This game · 139 FGA|Season model · 290 games · 39,575 shots
Atlanta Dream won — the process matched the result.
led the way with 25 points on 8-for-13 (62%), headlined by 4-for-4 in the interior — 3.7 more than expected overall on a night most other looks were tougher.
- Atlanta Dream created 1.7 more expected points from field-goal attempts.
- Dallas Wings outperformed expected value by 4.4 points on makes and misses.
- The game flipped in the fourth quarter — Dallas Wings created a +5.7 expected-point edge in Q4.
Shot quality
Shot diet
Dallas Wings lived in the midrange (33%) while Atlanta Dream was at 20% — a cleaner profile for Atlanta Dream.
carried the offense at the rim — 6/8 in the restricted area.
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 3% of Atlanta's attempts came from long midrange vs 19% of Dallas's; Dallas settled here more often (19% vs 3%).
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 3% of Atlanta's attempts came from long midrange vs 19% of Dallas's; Dallas settled here more often (19% vs 3%).
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
Dallas Wings won by 1.8 pts — SQ edge said ATL.
Atlanta Dream won 3 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 insightShepard found the right spots (56% from the rim or corner) but couldn't finish — -2.9 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 →