This game · 127 FGA|Season model · 290 games · 39,575 shots
Los Angeles Sparks won on finishing, not shot quality.

led the way with 16 points on 5-for-7 (71%), headlined by 3-for-3 in the paint — 5.1 more than expected overall on a night most other looks were tougher, with Ariel Atkins close behind (+4.2 on 8 points).
- Washington Mystics created 0.8 more expected points from field-goal attempts.
- Los Angeles Sparks outperformed expected value by 10.0 points on finishing.
- Q2 swung the look battle — Los Angeles Sparks built a +3.3 expected-point edge in that period.
Shot quality
Shot diet
Washington Mystics got the cleaner diet — 36% rim or corner looks vs 18% for Los Angeles Sparks.

carried the offense at the rim — 6/7 in the restricted area.
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 12% of Los Angeles's attempts came from the rim vs 31% of Washington's, with Washington leaning on the higher-value zone (31% vs 12%).
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 12% of Los Angeles's attempts came from the rim vs 31% of Washington's, with Washington leaning on the higher-value zone (31% vs 12%).
Possession context
WAS ran more early offense in this game.
Washington Mystics got 31% of FGA in transition (1.01 expected pts/att) vs 15% for Los Angeles Sparks (0.91 expected pts/att).
Inferred from ESPN play-by-play — transition, steals, and offensive rebounds before each FGA. Not official possession tracking.
Process scorecard
Full process edge
Los Angeles Sparks won by 14.1 pts — SQ edge said WAS.
Washington Mystics got the better looks, but Los Angeles Sparks won the full process battle by 14.1 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 insightAustin was sharp — 70% of attempts from good spots, headlined by 86% from Rim (6/7) against a 59% 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 →








