This game · 137 FGA|Season model · 290 games · 39,575 shots
Portland Fire won by getting the better shots.
led the way with 24 points on 7-for-13 (54%), headlined by 3-for-4 from the corner — 7.0 more than expected overall on a night most other looks were tougher.
- Portland Fire created 9.7 more expected points from field-goal attempts.
- Seattle Storm outperformed expected value by 9.8 points on makes and misses.
- Q1 swung the look battle — Portland Fire built a +5.0 expected-point edge in that period.
Shot quality
Shot diet
Seattle Storm lived in the midrange (22%) while Portland Fire was at 9% — a cleaner profile for Portland Fire.
carried the offense at the rim — 6/6 in the restricted area.
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 30% of Seattle's attempts came from above-arc threes vs 46% of Portland's; Portland tilted here more (46% vs 30%).
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 30% of Seattle's attempts came from above-arc threes vs 46% of Portland's; Portland tilted here more (46% vs 30%).
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
Portland Fire won by 12.3 pts
Portland Fire 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 insightCarleton's strongest zone was Cor 3 — 75% from Cor 3 (3/4) vs. a 42% expectation.
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 →