San Antonio Spurs

Western Conference

San Antonio
Spurs

HC Mitch Johnson

73-26
W2

ROSTER — IMPACT RANKINGS

Victor Wembanyama
Forward-Center Yr 2 80G (71S)
+22.8
24.7 pts
11.4 reb
3.0 ast
29.9 min

This late-season stretch was defined by Victor Wembanyama shaking off a brief shooting slump to become an absolute offensive avalanche. He looked entirely mortal during the 02/25 vs TOR matchup, clanking his way to just 12 points on 3-of-12 shooting to finish with a perfectly flat +0.0 Impact. That uninspiring score reflected a hesitant star settling for contested perimeter looks rather than imposing his physical frame inside. Yet even when his scoring volume dipped later in the month, he found ways to wreck the opposition through sheer rebounding dominance. Look at the 03/25 vs MEM tilt, where he managed only 19 points but still posted a massive +31.7 Impact by vacuuming up 15 rebounds and scoring efficiently on 8-of-15 shooting. When his volume and aggression finally aligned, the results were simply unfair. He completely dismantled the defense during the 03/30 vs CHI game, pouring in 41 points and 16 rebounds to generate a jaw-dropping +49.1 Impact by punishing defenders at the rim instead of bailing them out with jumpers.

De'Aaron Fox
Guard Yr 8 87G (87S)
+7.6
18.1 pts
3.8 reb
6.1 ast
31.4 min

This late-season stretch was defined by maddening inconsistency, with De'Aaron Fox oscillating between hyper-efficient offensive mastery and clunky shooting slumps. When his jumper was falling, he was completely unguardable. He tore apart the defense on 03/05 vs DET with 29 points on 12-for-22 shooting to generate a massive +30.2 Impact score. That elite rating wasn't just about scoring, as his relentless hustle and defensive disruption fueled an avalanche of easy transition points. He paired that scoring punch with brilliant facilitation on 03/10 vs BOS, carving up the floor for 25 points and 9 assists on 11-for-14 shooting for a +23.3 Impact. Yet, those peaks were routinely followed by baffling duds. Look no further than his grueling 40-minute slog on 04/04 vs DEN, where he forced up a 7-for-19 shooting night while missing all six of his three-point attempts. His dismal -8.6 Impact in that contest exposed the hidden costs of his game, as forced perimeter shots and stagnant ball movement actively dragged the offense into the mud.

Devin Vassell
Guard-Forward Yr 5 84G (82S)
+5.2
13.8 pts
4.2 reb
2.5 ast
31.3 min

Devin Vassell spent the late winter oscillating wildly between lethal perimeter assassin and offensive liability. On 03/03 vs PHI, he was devastatingly efficient, torching the nets for 22 points on 6-of-8 shooting from deep to generate a massive +23.3 Impact score. But that hot hand could vanish without warning. During a brutal outing on 03/08 vs HOU, he missed all six of his field goal attempts to finish with just 5 points, resulting in a dismal -8.7 Impact because his flat-footed perimeter settling actively stalled the offense. He did, however, occasionally find ways to salvage quiet scoring nights by doing the dirty work. On 04/06 vs PHI, Vassell managed a respectable +4.3 Impact despite scoring only 9 points. Rather than forcing bad looks, he kept the ball moving with four assists and leaned heavily into his defensive rotations to create crucial non-scoring value.

Keldon Johnson
Forward-Guard Yr 6 99G
+4.7
12.5 pts
5.1 reb
1.3 ast
22.6 min

A maddening tug-of-war between destructive tunnel vision and overpowering bully-ball defined this late-season stretch for Keldon Johnson. When he stubbornly forced the issue, the results were disastrous. Look no further than Mar 12 vs DEN, where his tendency to force wild, off-balance drives into set defenses cratered his momentum and yielded a brutal -13.3 impact score. Even when his shot fell, hidden costs frequently ruined his shifts. Despite pouring in 20 points during Mar 08 vs HOU, his overall impact plummeted to -6.0 because his hot perimeter shooting was entirely undone by a catastrophic -7.1 defensive rating. Yet, Johnson also found ways to salvage his value when his jumper abandoned him entirely. He shot a miserable 4-for-14 during Apr 06 vs PHI, but still generated a stellar +10.4 impact score by transforming into an absolute menace on the defensive end. When he finally balanced his physical aggression with smart execution, he remained a highly effective battering ram off the bench.

Stephon Castle
Guard Yr 1 85G (84S)
+4.7
17.0 pts
5.2 reb
7.2 ast
30.7 min

Stephon Castle spent the late winter transforming from a raw combo guard into a full-blown offensive engine. His absolute peak arrived on 03/12 vs DEN, where he erupted for 30 points, 11 rebounds, and 10 assists to earn a massive +19.2 Impact score. That dominant mark stemmed from relentless rim pressure and elite rebounding that completely broke Denver's defensive shell. Yet, raw numbers occasionally masked severe hidden costs. Despite stuffing the stat sheet with 15 points and 10 assists on 03/14 vs CHA, Castle posted a dismal -5.6 Impact score because his box-score production was hollowed out by poor transition defense and sloppy decision-making. Conversely, he learned how to tilt games without forcing his own offense. During the 03/01 vs NYK matchup, he scored just 13 points but generated a stellar +8.6 Impact score by diving for loose balls and suffocating his primary assignment on the perimeter. He is finally figuring out how to manipulate the entire floor.

Julian Champagnie
Forward Yr 3 99G (85S)
+3.6
11.1 pts
5.8 reb
1.5 ast
28.2 min

Extreme volatility defined Julian Champagnie's late-season stretch, as he oscillated violently between a helpful two-way spacer and an active detriment to the lineup. When his shot refused to fall, he occasionally salvaged his minutes through sheer grit. During the Mar 16 vs LAC matchup, he managed a solid +3.6 impact despite scoring just 7 points because his excellent defensive resistance and hustle metrics anchored the floor. Yet, finding the bottom of the net hardly guaranteed a positive night. He dropped 14 points while shooting 4/8 from deep on Mar 19 vs PHX, but bleeding points on the defensive end completely erased his shooting value, resulting in a brutal -16.0 impact score. The absolute floor arrived on Mar 10 vs BOS, where a catastrophic zero-point outing yielded a staggering -24.2 impact driven by forced perimeter looks and a total absence of secondary playmaking. This maddening inconsistency makes him a fascinating, albeit frustrating, puzzle on the wing.

Dylan Harper
Guard Yr 0 86G (6S)
+2.0
12.0 pts
3.8 reb
3.6 ast
23.2 min

This late-season stretch defined Dylan Harper as a volatile but explosive spark plug who could swing a game entirely on his own terms. When his jumper was falling, he was a nightmare to contain. He erupted for 24 points on 9-of-13 shooting during a spot start on 03/21 vs IND, generating a massive +17.4 Impact score through hyper-efficient shot selection and relentless downhill aggression. Yet his value wasn't purely tied to filling the bucket. During a gritty tilt on 03/01 vs NYK, Harper managed just 8 points but still posted a +3.4 Impact score because his active hands and suffocating perimeter defense completely disrupted the opposing backcourt. Conversely, defensive lapses and empty possessions occasionally sabotaged his floor time. Look no further than 04/01 vs GSW, where he tallied a respectable 13 points and 5 assists but suffered a -4.2 Impact score because hidden costs like blown rotations bled points the other way.

Luke Kornet
Center-Forward Yr 8 85G (26S)
+1.2
6.1 pts
5.7 reb
1.6 ast
19.7 min

This stretch was defined by wild swings in effectiveness, where Luke Kornet oscillated between a highly efficient spot-starter and a massive liability off the bench. Look at his start on 04/08 vs POR. He logged 10 points, five rebounds, and six assists, driving a massive +12.0 Impact score by operating as a high-post hub and moving the ball flawlessly. Yet, scoring double digits did not always guarantee a positive night. During the 04/06 vs PHI matchup, he put up 10 points but posted a -3.5 Impact score because he grabbed just three rebounds in 22 minutes, failing to anchor the interior and bleeding points on the other end. The floor completely fell out on 03/08 vs HOU. He managed just one rebound and two points in 14 minutes, resulting in a disastrous -11.8 Impact score as his lack of physical presence crippled the second unit. When he leverages his size to clean the glass and facilitate, he is a valuable piece, but his passive stretches make him incredibly hard to trust.

Harrison Barnes
Forward Yr 13 94G (52S)
-1.1
8.6 pts
2.5 reb
1.6 ast
22.8 min

Harrison Barnes’s late-season stretch was defined by maddening inconsistency, oscillating wildly between veteran stabilization and total invisibility. He occasionally found ways to tilt the floor without shooting, like on Apr 02 vs LAC where he managed a massive +8.5 impact score despite scoring just three points. Elite hustle metrics (+4.3) and suffocating defensive positioning (+10.4) completely erased the damage of his vanishing jumper that night. Yet, when his shot actually fell, his defensive effort often evaporated. During the Apr 10 vs DAL matchup, Barnes dropped 15 points on efficient shooting, but sluggish perimeter rotations dragged his overall impact down to a dismal -7.1. By the final weeks, a passive approach fully consumed his game. His stint concluded with a lifeless six-minute cameo on Apr 25 vs POR, recording zero points and a -3.9 impact as he drifted around the court without an ounce of offensive assertiveness.

Riley Minix
Forward Yr 1 3G
-2.7
3.0 pts
0.7 reb
0.3 ast
2.8 min
David Jones Garcia
Guard Yr 0 11G
-5.2
2.9 pts
1.2 reb
1.6 ast
6.2 min
Harrison Ingram
Forward Yr 1 7G
-5.4
1.6 pts
0.4 reb
0.1 ast
3.7 min
Kelly Olynyk
Forward-Center Yr 12 49G
-6.1
3.2 pts
1.6 reb
1.0 ast
7.9 min

This stretch was defined by Kelly Olynyk fading into the deep recesses of the bench, struggling to generate any rhythm during sporadic, low-minute appearances. On 03/03 vs PHI, he logged 12 minutes but failed to score a single point, missing both of his field goal attempts. That offensive invisibility left the second unit completely stagnant, resulting in a brutal -11.1 Impact score. He finally found a way to be useful without filling up the scoring column during a 03/17 vs SAC matchup. Despite managing just 4 points on 1-for-4 shooting, Olynyk clawed his way to a +1.1 Impact by grabbing 6 rebounds and dishing 3 assists to keep possessions alive. A few nights later, he managed a brief flash of his old offensive spark on 03/25 vs MEM. Hitting all of his shots for 9 points and 3 assists in just 9 minutes, his flawless execution yielded a +2.0 Impact, providing a rare bright spot in a month mostly filled with empty cardio.

Jeremy Sochan
Forward Yr 3 28G
-6.3
4.1 pts
2.6 reb
1.0 ast
12.8 min

This grueling stretch of the season was defined by garbage-time irrelevance before a late, desperate gasp for rotation minutes. Early on, Sochan was practically invisible on the floor. He sleepwalked through an 11-minute stint on 02/22 vs CHI, where his total lack of offensive aggression and defensive apathy resulted in a disastrous -9.3 Impact score. He barely broke a sweat on 03/01 vs SAS, logging just two minutes of empty cardio while dragging his team down to a -5.0 Impact score. It took until April for his coach to finally trust him with real run again. Given 17 minutes on 04/03 vs CHI, he managed only seven points but still posted a stellar +5.6 Impact score. That high mark despite a quiet scoring night was driven entirely by his relentless hustle, as he ripped down eight rebounds and finally anchored the defense instead of floating aimlessly on the perimeter.

Jordan McLaughlin
Guard Yr 6 53G
-6.6
2.0 pts
0.7 reb
0.9 ast
6.0 min

Jordan McLaughlin spent the final stretch of the season firmly anchored to the deep bench, struggling to generate any positive momentum during sporadic, low-leverage appearances. Even when given a longer leash with 18 minutes on 03/21 vs IND, his modest production of 6 points and 3 assists still yielded a -1.9 Impact score. His absolute refusal to threaten defenses as a scorer allowed opponents to sag off him entirely, clogging passing lanes and stalling the half-court offense. This glaring lack of scoring gravity severely punished him on 03/19 vs PHX. Despite dishing out 5 assists in just 10 minutes, he failed to attempt a single shot, dragging his overall footprint down to a dismal -7.5 Impact. The bleeding rarely stopped in shorter bursts, either. During a brief two-minute cameo on 04/12 vs DEN, he posted a brutal -8.2 Impact, as his lack of size was immediately exploited by opposing units on the defensive end. Without the offensive aggression needed to keep defenders honest, McLaughlin simply became a liability the moment he checked into the game.

Lindy Waters III
Forward Yr 4 48G
-7.6
2.2 pts
0.7 reb
0.5 ast
6.5 min

Lindy Waters III spent this late-season stretch marooned at the end of the bench, struggling to generate any real value during sparse rotational cameos. Even when given a rare extended runway on 03/17 vs SAC, his 11 points and four rebounds amounted to empty calories. Despite the decent shooting numbers, disjointed execution and a failure to elevate his teammates dragged his overall influence down to a -1.9 Impact score. Things turned downright ugly on 03/28 vs MIL. He bricked all three of his attempts from beyond the arc and offered zero playmaking to offset the misses, resulting in a disastrous -11.9 Impact score. His lone bright spot arrived on 03/03 vs PHI. He managed a +0.6 Impact score in 12 minutes, using active defensive hustle and a pair of three-pointers to briefly stabilize the second unit.

Mason Plumlee
Forward-Center Yr 12 11G (1S)
-7.9
0.6 pts
1.4 reb
0.5 ast
5.5 min

This six-game stretch was defined by absolute irrelevance, with Mason Plumlee reduced to a glorified spectator who barely broke a sweat. During the 03/10 vs BOS matchup, he logged a single minute of floor time, grabbing one rebound and registering a dismal -10.0 Impact score simply because he wasn't out there long enough to generate any actual value. He matched that rock-bottom -10.0 Impact score on 04/01 vs GSW, completely vanishing through seven minutes of action with zero points, zero rebounds, and zero assists. Even a surprise promotion to the starting lineup on 04/12 vs DEN couldn't salvage his production. He played a stretch-high 16 minutes in that contest but only managed two points and three boards, resulting in a poor -6.4 Impact score. His consistently dreadful impact grades stem from a complete lack of offensive aggression, taking just two total field goal attempts across the entire span while failing to protect the glass. He was merely occupying space out there, offering virtually zero resistance or playmaking when his number was finally called.

Carter Bryant
Forward Yr 0 87G
-8.2
4.0 pts
2.4 reb
0.7 ast
11.1 min

Carter Bryant’s late-season stretch was defined by empty minutes and a frustrating inability to anchor the second unit. Even when his box score looked clean, hidden costs dragged him down. Take his 04/10 vs DAL performance, where he tallied 12 points on flawless 3-for-3 shooting from deep. Despite that offensive efficiency, he registered a -4.5 Impact score, a clear sign that blown defensive assignments and poor rotational awareness were bleeding value on the other end of the floor. The bottom had completely fallen out earlier on 03/23 vs MIA. Although he managed to grab 8 rebounds, Bryant posted an abysmal -15.1 Impact score because he forced bad looks and missed all three of his perimeter shots. He did manage one brilliant flash of genuine value on 04/08 vs POR. Drilling five triples on his way to 17 points and 4 assists, he finally earned a +10.3 Impact score by pairing lethal shot selection with crisp ball movement.

Bismack Biyombo
Center Yr 14 33G (1S)
-9.1
0.8 pts
0.9 reb
0.2 ast
4.8 min

Bismack Biyombo’s latest stretch of the season was defined entirely by empty, fleeting cameos at the absolute end of the rotation. He rarely saw the floor for more than a handful of minutes, operating as a deep-bench placeholder who failed to generate any meaningful production. During the 03/08 vs HOU matchup, he logged four minutes of pure cardio. He grabbed just a single rebound and posted a dismal -14.1 impact score because his complete lack of offensive gravity actively hindered his unit. Even when he managed to find the basket, his underlying metrics remained harsh. In the 03/21 vs IND game, Biyombo scored a stretch-high four points on perfect 2/2 shooting, yet still recorded a -9.1 impact score since those isolated buckets could not mask his failure to protect the rim or secure more than one board. When given a slightly longer leash in the 03/25 vs MEM contest, he corralled four rebounds in nine minutes but missed his only shot attempt, yielding a -11.3 impact. Ultimately, these brief appearances revealed a veteran big man who is simply occupying space rather than altering the weather in the paint.

W
@ OKC OKC
111 SAS OKC 103
OKC @ OKC
111 103
Sat, May 30
Playoffs Analysis
+8
W
vs OKC OKC
91 OKC SAS 118
OKC vs OKC
118 91
Thu, May 28
Playoffs Analysis
+27
L
@ OKC OKC
114 SAS OKC 127
OKC @ OKC
114 127
Tue, May 26
Playoffs Analysis
-13
W
vs OKC OKC
82 OKC SAS 103
OKC vs OKC
103 82
Sun, May 24
Playoffs Analysis
+21
L
vs OKC OKC
123 OKC SAS 108
OKC vs OKC
108 123
Fri, May 22
Playoffs Analysis
-15
L
@ OKC OKC
113 SAS OKC 122
OKC @ OKC
113 122
Wed, May 20
Playoffs Analysis
-9
W
@ OKC OKC
122 SAS OKC 115
OKC @ OKC
122 115
Mon, May 18
Playoffs Analysis
+7
W
vs MIN MIN
97 MIN SAS 126
MIN vs MIN
126 97
Tue, May 12
Playoffs Analysis
+29
L
@ MIN MIN
109 SAS MIN 114
MIN @ MIN
109 114
Sun, May 10
Playoffs Analysis
-5
W
@ MIN MIN
115 SAS MIN 108
MIN @ MIN
115 108
Fri, May 8
Playoffs Analysis
+7
W
vs MIN MIN
95 MIN SAS 133
MIN vs MIN
133 95
Wed, May 6
Playoffs Analysis
+38
L
vs MIN MIN
104 MIN SAS 102
MIN vs MIN
102 104
Mon, May 4
Playoffs Analysis
-2
W
vs POR POR
95 POR SAS 114
POR vs POR
114 95
Tue, Apr 28
Playoffs Analysis
+19
W
@ POR POR
114 SAS POR 93
POR @ POR
114 93
Sun, Apr 26
Playoffs Analysis
+21
W
@ POR POR
120 SAS POR 108
POR @ POR
120 108
Fri, Apr 24
Playoffs Analysis
+12
L
vs POR POR
106 POR SAS 103
POR vs POR
103 106
Tue, Apr 21
Playoffs Analysis
-3
W
vs POR POR
98 POR SAS 111
POR vs POR
111 98
Sun, Apr 19
Playoffs Analysis
+13
L
vs DEN DEN
128 DEN SAS 118
DEN vs DEN
118 128
Sun, Apr 12
Analysis
-10
W
vs DAL DAL
120 DAL SAS 139
DAL vs DAL
139 120
Fri, Apr 10
Analysis
+19
W
vs POR POR
101 POR SAS 112
POR vs POR
112 101
Wed, Apr 8
Analysis
+11
W
vs PHI PHI
102 PHI SAS 115
PHI vs PHI
115 102
Mon, Apr 6
Analysis
+13
L
@ DEN DEN
134 SAS DEN 136
DEN @ DEN
134 136
Sat, Apr 4
Analysis
-2
W
@ LAC LAC
118 SAS LAC 99
LAC @ LAC
118 99
Thu, Apr 2
Analysis
+19
W
@ GSW GSW
127 SAS GSW 113
GSW @ GSW
127 113
Wed, Apr 1
Analysis
+14
W
vs CHI CHI
114 CHI SAS 129
CHI vs CHI
129 114
Mon, Mar 30
Analysis
+15
W
@ MIL MIL
127 SAS MIL 95
MIL @ MIL
127 95
Sat, Mar 28
Analysis
+32
W
@ MEM MEM
123 SAS MEM 98
MEM @ MEM
123 98
Wed, Mar 25
Analysis
+25
W
@ MIA MIA
136 SAS MIA 111
MIA @ MIA
136 111
Mon, Mar 23
Analysis
+25
W
vs IND IND
119 IND SAS 134
IND vs IND
134 119
Sat, Mar 21
Analysis
+15
W
vs PHX PHX
100 PHX SAS 101
PHX vs PHX
101 100
Thu, Mar 19
Analysis
+1
W
@ SAC SAC
132 SAS SAC 104
SAC @ SAC
132 104
Tue, Mar 17
Analysis
+28
W
@ LAC LAC
119 SAS LAC 115
LAC @ LAC
119 115
Mon, Mar 16
Analysis
+4
W
vs CHA CHA
102 CHA SAS 115
CHA vs CHA
115 102
Sat, Mar 14
Analysis
+13
L
vs DEN DEN
136 DEN SAS 131
DEN vs DEN
131 136
Thu, Mar 12
Analysis
-5
W
vs BOS BOS
116 BOS SAS 125
BOS vs BOS
125 116
Tue, Mar 10
Analysis
+9
W
vs HOU HOU
120 HOU SAS 145
HOU vs HOU
145 120
Sun, Mar 8
Analysis
+25
W
vs LAC LAC
112 LAC SAS 116
LAC vs LAC
116 112
Fri, Mar 6
Analysis
+4
W
vs DET DET
106 DET SAS 121
DET vs DET
121 106
Thu, Mar 5
Analysis
+15
W
@ PHI PHI
131 SAS PHI 91
PHI @ PHI
131 91
Tue, Mar 3
Analysis
+40
L
@ NYK NYK
89 SAS NYK 114
NYK @ NYK
89 114
Sun, Mar 1
Analysis
-25
W
@ BKN BKN
126 SAS BKN 110
BKN @ BKN
126 110
Thu, Feb 26
Analysis
+16
W
@ TOR TOR
110 SAS TOR 107
TOR @ TOR
110 107
Wed, Feb 25
Analysis
+3
W
@ DET DET
114 SAS DET 103
DET @ DET
114 103
Mon, Feb 23
Analysis
+11
W
vs SAC SAC
122 SAC SAS 139
SAC vs SAC
139 122
Sat, Feb 21
Analysis
+17
W
vs PHX PHX
94 PHX SAS 121
PHX vs PHX
121 94
Thu, Feb 19
Analysis
+27
W
@ GSW GSW
126 SAS GSW 113
GSW @ GSW
126 113
Wed, Feb 11
Analysis
+13
W
@ LAL LAL
136 SAS LAL 108
LAL @ LAL
136 108
Tue, Feb 10
Analysis
+28
W
vs DAL DAL
125 DAL SAS 138
DAL vs DAL
138 125
Sat, Feb 7
Analysis
+13
W
@ DAL DAL
135 SAS DAL 123
DAL @ DAL
135 123
Thu, Feb 5
Analysis
+12
W
vs OKC OKC
106 OKC SAS 116
OKC vs OKC
116 106
Wed, Feb 4
Analysis
+10
W
vs ORL ORL
103 ORL SAS 112
ORL vs ORL
112 103
Sun, Feb 1
Analysis
+9
L
@ CHA CHA
106 SAS CHA 111
CHA @ CHA
106 111
Sat, Jan 31
Analysis
-5
W
@ HOU HOU
111 SAS HOU 99
HOU @ HOU
111 99
Wed, Jan 28
Analysis
+12
L
vs NOP NOP
104 NOP SAS 95
NOP vs NOP
95 104
Mon, Jan 26
Analysis
-9
W
@ UTA UTA
126 SAS UTA 109
UTA @ UTA
126 109
Fri, Jan 23
Analysis
+17
L
@ HOU HOU
106 SAS HOU 111
HOU @ HOU
106 111
Wed, Jan 21
Analysis
-5
W
vs UTA UTA
110 UTA SAS 123
UTA vs UTA
123 110
Mon, Jan 19
Analysis
+13
W
vs MIN MIN
123 MIN SAS 126
MIN vs MIN
126 123
Sun, Jan 18
Analysis
+3
W
vs MIL MIL
101 MIL SAS 119
MIL vs MIL
119 101
Fri, Jan 16
Analysis
+18
L
@ OKC OKC
98 SAS OKC 119
OKC @ OKC
98 119
Wed, Jan 14
Analysis
-21
L
@ MIN MIN
103 SAS MIN 104
MIN @ MIN
103 104
Mon, Jan 12
Analysis
-1
W
@ BOS BOS
100 SAS BOS 95
BOS @ BOS
100 95
Sun, Jan 11
Analysis
+5
W
vs LAL LAL
91 LAL SAS 107
LAL vs LAL
107 91
Thu, Jan 8
Analysis
+16
L
@ MEM MEM
105 SAS MEM 106
MEM @ MEM
105 106
Wed, Jan 7
Analysis
-1
L
vs POR POR
115 POR SAS 110
POR vs POR
110 115
Sun, Jan 4
Analysis
-5
W
@ IND IND
123 SAS IND 113
IND @ IND
123 113
Sat, Jan 3
Analysis
+10
W
vs NYK NYK
132 NYK SAS 134
NYK vs NYK
134 132
Thu, Jan 1
Analysis
+2
L
vs CLE CLE
113 CLE SAS 101
CLE vs CLE
101 113
Tue, Dec 30
Analysis
-12
L
vs UTA UTA
127 UTA SAS 114
UTA vs UTA
114 127
Sun, Dec 28
Analysis
-13
W
@ OKC OKC
117 SAS OKC 102
OKC @ OKC
117 102
Thu, Dec 25
Analysis
+15
W
vs OKC OKC
110 OKC SAS 130
OKC vs OKC
130 110
Wed, Dec 24
Analysis
+20
W
@ WAS WAS
124 SAS WAS 113
WAS @ WAS
124 113
Mon, Dec 22
Analysis
+11
W
@ ATL ATL
126 SAS ATL 98
ATL @ ATL
126 98
Sat, Dec 20
Analysis
+28
W
vs WAS WAS
94 WAS SAS 119
WAS vs WAS
119 94
Fri, Dec 19
Analysis
+25
W
@ OKC OKC
111 SAS OKC 109
OKC @ OKC
111 109
Sun, Dec 14
Analysis
+2
W
@ LAL LAL
132 SAS LAL 119
LAL @ LAL
132 119
Thu, Dec 11
Analysis
+13
W
@ NOP NOP
135 SAS NOP 132
NOP @ NOP
135 132
Tue, Dec 9
Analysis
+3
L
@ CLE CLE
117 SAS CLE 130
CLE @ CLE
117 130
Sat, Dec 6
Analysis
-13
W
@ ORL ORL
114 SAS ORL 112
ORL @ ORL
114 112
Thu, Dec 4
Analysis
+2
W
vs MEM MEM
119 MEM SAS 126
MEM vs MEM
126 119
Wed, Dec 3
Analysis
+7
L
@ MIN MIN
112 SAS MIN 125
MIN @ MIN
112 125
Mon, Dec 1
Analysis
-13
W
@ DEN DEN
139 SAS DEN 136
DEN @ DEN
139 136
Sat, Nov 29
Analysis
+3
W
@ POR POR
115 SAS POR 102
POR @ POR
115 102
Thu, Nov 27
Analysis
+13
L
@ PHX PHX
102 SAS PHX 111
PHX @ PHX
102 111
Mon, Nov 24
Analysis
-9
W
vs ATL ATL
126 ATL SAS 135
ATL vs ATL
135 126
Fri, Nov 21
Analysis
+9
W
vs MEM MEM
101 MEM SAS 111
MEM vs MEM
111 101
Wed, Nov 19
Analysis
+10
W
vs SAC SAC
110 SAC SAS 123
SAC vs SAC
123 110
Sun, Nov 16
Analysis
+13
L
vs GSW GSW
109 GSW SAS 108
GSW vs GSW
108 109
Sat, Nov 15
Analysis
-1
L
vs GSW GSW
125 GSW SAS 120
GSW vs GSW
120 125
Thu, Nov 13
Analysis
-5
W
@ CHI CHI
121 SAS CHI 117
CHI @ CHI
121 117
Tue, Nov 11
Analysis
+4
W
vs NOP NOP
119 NOP SAS 126
NOP vs NOP
126 119
Sun, Nov 9
Analysis
+7
W
vs HOU HOU
110 HOU SAS 121
HOU vs HOU
121 110
Sat, Nov 8
Analysis
+11
L
@ LAL LAL
116 SAS LAL 118
LAL @ LAL
116 118
Thu, Nov 6
Analysis
-2
L
@ PHX PHX
118 SAS PHX 130
PHX @ PHX
118 130
Mon, Nov 3
Analysis
-12
W
vs MIA MIA
101 MIA SAS 107
MIA vs MIA
107 101
Fri, Oct 31
Analysis
+6
W
vs TOR TOR
101 TOR SAS 121
TOR vs TOR
121 101
Mon, Oct 27
Analysis
+20
W
vs BKN BKN
107 BKN SAS 118
BKN vs BKN
118 107
Sun, Oct 26
Analysis
+11
W
@ NOP NOP
120 SAS NOP 116
NOP @ NOP
120 116
Fri, Oct 24
Analysis
+4
W
@ DAL DAL
125 SAS DAL 92
DAL @ DAL
125 92
Wed, Oct 22
Analysis
+33