New Orleans Pelicans

Western Conference

New Orleans
Pelicans

26-56
L2

ROSTER — IMPACT RANKINGS

Trey Murphy III
Forward Yr 4 66G (66S)
+13.1
21.5 pts
5.7 reb
3.8 ast
35.5 min

This midseason stretch was defined by Trey Murphy III shaking off an abysmal shooting slump to ignite an absolute inferno from beyond the arc. The rut reached its lowest point on 01/30 vs MEM, where he managed just 8 points on a brutal 2-for-14 shooting night. That horrific perimeter shot selection dragged his overall Impact down to -7.7, actively stalling the offense with empty possessions. Just a few days later, he flipped the script entirely during a historic eruption on 02/04 vs MIL. Pouring in 44 points and draining 12 of his 19 three-point attempts, Murphy posted a staggering +39.7 Impact score because his lethal scoring gravity completely broke the opponent's defensive scheme. He eventually learned to survive the cold nights, too. On 03/21 vs CLE, he scored a meager 10 points on 3-for-10 shooting but still scraped together a positive +1.8 Impact. He kept his value afloat by crashing the glass for 6 rebounds and relying on sheer defensive hustle, adding a much-needed layer of grit to his game when his jumper abandoned him.

Zion Williamson
Forward Yr 6 62G (55S)
+11.9
21.0 pts
5.7 reb
3.2 ast
29.7 min

A stretch of ruthless, hyper-efficient interior bullying defined Zion Williamson's mid-season run. He battered the Mavericks on 03/16 vs DAL, pouring in 27 points on blistering 11-of-13 shooting to generate a massive +21.6 Impact score. That towering rating stemmed directly from his refusal to settle for bad looks, generating elite offensive value through sheer physical force at the rim. He rarely needed high volume to dominate. On 03/19 vs LAC, he posted a stellar +9.5 Impact score despite scoring a modest 15 points. He created immense non-scoring value in that matchup by setting bruising screens and battling for five crucial rebounds to keep possessions alive. Conversely, he slipped into a passive funk on 04/02 vs POR, where his 15 points couldn't save him from a -2.2 Impact score. Grabbing just a single rebound in 29 minutes, his complete lack of hustle on the glass dragged his overall value into the red.

Saddiq Bey
Guard-Forward Yr 5 72G (64S)
+11.0
17.7 pts
5.6 reb
2.5 ast
31.2 min

Saddiq Bey spent this late-season stretch operating as an unapologetic offensive flamethrower, hunting his shot with supreme confidence. He reached his absolute apex on 02/26 vs UTA, erupting for 42 points on hyper-efficient 14-of-20 shooting to generate a massive +38.8 Impact score. That towering rating was driven entirely by his unstoppable scoring execution, overwhelming Utah's defense to easily mask his slight defensive lapses. However, high point totals didn't always translate to winning basketball. During the 02/21 vs PHI matchup, Bey dropped 20 points but managed a pedestrian +2.1 Impact because his scoring was completely negated by brutal defensive rotations and sloppy execution that bled points on the other end. His value cratered further on 03/13 vs HOU, where a frigid 2-of-11 shooting night resulted in a -4.4 Impact. Without his jumper falling, his offensive gravity vanished entirely, leaving him unable to salvage his overall rating despite actually providing positive defensive resistance.

Dejounte Murray
Guard Yr 9 14G (14S)
+2.7
16.7 pts
5.4 reb
6.4 ast
27.8 min
Derik Queen
Center Yr 0 81G (48S)
+0.9
11.7 pts
7.1 reb
3.7 ast
25.0 min

A chaotic blend of brilliant high-post facilitation and maddening mental lapses defined Derik Queen's late-season transition from erratic reserve to spot starter. His true value often hid beneath the surface, perfectly illustrated during the Mar 21 vs CLE matchup. Despite scoring just 9 points, he generated a massive +10.3 impact score by operating as a flawless offensive hub and picking apart the zone with pinpoint interior passing. Conversely, raw box score production frequently masked severe underlying flaws. When he moved into the starting lineup on Apr 07 vs UTA, he stuffed the stat sheet with 17 points, 12 rebounds, and 7 assists. Yet, he dragged the unit down to a dismal -8.1 impact because a rash of illegal screens constantly sabotaged their momentum. He finally married heavy usage with winning basketball on Apr 10 vs BOS, pouring in 25 points and utilizing exceptional defensive positioning to drive a +9.6 impact score.

Jeremiah Fears
Guard Yr 0 82G (49S)
-0.4
14.3 pts
3.7 reb
3.4 ast
25.8 min

This twenty-game stretch was defined by maddening inconsistency, with Jeremiah Fears oscillating wildly between unstoppable offensive engine and inefficient shot-chucker. His worst habits surfaced on Mar 05 vs SAC, where a seemingly decent line of 13 points, 6 rebounds, and 6 assists masked a catastrophic -19.9 impact score. Inefficient volume shooting and a complete lack of defensive resistance cratered his value that night, a recurring theme during his mid-March slump. When Fears actually prioritized shot selection, however, he transformed into a lethal weapon. On Mar 24 vs NYK, he sliced through the defense for 21 points on just 12 attempts, generating a stellar +11.5 impact by taking only high-percentage looks. He eventually played his way into the starting lineup, capping off this roller-coaster run on Apr 07 vs UTA with a massive 40-point eruption. Absolute dominance in isolation situations allowed him to systematically dismantle the defense, driving a +12.9 impact score despite hitting just a single three-pointer.

DeAndre Jordan
Center Yr 17 12G (7S)
-1.0
4.4 pts
6.3 reb
0.9 ast
16.6 min
Jordan Poole
Guard Yr 6 39G (8S)
-2.2
13.4 pts
2.0 reb
3.1 ast
23.9 min

A brutal shooting slump defined Jordan Poole’s mid-to-late season stretch, turning his minutes into a nightly gamble. His erratic shot selection cratered his value during the 01/22 vs DET matchup, where a frigid 4-for-17 shooting night—including zero makes on seven attempts from deep—resulted in a -4.3 impact score. The bottom fell out completely on 03/16 vs DAL, as another miserable 0-for-6 night from beyond the arc earned him a disastrous -14.0 impact. When the jumper isn't falling, Poole offers almost nothing else to keep his team afloat. However, a late promotion to the starting unit briefly revived his lethal scoring touch on 04/07 vs UTA. He erupted for 34 points on 12-of-23 shooting in that game, generating a stellar +13.9 impact simply by overwhelming the defense with an avalanche of made threes. Yet, these explosive outbursts remained the exception rather than the rule in a deeply frustrating run.

Herbert Jones
Forward Yr 4 56G (56S)
-2.7
8.9 pts
3.4 reb
2.8 ast
28.4 min

This grueling stretch of the season was defined by a brutal offensive slump that tested the absolute limits of Herbert Jones's two-way reputation. He occasionally found ways to survive his broken jumper. During the 03/03 vs LAL matchup, Jones managed a +1.2 Impact despite a miserable two-point, 1-for-7 shooting night. He salvaged his value entirely through gritty non-scoring hustle, grabbing six rebounds and dishing five assists to keep the offense flowing. Bizarrely, when his shot actually fell during the 03/24 vs NYK game, his underlying value vanished. Even though he scored 13 points on a highly efficient 6-for-8 from the floor and added six assists, he still posted a -1.9 Impact because of hidden defensive breakdowns that constantly bled points the other way. The wheels completely fell off shortly after, culminating in an abysmal -14.6 Impact during the 04/02 vs POR tilt where poor shot selection resulted in a 3-for-9 brickfest. When a defensive specialist starts forcing bad looks, the hidden costs will always sink their overall effectiveness.

Bryce McGowens
Guard Yr 3 42G (13S)
-3.1
8.1 pts
2.1 reb
1.5 ast
20.9 min

Bryce McGowens spent this midseason stretch riding a frustrating seesaw between empty-calorie spot starts and invisible bench minutes. When thrust into the starting lineup on 02/20 vs MIL, he managed 10 points but dragged the team down with a miserable -6.1 Impact. That negative mark was the direct result of inefficient chucking and zero assists over 30 minutes of action, actively hurting the offensive rhythm. He briefly flipped the script in another start on 02/28 vs UTA, pouring in a high-volume 18 points to earn a stellar +8.6 Impact. That rating stemmed from his willingness to actually let it fly from deep, hitting four threes and finally providing genuine floor spacing for his teammates. Yet, the momentum vanished almost instantly on 03/01 vs LAC. Relegated back to the bench, McGowens sleepwalked through 26 minutes to post an abysmal -14.4 Impact, offering minimal defensive resistance and completely stalling the second-unit offense.

Yves Missi
Center Yr 1 66G (14S)
-3.3
5.7 pts
5.8 reb
1.3 ast
19.6 min

This stretch was defined by maddening inconsistency as Missi bounced between the bench and the starting lineup, struggling to translate his raw physical tools into winning basketball. Look no further than his start on 03/19 vs LAC. He posted a robust line of 11 points, 11 rebounds, and four assists on perfect 5-for-5 shooting, yet bled value to the tune of a -7.3 Impact score. Those gaudy counting stats were ultimately empty calories, as poor defensive effort and slow rotations dragged his overall value into the red. Conversely, he occasionally found ways to drive winning without demanding the basketball. During a bench stint on 03/11 vs TOR, Missi scored just six points but generated a +3.9 Impact score by dominating the glass for 10 rebounds and providing the relentless hustle needed to extend possessions. He finally put the entire package together on 04/05 vs ORL. Logging a grueling 40 minutes, he racked up 18 points and 13 boards on 8-of-9 shooting, earning a massive +10.5 Impact score by anchoring the defense and bullying his way to high-percentage shots inside.

Jose Alvarado
Guard Yr 4 41G
-3.6
7.9 pts
2.8 reb
3.1 ast
21.9 min

This stretch of the season was defined by erratic offensive irrelevance punctuated by brief flashes of starting-lineup brilliance. As a reserve, Alvarado routinely cratered his team's momentum with empty minutes and brutal shot selection. He completely bottomed out on 03/09 vs LAC, posting a dismal -15.3 impact score after missing all four of his attempts and failing to score in just eight minutes of floor time. Yet, when thrust into the starting five, he suddenly transformed into a dynamic floor general. On 03/17 vs IND, Alvarado erupted for 16 points and 10 assists, generating a stellar +8.3 impact score by pairing hot perimeter shooting with elite distribution. However, his return to the bench brought back his worst habits. During the 03/29 vs OKC matchup, he managed eight points but logged a brutal -13.4 impact score because his inefficient 3-for-10 shooting completely derailed the second unit's offensive flow. He remains a chaotic pendulum, swinging violently between a spark-plug playmaker and a total offensive black hole.

Kevon Looney
Forward Yr 10 21G (8S)
-3.8
2.8 pts
5.6 reb
1.6 ast
14.6 min

Kevon Looney's mid-to-late season stretch was defined by extreme rotational whiplash, bouncing between deep-bench irrelevance and sudden starting duties. During a lengthy stint off the pine on 01/03 vs POR, he attempted just four shots but generated a massive +9.0 impact score by inhaling 12 rebounds and anchoring the interior. He was eventually thrust into the starting lineup on 04/07 vs UTA, where he logged 28 minutes and posted a +7.7 impact by combining 12 rebounds with surprising playmaking to the tune of six assists. That momentum vanished completely on 04/10 vs BOS. Despite remaining in the starting five for 25 minutes, Looney dragged the lineup down to a dismal -9.2 impact score because he offered absolutely zero offensive gravity. He missed both of his three-point attempts, finished scoreless, and allowed Boston's defense to completely ignore him. When he dominates the boards, his lack of scoring is an acceptable quirk, but empty shooting nights make his minutes a severe liability.

Karlo Matković
Forward-Center Yr 1 62G (2S)
-4.4
5.7 pts
3.7 reb
0.8 ast
14.7 min

Karlo Matković spent this twenty-game stretch as a wildly unpredictable backup big, swinging violently between highly efficient two-way play and disastrous stretches of perimeter chucking. When he embraced his physical tools, he was a massive asset. He peaked on 03/16 vs DAL with 13 points and 10 rebounds in just 20 minutes. His stellar +12.7 Impact that night stemmed from relentless glass-cleaning and knocking down both of his three-point attempts. Yet, his focus frequently drifted. During the 02/26 vs UTA matchup, he scored a highly efficient 8 points on 3-of-4 shooting but still posted a dismal -5.5 Impact. That negative mark reflected the hidden costs of his floor time, as he grabbed a meager four rebounds in 25 minutes and failed to anchor the second unit's defense. The bottom completely fell out on 03/19 vs LAC, where he registered a brutal -11.3 Impact by abandoning his interior game and forcing terrible perimeter shots to finish 0-for-6 from the floor.

Josh Oduro
Center Yr 0 3G (1S)
-5.1
8.3 pts
7.7 reb
1.3 ast
27.3 min
Jordan Hawkins
Guard Yr 2 51G (1S)
-6.6
5.1 pts
1.7 reb
0.8 ast
13.6 min

Jordan Hawkins spent the bulk of this stretch buried at the end of the rotation before suddenly erupting into a high-volume offensive focal point in April. During his mid-winter exile, he was essentially a ghost on the floor, logging a dismal -15.5 Impact score on 02/20 vs MIL while failing to record a single point, rebound, or assist in five empty minutes. His minutes finally expanded in late March, setting the stage for a spectacular outburst on 04/07 vs UTA. He torched the Jazz for 25 points on blistering 11-of-16 shooting, generating a massive +23.4 Impact score because his elite scoring was paired with active rebounding and crisp passing. The magic eventually wore off. Promoted to the starting lineup on 04/12 vs MIN, Hawkins managed 13 points but still dragged the team down with a -4.8 Impact score. That negative mark stemmed directly from brutal shot selection, as he clanked his way to a 4-for-18 shooting night that completely stalled the offensive flow.

Trey Alexander
Guard Yr 1 9G
-7.0
5.2 pts
1.2 reb
1.0 ast
12.3 min
Micah Peavy
Guard-Forward Yr 0 61G (4S)
-7.7
4.3 pts
1.9 reb
1.0 ast
15.0 min

Micah Peavy’s late-season stretch was defined by a drastic shift from deep-bench irrelevance to a sudden, chaotic starting assignment. For weeks, he barely saw the floor. Given an extended leash on 04/03 vs SAC, he managed a +2.8 Impact score despite scoring just eight points, keeping his team afloat through gritty perimeter defense and timely ball movement. That effort earned him a starting nod, but his 20-point outburst on 04/07 vs UTA masked a surprisingly hollow performance. Even with highly efficient shooting, his -0.1 Impact score revealed the hidden costs of giving up easy baskets on the other end and failing to elevate his teammates. He finally put the pieces together on 04/12 vs MIN. Logging a massive 41 minutes, Peavy posted a +6.9 Impact score by blending 21 points with disciplined shot selection to generate genuine two-way value.

Hunter Dickinson
Center Yr 0 5G
-12.7
2.4 pts
1.0 reb
0.4 ast
8.5 min
L
@ MIN MIN
126 NOP MIN 132
MIN @ MIN
126 132
Sun, Apr 12
Analysis
-6
L
@ BOS BOS
118 NOP BOS 144
BOS @ BOS
118 144
Fri, Apr 10
Analysis
-26
W
vs UTA UTA
137 UTA NOP 156
UTA vs UTA
156 137
Tue, Apr 7
Analysis
+19
L
vs ORL ORL
112 ORL NOP 108
ORL vs ORL
108 112
Sun, Apr 5
Analysis
-4
L
@ SAC SAC
113 NOP SAC 117
SAC @ SAC
113 117
Fri, Apr 3
Analysis
-4
L
@ POR POR
106 NOP POR 118
POR @ POR
106 118
Thu, Apr 2
Analysis
-12
L
vs HOU HOU
134 HOU NOP 102
HOU vs HOU
102 134
Sun, Mar 29
Analysis
-32
L
@ TOR TOR
106 NOP TOR 119
TOR @ TOR
106 119
Sat, Mar 28
Analysis
-13
L
@ DET DET
108 NOP DET 129
DET @ DET
108 129
Thu, Mar 26
Analysis
-21
L
@ NYK NYK
116 NOP NYK 121
NYK @ NYK
116 121
Tue, Mar 24
Analysis
-5
L
vs CLE CLE
111 CLE NOP 106
CLE vs CLE
106 111
Sat, Mar 21
Analysis
-5
W
vs LAC LAC
99 LAC NOP 105
LAC vs LAC
105 99
Thu, Mar 19
Analysis
+6
W
vs LAC LAC
109 LAC NOP 124
LAC vs LAC
124 109
Wed, Mar 18
Analysis
+15
W
vs DAL DAL
111 DAL NOP 129
DAL vs DAL
129 111
Mon, Mar 16
Analysis
+18
L
@ HOU HOU
105 NOP HOU 107
HOU @ HOU
105 107
Fri, Mar 13
Analysis
-2
W
vs TOR TOR
111 TOR NOP 122
TOR vs TOR
122 111
Wed, Mar 11
Analysis
+11
W
vs WAS WAS
118 WAS NOP 138
WAS vs WAS
138 118
Sun, Mar 8
Analysis
+20
L
@ PHX PHX
116 NOP PHX 118
PHX @ PHX
116 118
Fri, Mar 6
Analysis
-2
W
@ SAC SAC
133 NOP SAC 123
SAC @ SAC
133 123
Thu, Mar 5
Analysis
+10
L
@ LAL LAL
101 NOP LAL 110
LAL @ LAL
101 110
Tue, Mar 3
Analysis
-9
L
@ LAC LAC
117 NOP LAC 137
LAC @ LAC
117 137
Sun, Mar 1
Analysis
-20
W
@ UTA UTA
115 NOP UTA 105
UTA @ UTA
115 105
Sat, Feb 28
Analysis
+10
W
@ UTA UTA
129 NOP UTA 118
UTA @ UTA
129 118
Thu, Feb 26
Analysis
+11
W
vs GSW GSW
109 GSW NOP 113
GSW vs GSW
113 109
Tue, Feb 24
Analysis
+4
W
vs PHI PHI
111 PHI NOP 126
PHI vs PHI
126 111
Sat, Feb 21
Analysis
+15
L
vs MIL MIL
139 MIL NOP 118
MIL vs MIL
118 139
Fri, Feb 20
Analysis
-21
L
vs MIA MIA
123 MIA NOP 111
MIA vs MIA
111 123
Wed, Feb 11
Analysis
-12
W
vs SAC SAC
94 SAC NOP 120
SAC vs SAC
120 94
Mon, Feb 9
Analysis
+26
W
@ MIN MIN
119 NOP MIN 115
MIN @ MIN
119 115
Fri, Feb 6
Analysis
+4
L
@ MIL MIL
137 NOP MIL 141
MIL @ MIL
137 141
Wed, Feb 4
Analysis
-4
L
@ CHA CHA
95 NOP CHA 102
CHA @ CHA
95 102
Mon, Feb 2
Analysis
-7
L
@ PHI PHI
114 NOP PHI 124
PHI @ PHI
114 124
Sat, Jan 31
Analysis
-10
W
vs MEM MEM
106 MEM NOP 114
MEM vs MEM
114 106
Fri, Jan 30
Analysis
+8
L
@ OKC OKC
95 NOP OKC 104
OKC @ OKC
95 104
Wed, Jan 28
Analysis
-9
W
@ SAS SAS
104 NOP SAS 95
SAS @ SAS
104 95
Mon, Jan 26
Analysis
+9
W
@ MEM MEM
133 NOP MEM 127
MEM @ MEM
133 127
Sat, Jan 24
Analysis
+6
L
vs DET DET
112 DET NOP 104
DET vs DET
104 112
Thu, Jan 22
Analysis
-8
L
@ HOU HOU
110 NOP HOU 119
HOU @ HOU
110 119
Mon, Jan 19
Analysis
-9
L
@ IND IND
119 NOP IND 127
IND @ IND
119 127
Sat, Jan 17
Analysis
-8
W
vs BKN BKN
113 BKN NOP 116
BKN vs BKN
116 113
Thu, Jan 15
Analysis
+3
L
vs DEN DEN
122 DEN NOP 116
DEN vs DEN
116 122
Wed, Jan 14
Analysis
-6
L
@ ORL ORL
118 NOP ORL 128
ORL @ ORL
118 128
Sun, Jan 11
Analysis
-10
W
@ WAS WAS
128 NOP WAS 107
WAS @ WAS
128 107
Sat, Jan 10
Analysis
+21
L
@ ATL ATL
100 NOP ATL 117
ATL @ ATL
100 117
Thu, Jan 8
Analysis
-17
L
vs LAL LAL
111 LAL NOP 103
LAL vs LAL
103 111
Wed, Jan 7
Analysis
-8
L
@ MIA MIA
106 NOP MIA 125
MIA @ MIA
106 125
Sun, Jan 4
Analysis
-19
L
vs POR POR
122 POR NOP 109
POR vs POR
109 122
Sat, Jan 3
Analysis
-13
L
@ CHI CHI
118 NOP CHI 134
CHI @ CHI
118 134
Thu, Jan 1
Analysis
-16
L
vs NYK NYK
130 NYK NOP 125
NYK vs NYK
125 130
Tue, Dec 30
Analysis
-5
L
vs PHX PHX
123 PHX NOP 114
PHX vs PHX
114 123
Sun, Dec 28
Analysis
-9
L
vs PHX PHX
115 PHX NOP 108
PHX vs PHX
108 115
Sat, Dec 27
Analysis
-7
L
@ CLE CLE
118 NOP CLE 141
CLE @ CLE
118 141
Wed, Dec 24
Analysis
-23
W
vs DAL DAL
113 DAL NOP 119
DAL vs DAL
119 113
Tue, Dec 23
Analysis
+6
W
vs IND IND
109 IND NOP 128
IND vs IND
128 109
Sun, Dec 21
Analysis
+19
W
vs HOU HOU
128 HOU NOP 133
HOU vs HOU
133 128
Fri, Dec 19
Analysis
+5
W
@ CHI CHI
114 NOP CHI 104
CHI @ CHI
114 104
Mon, Dec 15
Analysis
+10
W
vs POR POR
120 POR NOP 143
POR vs POR
143 120
Fri, Dec 12
Analysis
+23
L
vs SAS SAS
135 SAS NOP 132
SAS vs SAS
132 135
Tue, Dec 9
Analysis
-3
L
@ BKN BKN
101 NOP BKN 119
BKN @ BKN
101 119
Sat, Dec 6
Analysis
-18
L
vs MIN MIN
125 MIN NOP 116
MIN vs MIN
116 125
Fri, Dec 5
Analysis
-9
L
vs MIN MIN
149 MIN NOP 142
MIN vs MIN
142 149
Wed, Dec 3
Analysis
-7
L
@ LAL LAL
121 NOP LAL 133
LAL @ LAL
121 133
Mon, Dec 1
Analysis
-12
L
@ GSW GSW
96 NOP GSW 104
GSW @ GSW
96 104
Sun, Nov 30
Analysis
-8
L
vs MEM MEM
133 MEM NOP 128
MEM vs MEM
128 133
Thu, Nov 27
Analysis
-5
W
vs CHI CHI
130 CHI NOP 143
CHI vs CHI
143 130
Tue, Nov 25
Analysis
+13
L
vs ATL ATL
115 ATL NOP 98
ATL vs ATL
98 115
Sun, Nov 23
Analysis
-17
L
@ DAL DAL
115 NOP DAL 118
DAL @ DAL
115 118
Sat, Nov 22
Analysis
-3
L
vs DEN DEN
125 DEN NOP 118
DEN vs DEN
118 125
Thu, Nov 20
Analysis
-7
L
vs OKC OKC
126 OKC NOP 109
OKC vs OKC
109 126
Tue, Nov 18
Analysis
-17
L
vs GSW GSW
124 GSW NOP 106
GSW vs GSW
106 124
Mon, Nov 17
Analysis
-18
L
vs LAL LAL
118 LAL NOP 104
LAL vs LAL
104 118
Sat, Nov 15
Analysis
-14
L
vs POR POR
125 POR NOP 117
POR vs POR
117 125
Thu, Nov 13
Analysis
-8
L
@ PHX PHX
98 NOP PHX 121
PHX @ PHX
98 121
Tue, Nov 11
Analysis
-23
L
@ SAS SAS
119 NOP SAS 126
SAS @ SAS
119 126
Sun, Nov 9
Analysis
-7
W
@ DAL DAL
101 NOP DAL 99
DAL @ DAL
101 99
Thu, Nov 6
Analysis
+2
W
vs CHA CHA
112 CHA NOP 116
CHA vs CHA
116 112
Wed, Nov 5
Analysis
+4
L
@ OKC OKC
106 NOP OKC 137
OKC @ OKC
106 137
Sun, Nov 2
Analysis
-31
L
@ LAC LAC
124 NOP LAC 126
LAC @ LAC
124 126
Sat, Nov 1
Analysis
-2
L
@ DEN DEN
88 NOP DEN 122
DEN @ DEN
88 122
Thu, Oct 30
Analysis
-34
L
vs BOS BOS
122 BOS NOP 90
BOS vs BOS
90 122
Mon, Oct 27
Analysis
-32
L
vs SAS SAS
120 SAS NOP 116
SAS vs SAS
116 120
Fri, Oct 24
Analysis
-4
L
@ MEM MEM
122 NOP MEM 128
MEM @ MEM
122 128
Wed, Oct 22
Analysis
-6