Clay's Almanac
WNBA · June 5, 2026
Almanac — change team skin

Repaints the site's chrome in a team's colours. Predictions, grades and the colours on each game card are unchanged.

Almanac
NBA
WNBA
Log in Join

← Back to WNBA

Phoenix Mercury at Portland Fire

PHX 78 – POR 72

June 5, 2026 · Final

Darren "Dimes" Lin

Best model for this game

Darren "Dimes" Lin
All models: 12-0
Prediction ranges

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, each team scored inside its band below — this is about where the final score lands, not a claim about the average.

Confidence level for PHX at POR

All 12 models’ predicted scores

PHX — one dot per model POR — one dot per model Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Vince Chambers
PHX 82.0–87.2 POR 79.3–84.8 Overlap 2.8 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.5–86.7 POR 79.8–84.4 Overlap 1.95 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.7–86.5 POR 80.1–84.1 Overlap 1.39 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.9–86.3 POR 80.3–83.9 Overlap 0.97 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.1–86.1 POR 80.5–83.7 Overlap 0.61 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Vince Chambers (#1)
t-statistic
13.92
p-value
9.75e-30

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Reg
PHX 82.0–87.5 POR 79.6–85.0 Overlap 3.01 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.8) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.3) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

PHX 82.5–87.1 POR 80.1–84.6 Overlap 2.13 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.8) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.3) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.8–86.8 POR 80.3–84.3 Overlap 1.56 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.8) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.3) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 83.0–86.6 POR 80.6–84.1 Overlap 1.12 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.8) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.3) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 83.2–86.4 POR 80.7–83.9 Overlap 0.76 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.8) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.3) — by 2.4 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Reg (#2)
t-statistic
13.21
p-value
8.61e-28

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Dr. Wallace
PHX 82.2–87.3 POR 79.4–84.8 Overlap 2.62 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.6 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.6–86.8 POR 79.8–84.4 Overlap 1.78 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.6 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.8–86.6 POR 80.1–84.1 Overlap 1.23 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.6 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 83.0–86.4 POR 80.3–83.9 Overlap 0.81 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.6 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.2–86.2 POR 80.5–83.7 Overlap 0.46 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.6 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Wallace (#3)
t-statistic
14.74
p-value
4.62e-32

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Kevin Tol Warning
PHX 82.8–86.8 POR 79.7–84.5 Overlap 1.7 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.6 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 83.4–86.5 POR 80.1–84.1 Overlap 0.78 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.6 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.4–86.4 POR 80.3–83.9 Overlap 0.45 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.6 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.5–86.1 POR 80.5–83.7 Overlap 0.21 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.6 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.6–85.9 POR 80.7–83.5 No overlap Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.6 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Kevin (#4)
t-statistic
16.03
p-value
1.07e-35

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Dr. Lila Shah
PHX 81.4–85.9 POR 79.2–85.5 Overlap 4.07 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.4) — by 1.3 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

PHX 81.8–85.6 POR 79.7–85.0 Overlap 3.2 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.4) — by 1.3 points. The ranges overlap almost entirely, so one game could go either way.

PHX 82.0–85.3 POR 80.1–84.6 Overlap 2.64 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.4) — by 1.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.2–85.2 POR 80.3–84.4 Overlap 2.21 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.4) — by 1.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.3–85.0 POR 80.5–84.2 Overlap 1.85 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 83.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.4) — by 1.3 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

Show the math
Model
Dr. Lila Shah (#5)
t-statistic
7.12
p-value
3.78e-11

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Ice
PHX 82.2–87.2 POR 79.3–84.8 Overlap 2.53 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.0) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.6–86.8 POR 79.7–84.3 Overlap 1.67 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.0) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.9–86.6 POR 80.0–84.0 Overlap 1.12 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.0) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 83.1–86.4 POR 80.2–83.8 Overlap 0.69 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.0) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.3–86.2 POR 80.4–83.6 Overlap 0.34 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.0) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Ice (#6)
t-statistic
15.42
p-value
6.58e-34

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Jamal Tol Warning
PHX 82.8–87.2 POR 79.7–84.6 Overlap 1.82 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.9) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 83.6–87.0 POR 80.1–84.2 Overlap 0.6 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.9) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.7–86.8 POR 80.3–84.0 Overlap 0.31 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.9) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.7–86.4 POR 80.5–83.8 Overlap 0.02 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.9) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.7 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.8–86.2 POR 80.7–83.6 No overlap Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.9) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.7 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Jamal (#7)
t-statistic
16.16
p-value
4.87e-36

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Jordan
PHX 82.5–86.7 POR 79.2–85.0 Overlap 2.51 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.8–86.4 POR 79.6–84.5 Overlap 1.7 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 83.0–86.2 POR 79.9–84.2 Overlap 1.17 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 83.2–86.0 POR 80.2–84.0 Overlap 0.76 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.3–85.9 POR 80.4–83.8 Overlap 0.43 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.5 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Jordan (#8)
t-statistic
14.65
p-value
5.09e-31

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Darren "Dimes" Lin
PHX 82.0–87.2 POR 79.3–84.4 Overlap 2.34 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 81.8) — by 2.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.5–86.8 POR 79.7–84.0 Overlap 1.51 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 81.8) — by 2.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.7–86.5 POR 79.9–83.7 Overlap 0.98 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 81.8) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 82.9–86.3 POR 80.1–83.5 Overlap 0.56 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 81.8) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.1–86.1 POR 80.3–83.3 Overlap 0.22 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.6) over Portland Fire (avg. 81.8) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Darren "Dimes" Lin (#9)
t-statistic
16.04
p-value
1.03e-35

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Maya Jefferson Tol Warning
PHX 83.1–86.7 POR 79.9–84.4 Overlap 1.31 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.9) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.8 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 83.6–86.5 POR 80.4–84.1 Overlap 0.51 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.9) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.6–86.5 POR 80.6–83.9 Overlap 0.22 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.9) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.8 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 83.8–86.2 POR 80.9–83.4 No overlap Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.9) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.8 points. The 80% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

PHX 84.0–86.0 POR 81.0–83.0 No overlap Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.9) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.1) — by 2.8 points. The 75% ranges don't overlap at all — a confident model.

Show the math
Model
Maya Jefferson (#10)
t-statistic
16.98
p-value
3.55e-38

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Lexi
PHX 82.1–87.2 POR 79.5–85.1 Overlap 2.93 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.3) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.5–86.8 POR 80.0–84.6 Overlap 2.07 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.3) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.8–86.5 POR 80.2–84.3 Overlap 1.52 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.3) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 83.0–86.3 POR 80.5–84.1 Overlap 1.09 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.3) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 83.2–86.2 POR 80.7–83.9 Overlap 0.73 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.7) over Portland Fire (avg. 82.3) — by 2.4 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Lexi (#11)
t-statistic
13.24
p-value
8.32e-28

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

Coach Sarah Watanabe
PHX 81.3–86.9 POR 79.2–84.1 Overlap 2.76 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 95 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.1) over Portland Fire (avg. 81.7) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 81.8–86.4 POR 79.6–83.7 Overlap 1.93 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 90 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.1) over Portland Fire (avg. 81.7) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.1–86.1 POR 79.9–83.4 Overlap 1.38 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 85 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.1) over Portland Fire (avg. 81.7) — by 2.4 points. The ranges overlap some — there's real uncertainty here.

PHX 82.3–85.9 POR 80.1–83.2 Overlap 0.97 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 80 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.1) over Portland Fire (avg. 81.7) — by 2.4 points. The ranges barely touch.

PHX 82.5–85.7 POR 80.2–83.1 Overlap 0.62 pts Actual: PHX 78, POR 72

In 75 out of 100 simulated runs, leans Phoenix Mercury (avg. 84.1) over Portland Fire (avg. 81.7) — by 2.4 points. The ranges barely touch.

Show the math
Model
Coach Sarah Watanabe (#12)
t-statistic
13.77
p-value
3.36e-29

A low p-value means the two teams' average scores are statistically distinguishable — even when their ranges above overlap. Overlap describes where the final score could land; the test above is about whether the two averages differ. They are different claims, and either can hold without the other.

View as table
Vince Chambers — PHX at POR — Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Level PHX range POR range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.0–87.2 79.3–84.8 2.8 pts — No
90% 82.5–86.7 79.8–84.4 1.95 pts — No
85% 82.7–86.5 80.1–84.1 1.39 pts — No
80% 82.9–86.3 80.3–83.9 0.97 pts — No
75% 83.1–86.1 80.5–83.7 0.61 pts — No
Reg — PHX at POR — Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Level PHX range POR range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.0–87.5 79.6–85.0 3.01 pts — No
90% 82.5–87.1 80.1–84.6 2.13 pts — No
85% 82.8–86.8 80.3–84.3 1.56 pts — No
80% 83.0–86.6 80.6–84.1 1.12 pts — No
75% 83.2–86.4 80.7–83.9 0.76 pts — No
Dr. Wallace — PHX at POR — Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Level PHX range POR range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.2–87.3 79.4–84.8 2.62 pts — No
90% 82.6–86.8 79.8–84.4 1.78 pts — No
85% 82.8–86.6 80.1–84.1 1.23 pts — No
80% 83.0–86.4 80.3–83.9 0.81 pts — No
75% 83.2–86.2 80.5–83.7 0.46 pts — No
Kevin — PHX at POR — Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Level PHX range POR range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.8–86.8 79.7–84.5 1.7 pts Yes No
90% 83.4–86.5 80.1–84.1 0.78 pts Yes No
85% 83.4–86.4 80.3–83.9 0.45 pts Yes No
80% 83.5–86.1 80.5–83.7 0.21 pts Yes No
75% 83.6–85.9 80.7–83.5 — pts Yes No
Dr. Lila Shah — PHX at POR — Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Level PHX range POR range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 81.4–85.9 79.2–85.5 4.07 pts — No
90% 81.8–85.6 79.7–85.0 3.2 pts — No
85% 82.0–85.3 80.1–84.6 2.64 pts — No
80% 82.2–85.2 80.3–84.4 2.21 pts — No
75% 82.3–85.0 80.5–84.2 1.85 pts — No
Ice — PHX at POR — Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Level PHX range POR range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.2–87.2 79.3–84.8 2.53 pts — No
90% 82.6–86.8 79.7–84.3 1.67 pts — No
85% 82.9–86.6 80.0–84.0 1.12 pts — No
80% 83.1–86.4 80.2–83.8 0.69 pts — No
75% 83.3–86.2 80.4–83.6 0.34 pts — No
Jamal — PHX at POR — Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Level PHX range POR range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.8–87.2 79.7–84.6 1.82 pts Yes No
90% 83.6–87.0 80.1–84.2 0.6 pts Yes No
85% 83.7–86.8 80.3–84.0 0.31 pts Yes No
80% 83.7–86.4 80.5–83.8 0.02 pts Yes No
75% 83.8–86.2 80.7–83.6 — pts Yes No
Jordan — PHX at POR — Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Level PHX range POR range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.5–86.7 79.2–85.0 2.51 pts — No
90% 82.8–86.4 79.6–84.5 1.7 pts — No
85% 83.0–86.2 79.9–84.2 1.17 pts — No
80% 83.2–86.0 80.2–84.0 0.76 pts — No
75% 83.3–85.9 80.4–83.8 0.43 pts — No
Darren "Dimes" Lin — PHX at POR — Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Level PHX range POR range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.0–87.2 79.3–84.4 2.34 pts — No
90% 82.5–86.8 79.7–84.0 1.51 pts — No
85% 82.7–86.5 79.9–83.7 0.98 pts — No
80% 82.9–86.3 80.1–83.5 0.56 pts — No
75% 83.1–86.1 80.3–83.3 0.22 pts — No
Maya Jefferson — PHX at POR — Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Level PHX range POR range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 83.1–86.7 79.9–84.4 1.31 pts Yes No
90% 83.6–86.5 80.4–84.1 0.51 pts Yes No
85% 83.6–86.5 80.6–83.9 0.22 pts Yes No
80% 83.8–86.2 80.9–83.4 — pts Yes No
75% 84.0–86.0 81.0–83.0 — pts Yes No
Lexi — PHX at POR — Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Level PHX range POR range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 82.1–87.2 79.5–85.1 2.93 pts — No
90% 82.5–86.8 80.0–84.6 2.07 pts — No
85% 82.8–86.5 80.2–84.3 1.52 pts — No
80% 83.0–86.3 80.5–84.1 1.09 pts — No
75% 83.2–86.2 80.7–83.9 0.73 pts — No
Coach Sarah Watanabe — PHX at POR — Actual: PHX 78, POR 72
Level PHX range POR range Overlap Tol Warning Actual landed in range?
95% 81.3–86.9 79.2–84.1 2.76 pts — No
90% 81.8–86.4 79.6–83.7 1.93 pts — No
85% 82.1–86.1 79.9–83.4 1.38 pts — No
80% 82.3–85.9 80.1–83.2 0.97 pts — No
75% 82.5–85.7 80.2–83.1 0.62 pts — No