This game · 129 FGA|Season model · 290 games · 39,575 shots
Toronto Tempo won on finishing, not shot quality.
led the way with 19 points on 7-for-9 (78%), headlined by 5-for-5 in the interior — 6.1 more than expected overall on a night most other looks were tougher.
- Portland Fire created 13.4 more expected points from field-goal attempts.
- Both teams finished below expectation — Toronto Tempo held up better (5.3 pts below expected).
- Q2 swung the look battle — Portland Fire built a +7.9 expected-point edge in that period.
Shot quality
Shot diet
Portland Fire attacked the rim more — 36% of attempts in the restricted area vs 27% for Toronto Tempo.
carried the offense at the rim — 5/6 in the restricted area.
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 36% of Portland's attempts came from the rim vs 27% of Toronto's, with Portland leaning on the higher-value zone (36% vs 27%).
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 36% of Portland's attempts came from the rim vs 27% of Toronto's, with Portland leaning on the higher-value zone (36% vs 27%).
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 4.0 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 insightHarrison struggled most from Above — 0/3 against a 37% 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 →