This game · 130 FGA|Season model · 290 games · 39,575 shots
Phoenix Mercury won on finishing, not shot quality.

led the way with 27 points on 6-for-11 (55%), headlined by 4-for-7 from above the break — 6.1 more than expected overall on a night most other looks were tougher.
- Chicago Sky created 4.9 more expected points from field-goal attempts.
- Chicago Sky outperformed expected value by 1.8 points on makes and misses.
- Q3 swung the look battle — Chicago Sky built a +3.4 expected-point edge in that period.
Shot quality
Shot diet
Phoenix Mercury (10% good looks) and Chicago Sky (18% good looks) ran comparable diets with small zone-by-zone differences.

bailed out the offense from the midrange — 2/3 from short midrange, a zone most players avoid for good reason.
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 9% of Chicago's attempts came from short midrange vs 21% of Phoenix's; Phoenix settled here more often (21% vs 9%).
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 9% of Chicago's attempts came from short midrange vs 21% of Phoenix's; Phoenix settled here more often (21% vs 9%).
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
Phoenix Mercury won by 8.2 pts — SQ edge said CHI.
Chicago Sky got the better looks, but Phoenix Mercury won the full process battle by 8.2 pts.
Process edge blends expected points from shots, finishing, free throws, turnover cost, and second-chance value — not just who found the better offense.
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 insightCopper struggled most from S.Mid — 0/3 against a 39% baseline.
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 →




