This game · 141 FGA|Season model · 293 games · 39,996 shots
Dallas Wings won on finishing, not shot quality.

led the way with 21 points on 10-for-15 (67%), headlined by 4-for-6 in the paint — 5.2 more than expected overall (40% from the rim or corner), with Alanna Smith close behind (+5.1 on 10 points, 4-for-4 on tough looks).
- Portland Fire created 3.5 more expected points from field-goal attempts.
- Dallas Wings outperformed expected value by 17.6 points on makes and misses.
- Q1 swung the look battle — Portland Fire built a +3.8 expected-point edge in that period.
Shot quality
Shot diet
Dallas Wings attacked the rim more — 25% of attempts in the restricted area vs 13% for Portland Fire.

carried the offense at the rim — 5/6 in the restricted area.
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 38% of Portland's attempts came from above-arc threes vs 25% of Dallas's; Portland tilted here more (38% vs 25%).
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 38% of Portland's attempts came from above-arc threes vs 25% of Dallas's; Portland tilted here more (38% vs 25%).
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 22.8 pts — SQ edge said POR.
Portland Fire got the better looks, but Dallas Wings won the full process battle by 22.8 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 insightShepard's strongest zone was Paint — 67% from Paint (4/6) vs. a 40% 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 →





