah Clowney swinging violently between lethal stretch-big and outright offensive liability. He opened the period looking completely lost on 02/05 vs ORL. Missing all six of his field goal attempts—including four from deep—he finished with zero points and a dismal -16.1 Impact score. But when his perimeter stroke caught fire, he became an entirely different player. Take the 02/24 vs DAL matchup, where he erupted for 22 points on 4-of-5 shooting from beyond the arc, generating a massive +15.0 Impact score by punishing late rotations and spacing the floor efficiently. Conversely, raw point totals sometimes masked his actual on-court flaws. During a 03/07 vs DET tilt, Clowney managed 16 points but posted a -3.0 Impact score because of brutal shot selection, wasting offensive possessions by bricking four of his five three-point attempts. Until he learns to create value when his jumper goes cold, his nightly effectiveness will remain a total coin flip.

Tyrese Martin
Forward Yr 2 37G (6S)
-1.9
7.3 pts
2.9 reb
1.9 ast
18.8 min

This brutal 15-game stretch was defined by a rapid descent from sparkplug rotation piece to unplayable afterthought. Martin initially looked like a viable floor spacer, hitting three triples for 11 points during the 01/19 vs CHI matchup to earn a +2.8 impact score. Then, his jumper completely vanished. During the 01/26 vs LAC game, he chucked his way to a miserable 1-for-7 shooting night, generating a dismal -9.0 impact score as his forced attempts routinely killed offensive momentum. Things grew even bleaker shortly after during the 02/01 vs DET contest, where he logged zero points in eight minutes and posted a staggering -10.9 impact score. When his outside shot stops falling, Martin offers virtually no secondary playmaking or rebounding to keep himself above water. By the end of this miserable run, his minutes had evaporated entirely into meaningless garbage time cameos.

Egor Dëmin
Guard Yr 0 52G (45S)
-2.2
10.3 pts
3.2 reb
3.3 ast
25.2 min

Extreme boom-or-bust volatility defined Egor Dëmin’s midseason stretch, a run entirely dictated by the temperature of his perimeter jumper. On 01/30 vs UTA, his shot was scorching hot as he hit six threes to rack up 25 points and 10 rebounds for a massive +15.1 Impact score. He found that same rhythm on 02/05 vs ORL, drilling another six triples for 26 points and an explosive +19.5 Impact. These high-impact nights happened because his aggressive shot selection actually paid off, stretching the floor and punishing defensive rotations to open up the offense. However, that same trigger-happy approach devastated his team when the shots stopped falling, most notably on 02/20 vs OKC. During that dreadful outing, he forced tough looks to finish an abysmal 1-for-10 from the field and 1-for-8 from deep, dragging his Impact down to -7.5 because his stubborn shot selection actively derailed offensive possessions. He is a living roulette wheel on the wing. Until he learns to generate value through defense or playmaking when his jumper goes cold, Dëmin will remain a deeply frustrating gamble.

Tyson Etienne
Guard Yr 1 24G (2S)
-2.9
7.9 pts
1.1 reb
1.7 ast
15.8 min

A chaotic shift in role defined this eight-game stretch for Tyson Etienne, transforming him from a quiet reserve into an erratic, high-volume gunner. When thrust into the starting lineup on 04/09 vs IND, the results were disastrous. Despite scoring a respectable 14 points in 39 minutes, Etienne posted a brutal -7.4 impact score because his abysmal 5-for-17 shooting and poor shot selection actively killed his team's offensive momentum. He immediately redeemed himself the very next night on 04/10 vs MIL. Finding his rhythm from deep, he drained six triples on his way to 23 points, generating a stellar +8.3 impact by finally punishing defensive rotations instead of forcing bad looks. Even when his perimeter touch abandoned him on 04/12 vs TOR with a dreadful 2-for-10 mark from beyond the arc, he still tallied 20 points and a +7.6 impact. He salvaged that outing by relying on relentless defensive energy and hustle to create hidden value when the deep shots refused to fall.

Danny Wolf
Forward Yr 0 57G (15S)
-3.2
8.9 pts
4.9 reb
2.2 ast
20.8 min

This midseason stretch was defined by a rocky promotion to the starting lineup and maddeningly inconsistent shot selection. Wolf flashed his ceiling during an explosive 03/01 vs CLE matchup, pouring in 23 points and 9 rebounds to earn a massive +20.5 Impact score through crisp offensive execution. Yet, his floor remained terrifyingly low. He completely disappeared on 03/05 vs MIA, posting a catastrophic -25.0 Impact after going scoreless and failing to exert any physical presence on the glass. Even when he managed to fill the scoring column, his underlying value often cratered due to forced shots. Take his 02/11 vs IND performance; despite logging a respectable 14 points and 8 rebounds, his -3.1 Impact exposed the hidden costs of a selfish 4-for-13 shooting night that actively derailed the team's offensive flow. If Wolf wants to survive as a permanent starter, he must stop chucking through his slumps and start finding other ways to influence winning.

Terance Mann
Guard-Forward Yr 6 63G (51S)
-3.4
7.2 pts
3.2 reb
3.0 ast
24.3 min

Terance Mann spent this midseason stretch trapped in a brutal identity crisis, constantly shuffling between the starting lineup and the bench. His lone offensive eruption arrived on 02/24 vs DAL. He poured in 17 points on 6-of-9 shooting, earning a rare +9.2 Impact score because he finally hunted his own shots instead of deferring. Unfortunately, that aggression quickly vanished. His hesitation culminated in a disastrous showing on 03/18 vs OKC, where he missed all four of his field goal attempts. Putting up a total goose egg in the scoring column tanked his overall value, dragging his Impact score down to a staggering -14.7. Even when given heavy starter minutes on 02/11 vs IND, his meager four points and clunky 2-for-7 shooting yielded a brutal -13.3 Impact score. A utility wing simply cannot survive on the floor when he actively shrinks from the offense.

E.J. Liddell
Forward Yr 2 26G (5S)
-3.7
5.7 pts
2.7 reb
0.9 ast
13.4 min

E.J. Liddell’s late-season stretch was defined by a drastic early-April role change that rescued him from the end of the bench and turned him into an offensive revelation. Relegated to spot minutes initially, he looked completely lost during an 03/29 vs SAC matchup, clanking all three of his deep attempts to post a dismal -11.2 impact score. A promotion to the starting five changed everything. Given a green light on 04/07 vs MIL, Liddell torched the nets for 21 points on hyper-efficient 7-of-9 shooting. That brilliant shot selection generated a massive +19.7 impact score. He immediately backed that up on 04/09 vs IND with a bruising 26-point, 10-rebound double-double. His +17.3 impact in that Indiana contest stemmed directly from his relentless work on the glass and confident perimeter stroke. When allowed to establish his physical rhythm early, Liddell easily sheds the label of a fringe rotation piece.

Ochai Agbaji
Guard Yr 3 20G
-4.3
6.7 pts
2.3 reb
0.8 ast
16.2 min

Ochai Agbaji’s mid-season stretch was defined by maddeningly erratic bench production, operating as a wildly volatile swingman whose value lived and died by his jumper. When his shot was actually falling, he looked like an elite rotation piece. He poured in 18 points on a blistering 8-for-9 shooting performance on 03/09 vs MEM, earning a stellar +10.4 Impact score through sheer offensive efficiency. Yet, that same aggression frequently burned his own team when his touch vanished. Look at 03/18 vs OKC, where he managed 10 points but required nine field goal attempts and six three-point heaves to get there. His inefficient shot selection stalled the second-unit offense, resulting in a damaging -6.0 Impact score despite the double-digit scoring total. Even when he crashed the glass to compensate for a cold night, his lack of scoring gravity severely cramped the floor. On 02/11 vs IND, Agbaji grabbed 6 rebounds and dished 2 assists, but his scoreless outing on 0-for-3 shooting dragged his Impact score down to a dismal -8.6 because defenders completely ignored him on the perimeter.

Jalen Wilson
Forward Yr 2 54G (2S)
-4.5
6.4 pts
2.1 reb
0.9 ast
15.9 min

This stretch was defined by Jalen Wilson scraping his way out of end-of-bench obscurity to earn spot starts, though his actual on-court value swung violently from night to night. Back in late February, he was entirely lost in the rotation, posting a disastrous -12.9 Impact score during a scoreless eight-minute cardio session on 02/27 vs BOS. He finally found his rhythm as the season waned, peaking as a starter on 04/05 vs WAS with 19 points, five rebounds, and four assists. That performance yielded a stellar +8.6 Impact score because he paired clean shot selection—hitting 6-of-9 from the floor—with active playmaking and rebounding. Yet, heavy minutes did not always translate to winning basketball. Look at his marathon 37-minute shift on 04/09 vs IND, where he managed 11 points and five boards but dragged the team down with a brutal -9.8 Impact score. Despite the double-digit scoring, his erratic 4-of-11 chucking and overall offensive inefficiency created hidden costs that completely erased his counting stats.

Drake Powell
Guard-Forward Yr 0 63G (24S)
-6.3
6.5 pts
1.8 reb
1.4 ast
20.9 min

Drake Powell’s mid-season stretch was defined by a rocky promotion to the starting lineup where glaring offensive inefficiency constantly undermined his relentless energy. Elevated to the first five in early March, the young wing struggled to find a reliable shooting stroke, chucking up empty possessions that routinely cratered his overall value. Look at the 04/07 vs MIL matchup, where he tallied 11 points over 40 exhausting minutes but registered a -2.5 Impact score because a brutal 4-for-16 shooting night killed his team's offensive momentum. His limitations were even more damaging during a dismal 03/16 vs POR outing. He posted a staggering -16.7 Impact score in that contest after hitting just one of his six field goal attempts and failing to generate any meaningful playmaking. He did occasionally manufacture value without a heavy scoring load, managing a +2.2 Impact score on 03/25 vs GSW despite finishing with just 10 points because of his suffocating perimeter defense and timely hustle plays. Ultimately, this stretch revealed an athletic wing who must drastically refine his erratic jumper to survive heavy rotation minutes.

Ben Saraf
Guard Yr 0 44G (11S)
-6.5
7.5 pts
2.1 reb
3.3 ast
20.8 min

This fourteen-game stretch was defined by a turbulent transition from an erratic bench sparkplug to an inefficient spot-starter. Saraf's perimeter jumper completely abandoned him early on, leading to disastrous outings like his 03/20 vs NYK performance. During that contest, a brutal 2-for-9 shooting night yielded just 5 points and dragged him to a dismal -16.0 impact score. He found temporary redemption by relentlessly attacking the interior during his 03/22 vs SAC matchup. Despite missing all five of his three-point attempts, he poured in 22 points on 20 shots, generating a +8.7 impact score through sheer downhill aggression rather than outside finesse. Late in the month, the coaching staff moved him into the starting lineup, but increased minutes only magnified his glaring shot-selection issues. Look no further than 04/10 vs MIL, where he tallied 15 points but recorded a -1.1 impact score because he stubbornly bricked six of his nine three-point attempts.

Nolan Traore
Guard Yr 0 56G (31S)
-6.5
8.9 pts
1.8 reb
3.8 ast
22.2 min

A catastrophic shooting slump defined this late-season stretch for Nolan Traore, eventually dragging him out of the starting lineup entirely. The guard repeatedly hijacked possessions with errant jumpers, bleeding value on a nightly basis. Look no further than the 03/18 vs OKC matchup, where he managed 13 points but posted a dismal -10.7 Impact score because he required 14 field goal attempts to get there. Things hit rock bottom on 03/23 vs POR. Traore tossed up a horrific 0/9 shooting performance for zero points, earning a brutal -17.9 Impact score as his broken jumper actively sabotaged the offense. By April, the coaching staff had seen enough, demoting him to a reserve role. Interestingly, coming off the bench on 04/10 vs MIL, Traore salvaged a +3.7 Impact score despite shooting a ghastly 1/9 from deep. He finally found ways to contribute without a reliable jumper, attacking the glass for four rebounds and bringing enough defensive energy to keep his overall impact in the green.

Grant Nelson
Forward Yr 0 4G
-7.5
4.2 pts
1.5 reb
1.2 ast
8.7 min
L
@ TOR TOR
101 BKN TOR 136
TOR @ TOR
101 136
Sun, Apr 12
Analysis
-35
L
@ MIL MIL
108 BKN MIL 125
MIL @ MIL
108 125
Fri, Apr 10
Analysis
-17
L
vs IND IND
123 IND BKN 94
IND vs IND
94 123
Thu, Apr 9
Analysis
-29
W
vs MIL MIL
90 MIL BKN 96
MIL vs MIL
96 90
Tue, Apr 7
Analysis
+6
W
vs WAS WAS
115 WAS BKN 121
WAS vs WAS
121 115
Sun, Apr 5
Analysis
+6
L
vs ATL ATL
141 ATL BKN 107
ATL vs ATL
107 141
Fri, Apr 3
Analysis
-34
L
vs CHA CHA
117 CHA BKN 86
CHA vs CHA
86 117
Tue, Mar 31
Analysis
-31
W
vs SAC SAC
99 SAC BKN 116
SAC vs SAC
116 99
Sun, Mar 29
Analysis
+17
L
@ LAL LAL
99 BKN LAL 116
LAL @ LAL
99 116
Sat, Mar 28
Analysis
-17
L
@ GSW GSW
106 BKN GSW 109
GSW @ GSW
106 109
Wed, Mar 25
Analysis
-3
L
@ POR POR
99 BKN POR 134
POR @ POR
99 134
Mon, Mar 23
Analysis
-35
L
@ SAC SAC
122 BKN SAC 126
SAC @ SAC
122 126
Sun, Mar 22
Analysis
-4
L
vs NYK NYK
93 NYK BKN 92
NYK vs NYK
92 93
Fri, Mar 20
Analysis
-1
L
vs OKC OKC
121 OKC BKN 92
OKC vs OKC
92 121
Wed, Mar 18
Analysis
-29
L
vs POR POR
114 POR BKN 95
POR vs POR
95 114
Mon, Mar 16
Analysis
-19
L
@ PHI PHI
97 BKN PHI 104
PHI @ PHI
97 104
Sat, Mar 14
Analysis
-7
L
@ ATL ATL
97 BKN ATL 108
ATL @ ATL
97 108
Thu, Mar 12
Analysis
-11
L
vs DET DET
138 DET BKN 100
DET vs DET
100 138
Tue, Mar 10
Analysis
-38
W
vs MEM MEM
115 MEM BKN 126
MEM vs MEM
126 115
Mon, Mar 9
Analysis
+11
W
@ DET DET
107 BKN DET 105
DET @ DET
107 105
Sat, Mar 7
Analysis
+2
L
@ MIA MIA
110 BKN MIA 126
MIA @ MIA
110 126
Thu, Mar 5
Analysis
-16
L
@ MIA MIA
98 BKN MIA 124
MIA @ MIA
98 124
Tue, Mar 3
Analysis
-26
L
vs CLE CLE
106 CLE BKN 102
CLE vs CLE
102 106
Sun, Mar 1
Analysis
-4
L
@ BOS BOS
111 BKN BOS 148
BOS @ BOS
111 148
Fri, Feb 27
Analysis
-37
L
vs SAS SAS
126 SAS BKN 110
SAS vs SAS
110 126
Thu, Feb 26
Analysis
-16
L
vs DAL DAL
123 DAL BKN 114
DAL vs DAL
114 123
Tue, Feb 24
Analysis
-9
L
@ ATL ATL
104 BKN ATL 115
ATL @ ATL
104 115
Sun, Feb 22
Analysis
-11
L
@ OKC OKC
86 BKN OKC 105
OKC @ OKC
86 105
Fri, Feb 20
Analysis
-19
L
@ CLE CLE
84 BKN CLE 112
CLE @ CLE
84 112
Thu, Feb 19
Analysis
-28
L
vs IND IND
115 IND BKN 110
IND vs IND
110 115
Wed, Feb 11
Analysis
-5
W
vs CHI CHI
115 CHI BKN 123
CHI vs CHI
123 115
Mon, Feb 9
Analysis
+8
W
vs WAS WAS
113 WAS BKN 127
WAS vs WAS
127 113
Sat, Feb 7
Analysis
+14
L
@ ORL ORL
98 BKN ORL 118
ORL @ ORL
98 118
Thu, Feb 5
Analysis
-20
L
vs LAL LAL
125 LAL BKN 109
LAL vs LAL
109 125
Tue, Feb 3
Analysis
-16
L
@ DET DET
77 BKN DET 130
DET @ DET
77 130
Sun, Feb 1
Analysis
-53
W
@ UTA UTA
109 BKN UTA 99
UTA @ UTA
109 99
Fri, Jan 30
Analysis
+10
L
@ DEN DEN
103 BKN DEN 107
DEN @ DEN
103 107
Thu, Jan 29
Analysis
-4
L
@ PHX PHX
102 BKN PHX 106
PHX @ PHX
102 106
Wed, Jan 28
Analysis
-4
L
@ LAC LAC
89 BKN LAC 126
LAC @ LAC
89 126
Mon, Jan 26
Analysis
-37
L
vs BOS BOS
130 BOS BKN 126
BOS vs BOS
126 130
Sat, Jan 24
Analysis
-4
L
@ NYK NYK
66 BKN NYK 120
NYK @ NYK
66 120
Thu, Jan 22
Analysis
-54
L
vs PHX PHX
126 PHX BKN 117
PHX vs PHX
117 126
Tue, Jan 20
Analysis
-9
L
@ CHI CHI
102 BKN CHI 124
CHI @ CHI
102 124
Mon, Jan 19
Analysis
-22
W
vs CHI CHI
109 CHI BKN 112
CHI vs CHI
112 109
Sat, Jan 17
Analysis
+3
L
@ NOP NOP
113 BKN NOP 116
NOP @ NOP
113 116
Thu, Jan 15
Analysis
-3
L
@ DAL DAL
105 BKN DAL 113
DAL @ DAL
105 113
Tue, Jan 13
Analysis
-8
L
@ MEM MEM
98 BKN MEM 103
MEM @ MEM
98 103
Sun, Jan 11
Analysis
-5
L
vs LAC LAC
121 LAC BKN 105
LAC vs LAC
105 121
Sat, Jan 10
Analysis
-16
L
vs ORL ORL
104 ORL BKN 103
ORL vs ORL
103 104
Thu, Jan 8
Analysis
-1
W
vs DEN DEN
115 DEN BKN 127
DEN vs DEN
127 115
Sun, Jan 4
Analysis
+12
L
@ WAS WAS
99 BKN WAS 119
WAS @ WAS
99 119
Sat, Jan 3
Analysis
-20
L
vs HOU HOU
120 HOU BKN 96
HOU vs HOU
96 120
Thu, Jan 1
Analysis
-24
L
vs GSW GSW
120 GSW BKN 107
GSW vs GSW
107 120
Tue, Dec 30
Analysis
-13
W
@ MIN MIN
123 BKN MIN 107
MIN @ MIN
123 107
Sun, Dec 28
Analysis
+16
W
@ PHI PHI
114 BKN PHI 106
PHI @ PHI
114 106
Wed, Dec 24
Analysis
+8
W
vs TOR TOR
81 TOR BKN 96
TOR vs TOR
96 81
Sun, Dec 21
Analysis
+15
L
vs MIA MIA
106 MIA BKN 95
MIA vs MIA
95 106
Fri, Dec 19
Analysis
-11
W
vs MIL MIL
82 MIL BKN 127
MIL vs MIL
127 82
Sun, Dec 14
Analysis
+45
L
@ DAL DAL
111 BKN DAL 119
DAL @ DAL
111 119
Sat, Dec 13
Analysis
-8
W
vs NOP NOP
101 NOP BKN 119
NOP vs NOP
119 101
Sat, Dec 6
Analysis
+18
L
vs UTA UTA
123 UTA BKN 110
UTA vs UTA
110 123
Fri, Dec 5
Analysis
-13
W
@ CHI CHI
113 BKN CHI 103
CHI @ CHI
113 103
Thu, Dec 4
Analysis
+10
W
vs CHA CHA
103 CHA BKN 116
CHA vs CHA
116 103
Tue, Dec 2
Analysis
+13
L
@ MIL MIL
99 BKN MIL 116
MIL @ MIL
99 116
Sun, Nov 30
Analysis
-17
L
vs PHI PHI
115 PHI BKN 103
PHI vs PHI
103 115
Sat, Nov 29
Analysis
-12
L
vs NYK NYK
113 NYK BKN 100
NYK vs NYK
100 113
Tue, Nov 25
Analysis
-13
L
@ TOR TOR
109 BKN TOR 119
TOR @ TOR
109 119
Sun, Nov 23
Analysis
-10
W
@ BOS BOS
113 BKN BOS 105
BOS @ BOS
113 105
Sat, Nov 22
Analysis
+8
L
vs BOS BOS
113 BOS BKN 99
BOS vs BOS
99 113
Wed, Nov 19
Analysis
-14
W
@ WAS WAS
129 BKN WAS 106
WAS @ WAS
129 106
Sun, Nov 16
Analysis
+23
L
@ ORL ORL
98 BKN ORL 105
ORL @ ORL
98 105
Sat, Nov 15
Analysis
-7
L
vs TOR TOR
119 TOR BKN 109
TOR vs TOR
109 119
Wed, Nov 12
Analysis
-10
L
@ NYK NYK
98 BKN NYK 134
NYK @ NYK
98 134
Sun, Nov 9
Analysis
-36
L
vs DET DET
125 DET BKN 107
DET vs DET
107 125
Sat, Nov 8
Analysis
-18
W
@ IND IND
112 BKN IND 103
IND @ IND
112 103
Thu, Nov 6
Analysis
+9
L
vs MIN MIN
125 MIN BKN 109
MIN vs MIN
109 125
Tue, Nov 4
Analysis
-16
L
vs PHI PHI
129 PHI BKN 105
PHI vs PHI
105 129
Sun, Nov 2
Analysis
-24
L
vs ATL ATL
117 ATL BKN 112
ATL vs ATL
112 117
Wed, Oct 29
Analysis
-5
L
@ HOU HOU
109 BKN HOU 137
HOU @ HOU
109 137
Mon, Oct 27
Analysis
-28
L
@ SAS SAS
107 BKN SAS 118
SAS @ SAS
107 118
Sun, Oct 26
Analysis
-11
L
vs CLE CLE
131 CLE BKN 124
CLE vs CLE
124 131
Fri, Oct 24
Analysis
-7
L
@ CHA CHA
117 BKN CHA 136
CHA @ CHA
117 136
Wed, Oct 22
Analysis
-19