No dimension is above the 75th percentile. Defense is the weak spot.
Offense 49.4 · Defense 48.4 · Impact 49.0
| Date or season | Value |
|---|---|
| 2025-12-31 | 0 |
| 2026-01-02 | 0 |
| 2026-01-03 | 0 |
| 2026-01-05 | 3 |
| 2026-01-07 | 7 |
| 2026-01-08 | 2 |
| 2026-01-28 | 0 |
| 2026-03-24 | 7 |
| 2026-03-29 | 10 |
| 2026-04-12 | 0 |
| Reference | 4.3 |
| Measure | Value |
|---|---|
| Salary | 2,902,080 |
| Modeled range low | 905,149.65 |
| Modeled range high | 7,195,822.23 |
| Typical range low | 1,572,416.86 |
| Typical range high | 4,230,754.49 |
Average points scored per game played.
| Game | Date | PTS | 7-game average |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2025-10-26 | 0 | Unavailable |
| 2 | 2025-10-28 | 6 | Unavailable |
| 3 | 2025-10-30 | 6 | Unavailable |
| 4 | 2025-11-01 | 0 | Unavailable |
| 5 | 2025-11-02 | 3 | Unavailable |
| 6 | 2025-11-04 | 2 | Unavailable |
| 7 | 2025-11-07 | 8 | 3.57 |
| 8 | 2025-11-10 | 7 | 4.57 |
| 9 | 2025-11-12 | 5 | 4.43 |
| 10 | 2025-11-22 | 3 | 4 |
| 11 | 2025-11-23 | 6 | 4.86 |
| 12 | 2025-11-26 | 3 | 4.86 |
| 13 | 2025-11-28 | 0 | 4.57 |
| 14 | 2025-11-29 | 7 | 4.43 |
| 15 | 2025-12-01 | 8 | 4.57 |
| 16 | 2025-12-03 | 10 | 5.29 |
| 17 | 2025-12-05 | 2 | 5.14 |
| 18 | 2025-12-07 | 13 | 6.14 |
| 19 | 2025-12-22 | 7 | 6.71 |
| 20 | 2025-12-23 | 0 | 6.71 |
| 21 | 2025-12-29 | 7 | 6.71 |
| 22 | 2025-12-31 | 0 | 5.57 |
| 23 | 2026-01-02 | 0 | 4.14 |
| 24 | 2026-01-03 | 0 | 3.86 |
| 25 | 2026-01-05 | 3 | 2.43 |
| 26 | 2026-01-07 | 7 | 2.43 |
| 27 | 2026-01-08 | 2 | 2.71 |
| 28 | 2026-01-28 | 0 | 1.71 |
| 29 | 2026-03-24 | 7 | 2.71 |
| 30 | 2026-03-29 | 10 | 4.14 |
| 31 | 2026-04-12 | 0 | 4.14 |
| Date | Matchup | PTS | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-10-26 | CHA @ WAS | 0 | W |
| 2025-10-28 | CHA @ MIA | 6 | L |
| 2025-10-30 | CHA vs. ORL | 6 | L |
| 2025-11-01 | CHA vs. MIN | 0 | L |
| 2025-11-02 | CHA vs. UTA | 3 | W |
| 2025-11-04 | CHA @ NOP | 2 | L |
| 2025-11-07 | CHA @ MIA | 8 | L |
| 2025-11-10 | CHA vs. LAL | 7 | L |
| 2025-11-12 | CHA vs. MIL | 5 | W |
| 2025-11-22 | CHA vs. LAC | 3 | L |
| 2025-11-23 | CHA @ ATL | 6 | L |
| 2025-11-26 | CHA vs. NYK | 3 | L |
| 2025-11-28 | CHA vs. CHI | 0 | W |
| 2025-11-29 | CHA vs. TOR | 7 | W |
| 2025-12-01 | CHA @ BKN | 8 | L |
| 2025-12-03 | CHA @ NYK | 10 | L |
| 2025-12-05 | CHA @ TOR | 2 | W |
| 2025-12-07 | CHA vs. DEN | 13 | L |
| 2025-12-22 | CHA @ CLE | 7 | L |
| 2025-12-23 | CHA vs. WAS | 0 | W |
| 2025-12-29 | CHA vs. MIL | 7 | L |
| 2025-12-31 | CHA vs. GSW | 0 | L |
| 2026-01-02 | CHA @ MIL | 0 | L |
| 2026-01-03 | CHA @ CHI | 0 | W |
| 2026-01-05 | CHA @ OKC | 3 | W |
| 2026-01-07 | CHA vs. TOR | 7 | L |
| 2026-01-08 | CHA vs. IND | 2 | L |
| 2026-01-28 | CHA @ MEM | 0 | W |
| 2026-03-24 | CHA vs. SAC | 7 | W |
| 2026-03-29 | CHA vs. BOS | 10 | L |
| 2026-04-12 | CHA @ NYK | 0 | W |
Regular-season players whose current directory record lists the same primary position, across all experience levels. One row per player; stable seasons require at least 15 games and 10 minutes per game. This is descriptive context, not a similarity score. Sample: 151 eligible players with an observed value.
Percentile uses a tie-aware rank over the full eligible population; higher percentile always means better performance.
The distribution above compares this player with the eligible population. Historical comparables are a separate analysis; one nearby metric value does not establish a similar player.
38/95 field goals by zone · Source: NBA.com Stats (shotchartdetail), regular season.
Colour is FG% against the league in that zone: orange above, grey below. Paler zones take fewer of the player’s attempts; zones under 10 attempts show “—”.| Zone | Made–att. | FG% | League % | vs league | Share |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| At the rim (0–4 ft) | 8–14 | 57.1% | 67.1% | −10.0 pts | 14.7% |
| Short, left (4–10 ft) | 0–1 |
| Season | Value |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 0.02 |
This view is observed history only. Predictive projections are withheld. Published comparable player-seasons, when available below, are descriptive historical context rather than a forecast. Methodology
Historical similarity, not a forecast.
Prior-dominated. Admitted possessions cut the prior variance of total KOBE by only 15% (threshold 50%), so the prior still sets most of this estimate.
Offensive scoring impact
−0.92
| 50% | [−2.19, +0.36] |
|---|---|
| 80% | [−3.34, +1.51] |
| 95% | [−4.63, +2.79] |
Positive values mean fewer opponent points
−0.42
| 50% | [−1.50, +0.66] |
|---|---|
| 80% | [−2.47, +1.64] |
| 95% | [−3.56, +2.72] |
OFF + DEF from the joint posterior
−1.34
| 50% | [−3.07, +0.39] |
|---|---|
| 80% | [−4.62, +1.95] |
| 95% | [−6.36, +3.69] |
Producing like a $2.6M/yr player on a $2.9M rookie-scale deal: the CBA set this salary, so the gap is not a market verdict.
The going rate for this production is $1.9M to $3.5M.
Pay set by the CBA, not the market.
| 0.0% |
| 41.7% |
| — |
| 1.1% |
| Short, middle (4–10 ft) | 6–13 | 46.2% | 45.1% | +1.1 pts | 13.7% |
|---|
| Short, right (4–10 ft) | 0–4 | 0.0% | 42.7% | — | 4.2% |
|---|
| Mid-range, left baseline (10–16 ft) | 0–0 | — | 42.2% | — | 0.0% |
|---|
| Mid-range, left wing (10–16 ft) | 0–0 | — | 42.6% | — | 0.0% |
|---|
| Mid-range, middle (10–16 ft) | 0–3 | 0.0% | 46.5% | — | 3.2% |
|---|
| Mid-range, right wing (10–16 ft) | 0–0 | — | 44.3% | — | 0.0% |
|---|
| Mid-range, right baseline (10–16 ft) | 0–0 | — | 44.4% | — | 0.0% |
|---|
| Long two, left baseline | 0–0 | — | 39.4% | — | 0.0% |
|---|
| Long two, left wing | 0–0 | — | 39.3% | — | 0.0% |
|---|
| Long two, middle | 0–0 | — | 41.0% | — | 0.0% |
|---|
| Long two, right wing | 0–0 | — | 40.0% | — | 0.0% |
|---|
| Long two, right baseline | 0–0 | — | 39.1% | — | 0.0% |
|---|
| Left corner three | 5–12 | 41.7% | 38.7% | +3.0 pts | 12.6% |
|---|
| Right corner three | 3–11 | 27.3% | 38.6% | −11.3 pts | 11.6% |
|---|
| Above-break three, left | 7–15 | 46.7% | 35.8% | +10.9 pts | 15.8% |
|---|
| Above-break three, top | 3–7 | 42.9% | 35.4% | — | 7.4% |
|---|
| Above-break three, right | 4–6 | 66.7% | 35.0% | — | 6.3% |
|---|
| Deep three | 2–9 | 22.2% | 31.7% | — | 9.5% |
|---|
| Split | Value |
|---|---|
| Field goals | 40.0% |
| Threes | 40.0% |
| Free throws | 82.1% |
| True shooting | 58.6% |
The redesigned pillars are not available for this player. The legacy aggregate is shown where available.
Published recorded activity is descriptive only. Full opportunity-adjusted DAWG pillars remain unpublished; source coverage is unverified.
A fixed descriptive score of provider-recorded activity: equal-weighted mid-percentiles across six recorded categories, normalized per 36 provider minutes and compared with same-phase eligible players.
Regular season 2025-26. Average of ten percentiles (0–100) against his position in the same era; against every position it is 41.1. No starts on record, so he is compared with the whole league. Provisional: 368 minutes is below the 492-minute threshold, so the profile is shown but not ranked. Limited minutes pull estimates toward the league. Full edition
| Action | Count | Minutes | Observed /36 | Adjusted /36 | 80% range | Pctl (pos) | Pctl (league) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Steals | 5 | 368 | 0.49 | 0.80 | 0.55–1.07 | 6.0 | 6.0 |
| Blocks | 3 | 368 | 0.29 | 0.39 | 0.19–0.62 | 28.9 | 28.9 |
| Offensive rebounds | 13 | 368 | 1.27 | 1.32 | 0.91–1.77 | 50.1 | 50.1 |
| Assists | 24 | 368 | 2.35 | 2.46 | 1.88–3.07 | 28.1 | 28.1 |
| Deflections (hustle tracking) | 12 | 315 | 1.37 | 1.62 | 1.17–2.11 | 10.5 | 10.5 |
| Loose balls recovered (hustle tracking) | 4 | 315 | 0.46 | 0.69 | 0.51–0.87 | 47.5 | 47.5 |
| Charges drawn (hustle tracking) | 0 | 315 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.00–0.09 | 53.3 | 53.3 |
| Contested shots (hustle tracking) | 63 | 315 | 7.20 | 7.19 | 6.10–8.32 | 71.4 | 71.4 |
| Screen assists (hustle tracking) | 4 | 315 | 0.46 | 0.52 | 0.25–0.83 | 44.6 | 44.6 |
| Box-outs (hustle tracking) | 8 | 315 | 0.91 | 0.94 | 0.58–1.35 | 70.9 | 70.9 |
DAWG — Recorded Activity combines ten recorded actions. Four come from the box score: steals, blocks, offensive rebounds and assists. Six come from the NBA's hustle tracking: deflections, loose balls recovered, charges drawn, contested shots, screen assists and box-outs. It does not capture rotations, help defence, transition effort or missed assignments. It is a recorded-activity profile, not effort, defensive quality or total value, and it is separate from the published six-family NBA DAWG.
Each action is counted per 36 minutes. Hustle tracking covers only the games the league tracked, so hustle rates use the minutes from those games. In this edition, those games account for 99% of all minutes played. The adjusted rate blends a player's record with the league population, using a Gamma–Poisson model fitted on nearby seasons (2022–2025), never on the season being scored. Fewer minutes means more pull toward the league average.
Each player is judged against his own position. Guards, forwards and centres come from each player's most frequent starting slot: a coach's listing, not something inferred from the stats being ranked. A guard's blocks are compared with other guards' blocks, and a centre's assists with other centres'. Unusual activity for a role (a guard blocking shots or drawing charges, a centre passing) therefore counts for what it is, instead of being drowned out by the specialists. The rulers are frozen and come from the same era: guards 156, forwards 147, centres 74 player-seasons from 2026 with at least 492 minutes and all ten actions recorded.
The DAWG index is the plain average of the ten position-relative percentiles. The league-wide index beside it averages percentiles against every position (381 player-seasons, reference 7482b5f56126), and it leans toward centres, who rack up box-outs, contests and screen assists. League rates have moved a lot; box-outs per 36, for example, fell by about four-fifths between 2017-18 and 2022-23. So percentiles are relative to the era, not absolute across eras. The equal weights are a fixed policy, not learned values. If any action is unknown, the index is not shown, and the rest are never re-weighted.
Defensive rebounds, turnovers and personal fouls are shown separately and are not subtracted.
The zero line is shared by OFF, DEF, and Total for Liam McNeeley; positive DEF means fewer opponent points. Every interval comes from the joint posterior, so Total reflects the OFF/DEF correlation (0.07) and is not the sum of the component intervals.
| Component | Summary |
|---|---|
| OFF | mean −0.92; 50% interval [−2.19, +0.36]; 80% interval [−3.34, +1.51]; 95% interval [−4.63, +2.79] |
| DEF | mean −0.42; 50% interval [−1.50, +0.66]; 80% interval [−2.47, +1.64]; 95% interval [−3.56, +2.72] |
| Total | mean −1.34; 50% interval [−3.07, +0.39]; 80% interval [−4.62, +1.95]; 95% interval [−6.36, +3.69] |
| Season | Age | OFF | DEF | KOBE | 80% range |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-26 now | 20 | −0.9 | −0.4 | −1.3 | [−4.6, +2.0] |
| 2026-27 | 21 | −0.2 | −0.1 | −0.3 | [−3.7, +3.0] |
| 2027-28 | 22 | +0.3 | +0.2 | +0.5 | [−2.9, +3.8] |
| 2028-29 | 23 | +0.7 | +0.4 | +1.1 | [−2.3, +4.5] |
The player's rating if he plays. Minutes, injuries, retirement and role changes are not modeled. Ranges widen each season because form, role and aging are less certain further out.
Model kobe-nba-season-aging-v1 · run 0d48bd7dc965 · edition nba-kobe-public-v2-ad362d9884dc
How much the team's chance of winning moved while this player was on the floor. Every possession's swing is split across the ten players on the court, so this is shared credit, not adjusted for teammates. KOBE above is the adjusted measure.
| Game | Situation | Team win prob. | Swing, pct. pts | Share, wins |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| vs TOR | Q4 6:12, up 2, on defense | 60% → 47% | −13 | −0.025 |
| vs TOR | Q4 7:03, up 1, with the ball | 60% → 71% | +11 | +0.022 |
| vs TOR | Q4 3:06, down 5, with the ball | 17% → 27% | +10 | +0.020 |
| vs MIL | Q4 10:46, tied, on defense | 44% → 35% | −9 | −0.018 |
| vs GSW | Q4 10:05, down 1, on defense | 38% → 29% | −9 | −0.018 |
| vs MIL | Q4 11:02, down 3, with the ball | 35% → 44% | +9 | +0.018 |
| at MIL | Q3 0:45, up 1, with the ball | 47% → 56% | +9 | +0.018 |
| vs GSW | Q4 8:27, down 2, on defense | 33% → 24% | −9 | −0.018 |
| vs GSW | Q4 12:00, up 2, on defense | 53% → 44% | −9 | −0.018 |
| at NOP | Q3 1:54, up 2, with the ball | 58% → 66% | +8 | +0.016 |
See him among every contract → · How the value is built → · Salary data: Basketball-Reference.