This game · 120 FGA|Season model · 290 games · 39,575 shots
Indiana Fever won by getting the better shots.

led the way with 23 points on 9-for-17 (53%), headlined by 4-for-4 in the interior — 3.9 more than expected overall on a night most other looks were tougher.
- Indiana Fever created 5.5 more expected points from field-goal attempts.
- Indiana Fever outperformed expected value by 6.0 points on makes and misses.
- Indiana Fever created volume from above the break (41%) without the same value as rim or corner looks.
Shot quality
Shot diet
Los Angeles Sparks got the cleaner diet — 54% rim or corner looks vs 30% for Indiana Fever.

carried the offense at the rim — 7/7 in the restricted area.
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 24% of Indiana's attempts came from the rim vs 44% of Los Angeles's, with Los Angeles leaning on the higher-value zone (44% vs 24%).
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 24% of Indiana's attempts came from the rim vs 44% of Los Angeles's, with Los Angeles leaning on the higher-value zone (44% vs 24%).
Possession context
Inferred from ESPN play-by-play — transition, steals, and offensive rebounds before each FGA. Not official possession tracking.
Process scorecard
Full process edge
Indiana Fever won by 23.2 pts
Indiana Fever won 2 of 3 process categories outside the shot log.
Free throws, turnovers, and offensive rebounds come from ESPN box scores — complementary to FGA-only shot quality above.
Tracked FGA
ESPN box score
Process value (pts)
Process total = expected pts from shots + finishing + free throws − turnover cost + second-chance value (1.05 expected pts per OReb). SQ edge alone ignores the last three terms.
Player shots
Key insightBurrell found the right spots (60% from the rim or corner) but couldn't finish — -2.5 below expected on those looks.
Expected value is an estimate from public shot data — location, shooter history, and shot clock. No defender distance, closeout speed, spacing, or proprietary tracking.
Learn how it works →





