Philadelphia 76ers

Eastern Conference

Philadelphia
76ers

HC Nick Nurse

50-44
L4

ROSTER — IMPACT RANKINGS

Tyrese Maxey
Guard Yr 5 82G (82S)
+18.3
27.7 pts
4.1 reb
6.5 ast
38.3 min

This late-season stretch was defined by Tyrese Maxey transforming into an absolute offensive battering ram. He embraced a relentless, high-volume scoring role that simply overwhelmed opponents. His peak arrived on 02/22 vs MIN, where he torched the defense for 39 points and eight assists on crisp 16-for-28 shooting. That ruthless shot selection and dynamic playmaking earned him a staggering +32.9 Impact score. Even when his perimeter touch vanished, he still managed to dictate the game, like during his 32-point outing on 04/10 vs IND. Despite a brutal 1-for-10 night from beyond the arc, he generated a massive +30.5 Impact score because his aggressive rim pressure and eight rebounds continuously collapsed the defense. The heavy burden only truly backfired on 04/06 vs SAS. During that sluggish 15-point effort, his -5.3 Impact score revealed the hidden costs of a fatigued guard forcing bad looks instead of trusting his teammates.

Joel Embiid
Center-Forward Yr 9 45G (45S)
+15.8
26.4 pts
7.6 reb
4.2 ast
31.9 min

This late-season stretch was defined by sheer, brute-force offensive dominance, though Embiid's overall effectiveness fluctuated wildly depending on his shot selection. He reached his absolute peak on 01/31 vs NOP. Pouring in 40 points and 11 rebounds, he generated a monstrous +30.1 Impact score because his relentless activity on the glass and high-motor defensive rotations easily offset his high shooting volume. Conversely, his insistence on forcing tough looks severely limited his value on 03/30 vs MIA. Despite scoring 26 points, he posted a pedestrian +5.1 Impact because he needed 25 shots to get there, stalling the offense with selfish, contested jumpers. Yet when his jumper abandoned him entirely on 04/03 vs MIN, the big man found other ways to anchor the team. He managed a sturdy +15.4 Impact despite scoring a stretch-low 19 points on 6-of-17 shooting by relentlessly crashing the boards for 13 rebounds and keeping the ball moving with seven assists.

Paul George
Forward Yr 15 49G (49S)
+7.0
17.1 pts
5.0 reb
3.5 ast
31.9 min

Paul George's late-season stretch was defined by a blistering offensive peak that eventually gave way to a gritty, grind-it-out survival mode. He looked utterly unstoppable during the 04/01 vs WAS matchup, erupting for 39 points on brilliant 15-for-22 shooting. That pristine shot selection and relentless offensive pressure earned him a massive +38.7 Impact score. Just days later, his jumper abandoned him during the 04/06 vs SAS contest, where he managed only 16 points on a rough 5-for-15 from the floor. Yet he still salvaged a +6.2 Impact score in that game by leaning heavily into his defensive rotations and creating extra possessions through sheer hustle. The wheels finally fell off completely during the 04/09 vs HOU game. A miserable 7-point outing on 2-for-8 shooting, compounded by a complete lack of playmaking, resulted in a brutal -14.1 Impact score. It was a stark reminder that while his veteran savvy can often mask a cold shooting night, even George cannot hide when his entire offensive arsenal vanishes.

VJ Edgecombe
Guard Yr 0 87G (87S)
+6.5
15.8 pts
5.8 reb
4.1 ast
35.3 min

This late-season stretch was defined by VJ Edgecombe evolving into a terrifying, high-usage offensive engine. He absolutely dominated on 03/19 vs SAC. Pouring in 38 points and 11 assists on 16-of-28 shooting, he generated a staggering +37.4 Impact score through relentless rim pressure and brilliant shot creation. Even when his jumper abandoned him, he found ways to tilt the floor. Take his performance on 04/12 vs MIL. He managed just 9 points, but his elite court vision kept him in the positive with a +2.3 Impact score thanks to 11 assists and 7 rebounds. Still, his youthful tunnel vision occasionally hurt the team. Look at 03/12 vs DET, where a forced 3-for-14 shooting night and zero assists dragged him down to a -4.5 Impact score.

Kelly Oubre Jr.
Forward-Guard Yr 10 62G (53S)
+4.2
13.7 pts
5.1 reb
1.5 ast
31.9 min

Kelly Oubre Jr.'s mid-season stretch was defined by wild stylistic whiplash, oscillating between an erratic volume shooter and a gritty role player who briefly lost his starting job. You could see this extreme volatility perfectly during his 03/10 vs MEM performance. He poured in 30 points and grabbed 12 rebounds to generate a massive +22.4 Impact score, using relentless hustle and physical rebounding to create value despite an ugly 1-for-9 shooting night from deep. When that energy vanished, the results were disastrous. During his 03/01 vs BOS outing, Oubre forced terrible looks to finish with just four points on 2-for-10 shooting, posting a brutal -14.4 Impact score as his poor shot selection actively harmed the offense. After a brief demotion to the bench, he finally found a sustainable rhythm without needing to dominate the ball. In his 04/10 vs IND matchup, he scored a modest 15 points but still logged a stellar +17.0 Impact score by locking in on disruptive defensive rotations and generating crucial extra possessions.

Andre Drummond
Center Yr 13 75G (26S)
+1.6
6.1 pts
7.9 reb
1.2 ast
18.7 min

This volatile stretch for Andre Drummond was defined by a bizarre mid-season identity crisis that eventually gave way to a dominant rebounding resurgence. Early on, he inexplicably fancied himself a stretch big. He launched terrible perimeter shots during a disastrous start on 03/03 vs SAS, missing all four of his three-point attempts in just five minutes. That baffling shot selection actively derailed the offense, resulting in a brutal -9.2 impact score. Thankfully, Drummond eventually abandoned the perimeter and returned to doing the dirty work in the paint. Look at his performance on 03/15 vs POR. Despite scoring a mere six points, he vacuumed up 17 rebounds in 35 minutes to generate a +7.8 impact by simply overpowering smaller defenders on the glass. He carried that physical momentum through the end of the year, culminating in a massive +22.4 impact off the bench on 04/15 vs ORL.

Quentin Grimes
Guard Yr 4 87G (19S)
-0.1
12.5 pts
3.5 reb
3.1 ast
28.4 min

A mid-March promotion to the starting lineup unlocked an entirely different version of Quentin Grimes, transforming him from a hesitant reserve into an aggressive offensive focal point. The absolute peak of this scoring binge arrived on 03/15 vs POR, where he poured in 31 points on 22 shot attempts to generate a staggering +24.9 Impact score. Even when his shot volume dipped, his peripheral hustle kept his value afloat. Look at his +10.7 Impact on 03/25 vs CHI; despite scoring just 13 points, he drove winning basketball through highly efficient shooting, six rebounds, and five assists. The magic abruptly faded when he returned to the second unit in late March. Stripped of his starting rhythm, he vanished completely on 04/04 vs DET, finishing with zero points on 0-for-4 shooting to post a brutal -15.5 Impact. When given the ultimate green light, Grimes looked like a legitimate offensive engine, but his inability to affect the game in a reduced role remains a glaring flaw.

Dominick Barlow
Forward Yr 3 81G (59S)
-0.8
7.1 pts
4.4 reb
1.1 ast
22.1 min

Dominick Barlow’s late-season stretch was defined by maddening inconsistency, bouncing between highly effective hustle play and complete offensive invisibility before finally losing his starting job. On 03/01 vs BOS, he looked like a legitimate rotation big, dropping 14 points and 8 rebounds for a massive +12.2 Impact score. He earned that elite mark by attacking the glass and converting efficiently around the rim. Yet, those flashes of brilliance vanished completely on 03/03 vs SAS. He sleepwalked through 13 minutes, missing all four of his field goal attempts and grabbing zero rebounds, which tanked his Impact score to a brutal -12.5. Still, even when his scoring dried up, he occasionally found ways to tilt the floor. During the 04/03 vs MIN matchup, Barlow managed just 7 points but ripped down 10 rebounds, generating a +7.6 Impact score entirely through relentless interior physicality and defensive rebounding. Unfortunately, those gritty performances were too rare to save his starting role.

Cameron Payne
Guard Yr 10 22G (1S)
-2.4
7.4 pts
2.0 reb
2.6 ast
17.0 min

Cameron Payne's recent stretch was defined by sheer volatility, swinging violently between essential sparkplug and unplayable liability. He looked like a premium bench weapon on 03/25 vs CHI, draining five three-pointers to post a stellar +8.0 Impact score. That blistering perimeter efficiency forced the defense to stretch, creating immense offensive value without needing heavy usage. Yet, raw production didn't always translate to winning basketball, as seen on 03/23 vs OKC. Despite tallying 10 points and six assists, his erratic shot selection—chucking up seven threes and hitting just two—dragged his Impact down to a negative -0.6. The bottom fell out completely on 03/28 vs CHA. Yanked after just two empty minutes of court time, he registered a catastrophic -13.0 Impact score by offering absolutely zero production or resistance.

MarJon Beauchamp
Forward Yr 3 14G (1S)
-2.5
6.8 pts
2.3 reb
1.1 ast
14.0 min
Eric Gordon
Guard Yr 17 6G
-2.9
5.5 pts
0.3 reb
0.5 ast
12.3 min
Adem Bona
Forward Yr 1 82G (22S)
-4.8
4.5 pts
4.0 reb
0.4 ast
16.4 min

Adem Bona’s late-season stretch was defined by a chaotic promotion to the starting lineup, resulting in wild swings between dominant efficiency and complete invisibility. He finally cracked the starting five on 03/04 vs UTA, logging 12 points on 6-of-8 shooting to generate a stellar +11.0 Impact score. Even when his touch vanished, he occasionally found ways to stay on the floor through sheer grit. Look at his 33-minute grind on 03/14 vs BKN, where 10 hard-fought rebounds salvaged a +2.9 Impact score despite a quiet 9-point, 2-for-5 shooting night. Yet, his offensive limitations frequently crippled the team's spacing when he stopped crashing the glass. During an abysmal start on 04/09 vs HOU, Bona attempted just a single shot and grabbed only two rebounds in 15 minutes, suffering a brutal -13.9 Impact score because he provided absolutely zero rim pressure or secondary value. He is an explosive athlete, but until he demands the ball in the paint consistently, he remains a frustratingly volatile rotation piece.

Trendon Watford
Guard-Forward Yr 4 60G (7S)
-4.9
6.1 pts
3.0 reb
2.2 ast
15.1 min

This late-season stretch was defined by erratic offensive utility and a complete inability to stretch the floor, ultimately reducing Trendon Watford to a fringe rotation piece. His jumper completely abandoned him, leading to ugly outings like the 03/03 vs SAS matchup. Despite playing hard and generating active hustle plays, his 0-for-4 shooting from deep dragged his Impact score down to -6.2 because of the sheer cost of those wasted possessions. Even when his raw scoring looked solid, hidden defensive lapses often ruined his overall value. During the 03/10 vs MEM game, he scored 11 points on an efficient 4-of-5 from the field, yet still posted a -5.7 Impact score due to poor rotations and bleeding points on the other end. He did find a fleeting rhythm during the 03/21 vs UTA contest, racking up 20 points, nine boards, and four assists. His +13.7 Impact score that night stemmed from relentless rebounding and smart interior finishing rather than settling for outside shots. Unfortunately, those flashes were too rare, and his playing time subsequently vanished by April.

Justin Edwards
Forward Yr 1 73G (12S)
-4.9
5.7 pts
1.6 reb
1.2 ast
14.9 min

A tantalizing mid-March promotion to the starting lineup quickly gave way to a harsh reality check and a subsequent banishment back to the bench. Edwards initially earned that starting job by doing the dirty work. On 03/12 vs DET, a modest 12-point outing yielded a strong +12.0 Impact score because he crashed the glass for 9 rebounds and kept the offense humming with 5 assists. A week later, he caught absolute fire on 03/19 vs SAC, pouring in 32 points on blistering 7-of-11 perimeter shooting to generate a massive +27.9 Impact score. When his jumper fell, he looked like a legitimate weapon. But his utility vanished when the hot streak ended, as seen during his return to the second unit on 03/25 vs CHI. Despite scoring an efficient 12 points in just 14 minutes, he still posted a -3.7 Impact score. That negative mark was the direct result of hidden costs; a total lack of rebounding and poor defensive engagement turned his quick buckets into empty calories.

Dalen Terry
Forward Yr 3 21G
-5.6
3.4 pts
1.2 reb
1.4 ast
10.2 min

Dalen Terry spent this sixteen-game stretch fighting a losing battle for rotational stability, plummeting into a deep mid-season slump. He briefly flashed value as a connective bench piece on 02/01 vs MIA, where his modest eight points were elevated by six rebounds and three assists to generate a +3.5 Impact score. However, that peripheral hustle quickly vanished as the weeks dragged on. Even when he managed to find the basket, hidden costs ruined his shifts. He tallied eight points on 03/12 vs DET, but a lack of perimeter spacing and minimal playmaking across 23 minutes dragged him down to a dismal -7.0 Impact. Things completely bottomed out during a brutal, invisible stint on 03/19 vs SAC. In just four minutes of action, Terry missed both his shot attempts and recorded zero rebounds or assists, resulting in a staggering -13.3 Impact score. For a wing desperately needing to carve out an NBA niche, these empty-calorie shifts and frequent disappearing acts only pushed him further down the bench hierarchy.

Jared McCain
Guard Yr 1 37G (1S)
-5.9
6.6 pts
2.0 reb
1.7 ast
16.8 min

Jared McCain’s late-season stretch was defined by extreme volatility, oscillating wildly between lethal microwave scoring and hollow, empty-calorie minutes. Look no further than his explosive outing on 03/18 vs BKN, where he poured in 26 points on five made threes to post a massive +17.3 impact score. But when the shots stopped falling, his lack of playmaking made him an absolute liability. During a brutal dud on 03/29 vs NYK, he went scoreless on 0-for-3 shooting, resulting in a disastrous -15.2 impact score simply because he offered zero secondary value to keep the offense afloat. Even when he managed to fill the bucket, the underlying math often punished him. His promotion to the starting lineup on 04/10 vs DEN yielded 15 points on efficient 6-of-11 shooting, yet he still registered a -0.4 impact score. Those hidden costs—nonexistent rebounding and defensive lapses—gave right back to the opponent whatever he produced on the scoreboard.

Jabari Walker
Forward Yr 3 70G (6S)
-6.5
4.0 pts
2.8 reb
0.5 ast
11.3 min

This stretch of the season was defined by extreme, whiplash-inducing volatility for Jabari Walker, who oscillated wildly between unplayable bench warmer and sudden offensive juggernaut. He erupted out of nowhere during a back-to-back set, first hanging 20 points on 03/03 vs SAS before torching the nets for 22 points and 10 rebounds on 03/04 vs UTA. That Utah performance yielded a staggering +23.0 impact score because he paired his hot perimeter shooting with relentless work on the glass and stout defensive effort. Yet, his offensive outbursts didn't always translate to dominant basketball. On 03/12 vs DET, Walker poured in 16 points on flawless 6-for-6 shooting, but managed a surprisingly meager +2.2 impact. By grabbing just a single rebound and providing absolutely zero resistance on the defensive end, his perfect shooting was essentially empty calories. When the jumper stopped falling entirely, he became an active liability on the floor. Look no further than his scoreless outing on 03/19 vs SAC, which generated a disastrous -17.4 impact due to forced shots and completely blown defensive assignments.

Tyrese Martin
Forward Yr 2 9G
-7.6
2.2 pts
1.1 reb
1.0 ast
9.0 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.

Johni Broome
Forward Yr 0 13G
-8.4
1.3 pts
1.4 reb
0.4 ast
4.8 min
Kyle Lowry
Guard Yr 19 16G
-10.1
1.1 pts
0.6 reb
0.7 ast
7.6 min
Hunter Sallis
Guard Yr 0 7G
-12.1
1.0 pts
0.1 reb
0.6 ast
3.7 min
L
vs NYK NYK
144 NYK PHI 114
NYK vs NYK
114 144
Sun, May 10
Playoffs Analysis
-30
L
vs NYK NYK
108 NYK PHI 94
NYK vs NYK
94 108
Fri, May 8
Playoffs Analysis
-14
L
@ NYK NYK
102 PHI NYK 108
NYK @ NYK
102 108
Wed, May 6
Playoffs Analysis
-6
L
@ NYK NYK
98 PHI NYK 137
NYK @ NYK
98 137
Mon, May 4
Playoffs Analysis
-39
W
@ BOS BOS
109 PHI BOS 100
BOS @ BOS
109 100
Sat, May 2
Playoffs Analysis
+9
W
vs BOS BOS
93 BOS PHI 106
BOS vs BOS
106 93
Thu, Apr 30
Playoffs Analysis
+13
W
@ BOS BOS
113 PHI BOS 97
BOS @ BOS
113 97
Tue, Apr 28
Playoffs Analysis
+16
L
vs BOS BOS
128 BOS PHI 96
BOS vs BOS
96 128
Sun, Apr 26
Playoffs Analysis
-32
L
vs BOS BOS
108 BOS PHI 100
BOS vs BOS
100 108
Fri, Apr 24
Playoffs Analysis
-8
W
@ BOS BOS
111 PHI BOS 97
BOS @ BOS
111 97
Tue, Apr 21
Playoffs Analysis
+14
L
@ BOS BOS
91 PHI BOS 123
BOS @ BOS
91 123
Sun, Apr 19
Playoffs Analysis
-32
W
vs ORL ORL
97 ORL PHI 109
ORL vs ORL
109 97
Wed, Apr 15
Play-In Analysis
+12
W
vs MIL MIL
106 MIL PHI 126
MIL vs MIL
126 106
Sun, Apr 12
Analysis
+20
W
@ IND IND
105 PHI IND 94
IND @ IND
105 94
Fri, Apr 10
Analysis
+11
L
@ HOU HOU
102 PHI HOU 113
HOU @ HOU
102 113
Thu, Apr 9
Analysis
-11
L
@ SAS SAS
102 PHI SAS 115
SAS @ SAS
102 115
Mon, Apr 6
Analysis
-13
L
vs DET DET
116 DET PHI 93
DET vs DET
93 116
Sat, Apr 4
Analysis
-23
W
vs MIN MIN
103 MIN PHI 115
MIN vs MIN
115 103
Fri, Apr 3
Analysis
+12
W
@ WAS WAS
153 PHI WAS 131
WAS @ WAS
153 131
Wed, Apr 1
Analysis
+22
L
@ MIA MIA
109 PHI MIA 119
MIA @ MIA
109 119
Mon, Mar 30
Analysis
-10
W
@ CHA CHA
118 PHI CHA 114
CHA @ CHA
118 114
Sat, Mar 28
Analysis
+4
W
vs CHI CHI
137 CHI PHI 157
CHI vs CHI
157 137
Wed, Mar 25
Analysis
+20
L
vs OKC OKC
123 OKC PHI 103
OKC vs OKC
103 123
Mon, Mar 23
Analysis
-20
W
@ UTA UTA
126 PHI UTA 116
UTA @ UTA
126 116
Sat, Mar 21
Analysis
+10
W
@ SAC SAC
139 PHI SAC 118
SAC @ SAC
139 118
Thu, Mar 19
Analysis
+21
L
@ DEN DEN
96 PHI DEN 124
DEN @ DEN
96 124
Tue, Mar 17
Analysis
-28
W
vs POR POR
103 POR PHI 109
POR vs POR
109 103
Sun, Mar 15
Analysis
+6
W
vs BKN BKN
97 BKN PHI 104
BKN vs BKN
104 97
Sat, Mar 14
Analysis
+7
L
@ DET DET
109 PHI DET 131
DET @ DET
109 131
Thu, Mar 12
Analysis
-22
W
vs MEM MEM
129 MEM PHI 139
MEM vs MEM
139 129
Tue, Mar 10
Analysis
+10
L
@ CLE CLE
101 PHI CLE 115
CLE @ CLE
101 115
Mon, Mar 9
Analysis
-14
L
@ ATL ATL
116 PHI ATL 125
ATL @ ATL
116 125
Sat, Mar 7
Analysis
-9
W
vs UTA UTA
102 UTA PHI 106
UTA vs UTA
106 102
Wed, Mar 4
Analysis
+4
L
vs SAS SAS
131 SAS PHI 91
SAS vs SAS
91 131
Tue, Mar 3
Analysis
-40
L
@ BOS BOS
98 PHI BOS 114
BOS @ BOS
98 114
Sun, Mar 1
Analysis
-16
W
vs MIA MIA
117 MIA PHI 124
MIA vs MIA
124 117
Thu, Feb 26
Analysis
+7
W
@ IND IND
135 PHI IND 114
IND @ IND
135 114
Tue, Feb 24
Analysis
+21
W
@ MIN MIN
135 PHI MIN 108
MIN @ MIN
135 108
Sun, Feb 22
Analysis
+27
L
@ NOP NOP
111 PHI NOP 126
NOP @ NOP
111 126
Sat, Feb 21
Analysis
-15
L
vs ATL ATL
117 ATL PHI 107
ATL vs ATL
107 117
Thu, Feb 19
Analysis
-10
L
vs NYK NYK
138 NYK PHI 89
NYK vs NYK
89 138
Wed, Feb 11
Analysis
-49
L
@ POR POR
118 PHI POR 135
POR @ POR
118 135
Mon, Feb 9
Analysis
-17
W
@ PHX PHX
109 PHI PHX 103
PHX @ PHX
109 103
Sat, Feb 7
Analysis
+6
L
@ LAL LAL
115 PHI LAL 119
LAL @ LAL
115 119
Thu, Feb 5
Analysis
-4
W
@ GSW GSW
113 PHI GSW 94
GSW @ GSW
113 94
Tue, Feb 3
Analysis
+19
W
@ LAC LAC
128 PHI LAC 113
LAC @ LAC
128 113
Mon, Feb 2
Analysis
+15
W
vs NOP NOP
114 NOP PHI 124
NOP vs NOP
124 114
Sat, Jan 31
Analysis
+10
W
vs SAC SAC
111 SAC PHI 113
SAC vs SAC
113 111
Thu, Jan 29
Analysis
+2
W
vs MIL MIL
122 MIL PHI 139
MIL vs MIL
139 122
Wed, Jan 28
Analysis
+17
L
@ CHA CHA
93 PHI CHA 130
CHA @ CHA
93 130
Mon, Jan 26
Analysis
-37
L
vs NYK NYK
112 NYK PHI 109
NYK vs NYK
109 112
Sat, Jan 24
Analysis
-3
W
vs HOU HOU
122 HOU PHI 128
HOU vs HOU
128 122
Fri, Jan 23
Analysis
+6
L
vs PHX PHX
116 PHX PHI 110
PHX vs PHX
110 116
Wed, Jan 21
Analysis
-6
W
vs IND IND
104 IND PHI 113
IND vs IND
113 104
Tue, Jan 20
Analysis
+9
L
vs CLE CLE
117 CLE PHI 115
CLE vs CLE
115 117
Sat, Jan 17
Analysis
-2
L
vs CLE CLE
133 CLE PHI 107
CLE vs CLE
107 133
Thu, Jan 15
Analysis
-26
W
@ TOR TOR
115 PHI TOR 102
TOR @ TOR
115 102
Tue, Jan 13
Analysis
+13
L
@ TOR TOR
115 PHI TOR 116
TOR @ TOR
115 116
Sun, Jan 11
Analysis
-1
W
@ ORL ORL
103 PHI ORL 91
ORL @ ORL
103 91
Sat, Jan 10
Analysis
+12
W
vs WAS WAS
110 WAS PHI 131
WAS vs WAS
131 110
Thu, Jan 8
Analysis
+21
L
vs DEN DEN
125 DEN PHI 124
DEN vs DEN
124 125
Tue, Jan 6
Analysis
-1
W
@ NYK NYK
130 PHI NYK 119
NYK @ NYK
130 119
Sun, Jan 4
Analysis
+11
W
@ DAL DAL
123 PHI DAL 108
DAL @ DAL
123 108
Fri, Jan 2
Analysis
+15
W
@ MEM MEM
139 PHI MEM 136
MEM @ MEM
139 136
Wed, Dec 31
Analysis
+3
L
@ OKC OKC
104 PHI OKC 129
OKC @ OKC
104 129
Sun, Dec 28
Analysis
-25
L
@ CHI CHI
102 PHI CHI 109
CHI @ CHI
102 109
Sat, Dec 27
Analysis
-7
L
vs BKN BKN
114 BKN PHI 106
BKN vs BKN
106 114
Wed, Dec 24
Analysis
-8
W
vs DAL DAL
114 DAL PHI 121
DAL vs DAL
121 114
Sun, Dec 21
Analysis
+7
W
@ NYK NYK
116 PHI NYK 107
NYK @ NYK
116 107
Sat, Dec 20
Analysis
+9
L
@ ATL ATL
117 PHI ATL 120
ATL @ ATL
117 120
Sun, Dec 14
Analysis
-3
W
vs IND IND
105 IND PHI 115
IND vs IND
115 105
Sat, Dec 13
Analysis
+10
L
vs LAL LAL
112 LAL PHI 108
LAL vs LAL
108 112
Mon, Dec 8
Analysis
-4
W
@ MIL MIL
116 PHI MIL 101
MIL @ MIL
116 101
Sat, Dec 6
Analysis
+15
W
vs GSW GSW
98 GSW PHI 99
GSW vs GSW
99 98
Fri, Dec 5
Analysis
+1
W
vs WAS WAS
102 WAS PHI 121
WAS vs WAS
121 102
Wed, Dec 3
Analysis
+19
L
vs ATL ATL
142 ATL PHI 134
ATL vs ATL
134 142
Sun, Nov 30
Analysis
-8
W
@ BKN BKN
115 PHI BKN 103
BKN @ BKN
115 103
Sat, Nov 29
Analysis
+12
L
vs ORL ORL
144 ORL PHI 103
ORL vs ORL
103 144
Wed, Nov 26
Analysis
-41
L
vs MIA MIA
127 MIA PHI 117
MIA vs MIA
117 127
Sun, Nov 23
Analysis
-10
W
@ MIL MIL
123 PHI MIL 114
MIL @ MIL
123 114
Fri, Nov 21
Analysis
+9
L
vs TOR TOR
121 TOR PHI 112
TOR vs TOR
112 121
Thu, Nov 20
Analysis
-9
W
vs LAC LAC
108 LAC PHI 110
LAC vs LAC
110 108
Tue, Nov 18
Analysis
+2
L
@ DET DET
105 PHI DET 114
DET @ DET
105 114
Sat, Nov 15
Analysis
-9
W
vs BOS BOS
100 BOS PHI 102
BOS vs BOS
102 100
Wed, Nov 12
Analysis
+2
L
vs DET DET
111 DET PHI 108
DET vs DET
108 111
Mon, Nov 10
Analysis
-3
W
vs TOR TOR
120 TOR PHI 130
TOR vs TOR
130 120
Sun, Nov 9
Analysis
+10
L
@ CLE CLE
121 PHI CLE 132
CLE @ CLE
121 132
Thu, Nov 6
Analysis
-11
L
@ CHI CHI
111 PHI CHI 113
CHI @ CHI
111 113
Wed, Nov 5
Analysis
-2
W
@ BKN BKN
129 PHI BKN 105
BKN @ BKN
129 105
Sun, Nov 2
Analysis
+24
L
vs BOS BOS
109 BOS PHI 108
BOS vs BOS
108 109
Fri, Oct 31
Analysis
-1
W
@ WAS WAS
57 PHI WAS 63
WAS @ WAS
57 63
Tue, Oct 28
Analysis
-6
W
vs ORL ORL
124 ORL PHI 136
ORL vs ORL
136 124
Mon, Oct 27
Analysis
+12
W
vs CHA CHA
121 CHA PHI 125
CHA vs CHA
125 121
Sat, Oct 25
Analysis
+4
W
@ BOS BOS
117 PHI BOS 116
BOS @ BOS
117 116
Wed, Oct 22
Analysis
+1