Lakers’ shooting statistics in Game 1 may signal positive implications for Rockets.

The initial week of the 2026 NBA playoffs has not presented many unexpected outcomes. The seventh and eighth seeds from both conferences progressed through the play-in tournament. During the opening weekend of the playoffs, home teams secured victories in seven of the eight Game 1s, winning by an average margin of 17.7 points. Only one game throughout the weekend was decided by fewer than ten points.

However, that close game was somewhat unexpected, as the fourth-seeded Los Angeles Lakers triumphed over the fifth-seeded Houston Rockets. Despite the absence of Houston’s top scorer, Kevin Durant, for Game 1, the Lakers were considered underdogs at home due to the absence of their leading two scorers, Luka Doncic and Austin Reaves.

Among 16 NBA analysts from ESPN who predicted the series outcome, 15 favored Houston.

Nevertheless, with 27 points from Luke Kennard and a near-triple-double from 41-year-old LeBron James, the Lakers outperformed the visiting Rockets. Houston never held a lead greater than two points, while the Lakers extended their lead to as much as 16 before ultimately winning by nine.

This outcome could alter the series’ trajectory and raises significant questions about a Rockets team that may face upheaval and roster changes this summer if they do not succeed against a Lakers team dealing with injuries.

However, a deeper analysis suggests that the Lakers’ Game 1 win might have been an anomaly, with their apparent dominance potentially misleading. Underlying statistics and recent playoff trends present cautionary signs for the victorious Lakers and offer a reason for optimism and patience for the Rockets as both teams gear up for a pivotal Game 2 on Tuesday.

Let’s delve into how the Lakers established several shooting records in Game 1 and why, paradoxically, this might be advantageous for the Rockets.

Shotmaking versus shot quality

Despite the absence of Doncic and Reaves, the Lakers’ offense was formidable on Saturday. Their effective field goal percentage, which accounts for the additional value of three-pointers, was 68.2%. This marks a franchise playoff record, significant considering the Lakers have participated in the most postseason games of any team.

However, according to GeniusIQ tracking, their calculated shot probability, which estimates expected eFG% based on factors like shot location and the shooter’s skill, was only 51.5% in Game 1. The difference between these two figures is referred to as “shotmaking,” and the Lakers’ plus-16.7% figure is among the highest recorded.

For perspective, in the other Game 1s this postseason, no other team’s shotmaking approached the Lakers’ level.

Game 1 shotmaking

Historically, the last time the Lakers achieved better shotmaking in any game—regular season or playoffs—was in 2018, a time when their leading scorers were Isaiah Thomas and Julius Randle. The last occasion the Rockets allowed such exceptional shotmaking was in 2019, during their notable 159-158 shootout against the Washington Wizards.

In the playoffs specifically, the Lakers’ Game 1 shotmaking ranks ninth out of 2,086 single-game performances since the 2013-14 season, according to GeniusIQ’s database. It was the highest mark for any Game 1 in that timeframe.

Los Angeles benefited from remarkable team-wide overperformance. Of the eight Lakers who took shots in Game 1, seven surpassed their calculated shot probability, often by significant margins.

However, this may not bode well for the Lakers’ prospects moving forward.

A history lesson

While the Lakers were excelling offensively, Houston struggled in Durant’s absence. The Rockets not only failed to create many quality scoring opportunities but also were less accurate than anticipated on their attempts.

Houston underperformed its expected effective field goal percentage by 5.0%, resulting in a staggering 21.7% disparity in shotmaking between the two teams. This margin ranks as the 13th largest in a playoff game since 2013-14 and the second highest in a Game 1.

However, previous instances of significant shotmaking disparities should provide hope for Houston.

The record for the largest shotmaking gap in a Game 1 belongs to the 2016 San Antonio Spurs, who opened the Western Conference semifinals with a 32-point victory over Durant’s Oklahoma City Thunder, thanks to a 25.0% disparity. Yet, the shotmaking evened out throughout the series, and the Thunder ultimately upset the 67-win Spurs in six games.

Numerous other examples from the past decade illustrate that a team can experience a substantial shotmaking disparity in Game 1 and still lose the series. For instance, in 2017, Houston defeated San Antonio by 27 points in Game 1 with a 17.4% shotmaking gap, but the Spurs advanced in six games; in 2018, the Boston Celtics held an 18.5% shotmaking advantage in Game 1 against Cleveland, winning by 25 points, yet James’ Cavaliers prevailed in seven; and in 2019, Boston outperformed the Bucks in Game 1 and won by 22 points, but Milwaukee won the series in five.

In 2020, the top-seeded Lakers found themselves on the other side of a shotmaking gap in their playoff opener, unexpectedly losing Game 1 in the bubble to the eighth-seeded Portland Trail Blazers. However, their fortunes changed, and James’ Lakers won the next four games to embark on their championship journey.

Teams are aware that they cannot rely on outlier shotmaking to persist over multiple games. Reflecting on the 2019 Bucks-Celtics series, a member of the Milwaukee front office later remarked that he was never concerned, even after his team’s Game 1 loss, because he recognized that Boston’s single-game shotmaking advantage was not sustainable. Ultimately, the Bucks won four consecutive games by an average of 16.3 points.

The Rockets may share a similar sentiment following their Game 1 setback. Among all teams in all games this season, the Lakers’ shot quality in Game 1 was in the 16th percentile. The Rockets should take solace in that defensive performance, even if the Lakers’ actual eFG% was in the 97th percentile.

The Lakers’ historic overperformance meant they scored 22 more points than they “should” have based on their shot quality. Without that advantage, Houston likely would have emerged victorious.

As it stands, even with those 22 “extra” points, the Lakers’ final winning margin was in single digits. This is atypical in a league where make-or-miss plays dominate: For teams with shotmaking gaps of at least 20% in the playoffs since 2013-14, the average margin of victory is 29.9 points. Such games are typically blowouts.

Yet, the Lakers won by only nine points in Game 1. A victory is a victory, but history indicates they should have won by a significantly larger margin given their exceptional shotmaking advantage.

Margin of victory for teams with large shotmaking gaps

Improbable, but not impossible

It is important to note that there can be some meaningful signals within the shotmaking variance. For example, the New York Knicks managed to secure a Game 1 victory against the Celtics last year due to a seemingly unsustainable shotmaking gap—and then replicated that success in Game 2, ultimately upsetting the series.

It is not out of the realm of possibility that the Lakers could follow a similar trajectory against the Rockets. However, it is unlikely.

From beyond the arc, the Lakers shot 10-for-19 (53%) in Game 1, highlighted by a flawless 5-for-5 performance from Kennard. While Kennard is an exceptional shooter—his 44% career mark from three-point range is the best among active players—he is still likely to miss some three-point attempts as the series progresses. He has now attempted at least five three-pointers in 241 career games, and Saturday’s performance was only the second time he did so without a miss.

Similarly, the Lakers excelled in midrange shooting this season, converting 49% of their two-pointers that were not taken in the restricted area, according to GeniusIQ. Only the Denver Nuggets had a higher accuracy rate. However, in Game 1 against Houston, the Lakers converted 65% of those midrange shots, which is not sustainable over a larger sample size. The other 15 playoff teams all shot 50% or worse from those areas over the weekend.

Exceptional shooting in a single playoff game is often random, with little predictive value for subsequent games. Teams that exceed their expected eFG% by at least 12% in a playoff game typically have an average shotmaking figure of plus-0.01% in their next game in the series, based on an analysis of data from GeniusIQ and ESPN Research.

Meanwhile, Houston excelled in more replicable statistical categories in Game 1: The Rockets secured 21 offensive rebounds and recorded 13 steals against the Lakers’ point-guard-less lineup, allowing them to attempt 93 shots compared to the Lakers’ 66. (Additionally, the Lakers did not compensate with extra free throws; they were 17-for-26 at the line, compared to 17-for-25 for Houston.)

Dominating the possession battle was the Rockets’ successful strategy during the regular season, and they appear poised to continue that approach against Los Angeles.

Nonetheless, losing Game 1 remains a concern for Houston, particularly given the unusual timing of this series due to the injuries to key players. Each Lakers victory extends the timeline for Doncic and Reaves to return. If Durant remains sidelined following his unexpected Game 1 absence, the Rockets could face difficulties regardless of the Lakers’ shooting; their average shot quality was even lower than that of the Lakers in Game 1 (though the Rockets rebounded many of their own misses, which should have allowed them to score more).

Prior to the series, I anticipated that the Lakers would be unexpectedly competitive against Houston despite their injuries, as lineups featuring James and shooters performed well during the regular season. However, I do not expect those shooters to maintain their historical outlier performance for many more games, and Houston’s defense, which ranked fifth in efficiency during the regular season, remains strong.

It may not appear so after the mismatch in Game 1, but the Rockets have a clear path forward. This begins with the Lakers’ shooting regressing to the mean on Tuesday night.