This game · 141 FGA|Season model · 357 games · 48,742 shots
Phoenix Mercury won on finishing, not shot quality.
led the way with 31 points on 10-for-17 (59%), headlined by 7-for-9 in the paint — 6.4 more than expected overall on a night most other looks were tougher.
- Dallas Wings created 7.1 more expected points from field-goal attempts.
- Dallas Wings outperformed expected value by 2.9 points on makes and misses.
- Q3 swung the look battle — Dallas Wings built a +8.8 expected-point edge in that period.
Shot quality
Shot diet
Dallas Wings lived in the midrange (42%) while Phoenix Mercury was at 22% — a cleaner profile for Phoenix Mercury.
bailed out the offense from the midrange — 3/4 from short midrange, a zone most players avoid for good reason.
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 19% of Dallas's attempts came from the paint vs 40% of Phoenix's; Phoenix tilted here more (40% vs 19%).
This is where the shot diets diverged most — 19% of Dallas's attempts came from the paint vs 40% of Phoenix's; Phoenix tilted here more (40% vs 19%).
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
Phoenix Mercury won by 3.8 pts — SQ edge said DAL.
Dallas Wings got the better looks, but Phoenix Mercury carried the process scorecard.
Phoenix Mercury won the free-throw line by 12 pts and the turnover battle by 4. Those stops never show up in expected pts per attempt.
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 insightCopper's strongest zone was Paint — 78% from Paint (7/9) vs. a 39% 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 →