Julian Champagnie · Court Sentiment

Verdict

29.9%34.1%35.9%

29.9%Negative747 comments

34.1%Neutral853 comments

35.9%Positive898 comments

+6Net sentimentpositive minus negative

n=2,498 comments about Julian ChampagnieUnofficial

Receipts

What the room said about Julian Champagnie, verbatim: the highest-scoring comments in each class.

Exhibit 01Negative.no flair
Champagnie couldn’t shoot a ball into the ocean
Post · [Katz] The Knicks have pulled off the greatest comeback in NBA Finals history. They lead the series 3-1. Madison Square Garden is absolute mahem.▲ 150Jun 11, 2026Source ↗
Exhibit 02Negative.no flair
Then Champagnie bricked the everliving fuck out of it. Love to see it
Post-game thread · NYK 105 @ SAS 95 · R4 G1 · Jun 3▲ 38Jun 4, 2026Source ↗
Exhibit 03Negative.GSW flair
Barnes probably not the answer but holy shit watching Champagnie do what he did tonight made my eyes bleed
Post · Harrison Barnes DNP-CD in Game 4 once again while Devin Vassell and Stephon Castle continue their 10 pt game streak with 18 pts , 5 Rebs and 13 pts respectively▲ 38Jun 11, 2026Source ↗

Method

A receipt is a top-scoring comment about Julian Champagnie that cleared the classifier's confidence bar and a second pass confirming it is about him. No usernames: the site judges players, not commenters.

Fans

Of what r/NBA says about Julian Champagnie, his own Spurs fans are 22% negative, rival fans 32%, unflaired commenters 32%. Fewer than two fanbases have 200 comments about him, so no fanbase stands out.

21.9%Own fansSAS flair · 544 comments

32.4%Rival fansevery other flair · 1,152 comments

31.8%Unflairedno flair · 802 comments

Method

A fanbase is the flair its commenters wear. Flairs with fewer than 200 comments about Julian Champagnie are left out of the lists; the tick is his rate across every flaired comment, from summed counts, never a mean of rates.

Rooms

Julian Champagnie was talked about most in the game threads: 1,333 of his 2,498 comments, +7 net sentiment against +6 across his season. His harshest room was highlights, +5 on 11% of his comments; his warmest the front page, +7 on 17% of his comments.

Game threads53% of his comments32.339.21,333

Front page17% of his commentsWarmest22.329.6426

Highlights11% of his commentsHarshest29.133.8278

Method

A room is the kind of post a comment sat under: a game thread, the front page, a highlight. A room is drawn when it holds at least 200 comments about Julian Champagnie; left out here: Post-game threads (170), News (158), Daily chat thread (95), Lowlights (34), Discussion posts (2), Injury posts (2). The bar is the room's share of his comments, its split the room's sentiment. Harshest and warmest are by net sentiment, positive minus negative, from summed counts, never a mean of rates.

Timeline

Over 4-week windows, the negative share of comments about Julian Champagnie ran between 11% and 38%. His worst week was the week of May 18, 49% negative of 166 comments; his best the week of May 25, 47% positive. 28 of 40 weeks had fewer than 30 comments and are left off the line.

Oct 6 · 4 comments, under the floor
- W @ MIA 112–107
- W vs UTA 134–130
Oct 13 · 4 comments, under the floor
- W @ IND 124–108
- W vs IND 133–104
Oct 20 · 10 comments, under the floor
- W @ DAL 125–92
- W @ NOP 120–116
- W vs BKN 118–107
Oct 27 · 7 comments, under the floor
- W vs TOR 121–103
- W vs MIA 107–101
- L @ PHX 118–130
Nov 3 · 47% negative · 16% positive · 38 comments
- L @ LAL 116–118
- W vs HOU 121–110
- W vs NOP 126–119
Nov 10 · 18 comments, under the floor
- W @ CHI 121–117
- L vs GSW 120–125
- L vs GSW 108–109
- W vs SAC 123–110
Nov 17 · 7 comments, under the floor
- W vs MEM 111–101
- W vs ATL 135–126
- L @ PHX 102–111
Nov 24 · 4 comments, under the floor
- W @ POR 115–102
- W @ DEN 139–136
- L @ MIN 112–125
Dec 1 · 8 comments, under the floor
- W vs MEM 126–119
- W @ ORL 114–112
- L @ CLE 117–130
Dec 8 · 11 comments, under the floor
- W @ NOP 135–132
- W @ LAL 132–119
- W vs OKC 111–109
Dec 15 · 9 comments, under the floor
- L vs NYK 113–124
- W vs WAS 119–94
- W @ ATL 126–98
- W @ WAS 124–113
Dec 22 · 27 comments, under the floor
- W vs OKC 130–110
- W @ OKC 117–102
- L vs UTA 114–127
Dec 29 · 19% negative · 42% positive · 105 comments
- L vs CLE 101–113
- W vs NYK 134–132
- W @ IND 123–113
- L vs POR 110–115
Jan 5 · 24 comments, under the floor
- L @ MEM 105–106
- W vs LAL 107–91
- W @ BOS 100–95
- L @ MIN 103–104
Jan 12 · 16 comments, under the floor
- L @ OKC 98–119
- W vs MIL 119–101
- W vs MIN 126–123
Jan 19 · 39% negative · 30% positive · 33 comments
- W vs UTA 123–110
- L @ HOU 106–111
- W @ UTA 126–109
- L vs NOP 95–104
Jan 26 · 14 comments, under the floor
- W @ HOU 111–99
- L @ CHA 106–111
- W vs ORL 112–103
Feb 2 · 24 comments, under the floor
- W vs OKC 116–106
- W @ DAL 135–123
- W vs DAL 138–125
Feb 9 · 14 comments, under the floor
- W @ LAL 136–108
- W @ GSW 126–113
Feb 16 · 7 comments, under the floor
- W vs PHX 121–94
- W vs SAC 139–122
Feb 23 · 25 comments, under the floor
- W @ DET 114–103
- W @ TOR 110–107
- W @ BKN 126–110
- L @ NYK 89–114
Mar 2 · 29% negative · 35% positive · 31 comments
- W @ PHI 131–91
- W vs DET 121–106
- W vs LAC 116–112
- W vs HOU 145–120
Mar 9 · 14 comments, under the floor
- W vs BOS 125–116
- L vs DEN 131–136
- W vs CHA 115–102
Mar 16 · 45% negative · 17% positive · 60 comments
- W @ LAC 119–115
- W @ SAC 132–104
- W vs PHX 101–100
- W vs IND 134–119
Mar 23 · 4 comments, under the floor
- W @ MIA 136–111
- W @ MEM 123–98
- W @ MIL 127–95
Mar 30 · 20 comments, under the floor
- W vs CHI 129–114
- W @ GSW 127–113
- W @ LAC 118–99
- L @ DEN 134–136
Apr 6 · 6 comments, under the floor
- W vs PHI 115–102
- W vs POR 112–101
- W vs DAL 139–120
- L vs DEN 118–128
Apr 13 · 6 comments, under the floor
- W vs POR 111–98
Apr 20 · 25 comments, under the floor
- L vs POR 103–106
- W @ POR 120–108
- W @ POR 114–93
Apr 27 · 25 comments, under the floor
- W vs POR 114–95
May 4 · 22% negative · 35% positive · 211 comments
- L vs MIN 102–104
- W vs MIN 133–95
- W @ MIN 115–108
- L @ MIN 109–114
May 11 · 33% negative · 29% positive · 105 comments
- W vs MIN 126–97
- W @ MIN 139–109
May 18 · 49% negative · 20% positive · 166 comments
- W @ OKC 122–115
- L @ OKC 113–122
- L vs OKC 108–123
- W vs OKC 103–82
May 25 · 28% negative · 47% positive · 614 comments
- L @ OKC 114–127
- W vs OKC 118–91
- W @ OKC 111–103
Jun 1 · 27% negative · 43% positive · 473 comments
- L vs NYK 95–105
- L vs NYK 104–105
Jun 8 · 46% negative · 17% positive · 226 comments
- W @ NYK 115–111
- L @ NYK 106–107
- L vs NYK 90–94

Method

Lines are 4-week rolling rates from summed counts (Σ negative ÷ Σ comments), drawn only where the window holds at least 30 comments. Dots are single weeks, sized by n. Bands follow the season calendar.

Games

The room talked about Julian Champagnie in 16 of his 110 games, at least 20 comments each. It was harsher after losses: net sentiment +1 in losses (34% negative, 36% positive) against +20 in wins (27% negative, 47% positive), on a season net sentiment of +6.

+20In wins27% neg · 47% pos · 494 comments

+1In losses34% neg · 36% pos · 700 comments

+6His season30% neg · 36% pos · 2,498 comments

Games the room talked about Julian Champagnie in, at least 20 comments each, newest first.
Date	Phase	Opp	Result	Min	Pts	Reb	Ast	FG	3P	TOV	+/−	P/R/A	Comments	Verdict
Jun 13R4 G5	R4 G5	vs NYKL 90–94	L 90–94	31	14	7	1	5-9	4-8	4	-10	14/7/1	56,307	35 points harsher than his season, from 42 comments.
Jun 10R4 G4	R4 G4	@ NYKL 106–107	L 106–107	33	5	5	3	2-9	1-7	0	-4	5/5/3	73,619	76 points harsher than his season, from 30 comments.
Jun 8R4 G3	R4 G3	@ NYKW 115–111	W 115–111	27	12	1	3	4-9	3-7	0	+8	12/1/3	59,290	3 points harsher than his season, from 57 comments.
Jun 5R4 G2	R4 G2	vs NYKL 104–105	L 104–105	36	8	4	1	2-6	2-5	0	-8	8/4/1	54,897	10 points harsher than his season, from 82 comments.
Jun 3R4 G1	R4 G1	vs NYKL 95–105	L 95–105	31	16	10	1	5-11	5-10	0	-8	16/10/1	45,156	15 points warmer than his season, from 286 comments.
May 30R3 G7	R3 G7	@ OKCW 111–103	W 111–103	38	20	6	1	6-11	6-10	1	+16	20/6/1	51,944	40 points warmer than his season, from 207 comments.
May 26R3 G5	R3 G5	@ OKCL 114–127	L 114–127	30	22	8	1	8-15	4-8	2	-20	22/8/1	25,748	3 points warmer than his season, from 123 comments.
May 24R3 G4	R3 G4	vs OKCW 103–82	W 103–82	29	2	4	2	1-7	0-5	0	0	2/4/2	20,926	58 points harsher than his season, from 56 comments.
May 22R3 G3	R3 G3	vs OKCL 108–123	L 108–123	35	10	5	2	4-10	2-8	0	-4	10/5/2	31,843	33 points harsher than his season, from 30 comments.
May 20R3 G2	R3 G2	@ OKCL 113–122	L 113–122	36	8	5	2	2-8	1-7	0	+11	8/5/2	35,453	77 points harsher than his season, from 31 comments.

Bad nights get punished: across 16 games the room talked about, net sentiment rises with Julian Champagnie's Game Score.

r = 0.69 · 16 games · win loss