This game · 157 FGA|Season model · 290 games · 39,575 shots
Indiana Fever won on finishing, not shot quality.
led the way with 29 points on 11-for-16 (69%), headlined by 4-for-6 from above the break — 9.5 more than expected overall with 50% of attempts from the rim or corner.
- Toronto Tempo created 19.3 more expected points from field-goal attempts.
- Indiana Fever outperformed expected value by 14.5 points on makes and misses.
- Q3 swung the look battle — Toronto Tempo built a +8.2 expected-point edge in that period.
Shot quality
Shot diet
Toronto Tempo (43% good looks) and Indiana Fever (41% good looks) ran comparable diets with small zone-by-zone differences.
carried the offense at the rim — 6/8 in the restricted area.
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 36% of Indiana's attempts came from the rim vs 33% of Toronto's, with Indiana leaning on the higher-value zone (36% vs 33%).
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 36% of Indiana's attempts came from the rim vs 33% of Toronto's, with Indiana leaning on the higher-value zone (36% vs 33%).
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
Toronto Tempo won by 11.5 pts
Toronto Tempo won the turnover battle by 5 (17 total TO).
Turnovers never enter the shot log — a clean process win even when looks were even.
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 insightMabrey struggled most from Rim — 1/3 against a 60% 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 →