charlotte hornets vs oklahoma city thunder match player stats
The charlotte hornets vs oklahoma city thunder match player stats from March 22, 2025, tell a much deeper story than the 141-106 final score alone. Oklahoma City did not simply win this game. The Thunder controlled the game through efficient shooting, stronger rebounding, better ball security, and sustained offensive pressure across all four quarters. Charlotte had several individual performances worth noting, especially Miles Bridges, Jusuf Nurkic, and KJ Simpson, but Oklahoma City’s balance and efficiency made the 35-point margin difficult to overcome.
The game was played at Paycom Center in Oklahoma City, where the Thunder entered with a 58-12 record and a 31-5 home record. Charlotte arrived at 18-52 overall and 7-27 on the road. Those records provide useful context, but the box score shows exactly how the gap appeared on the court.
Oklahoma City finished with 54 made field goals on 94 attempts, good for 57 percent shooting. Charlotte made 37 of 80 attempts, or 46 percent. The Thunder also made 21 of 39 three-point attempts, compared with Charlotte’s 19 of 41. The difference was not simply that Oklahoma City shot more. The Thunder converted at a remarkably high rate while also committing fewer turnovers and collecting more rebounds.
The individual headline belonged to Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, who scored 30 points and added 9 assists. Isaiah Hartenstein led Oklahoma City with 10 rebounds. For Charlotte, Miles Bridges scored 20 points, Jusuf Nurkic collected 9 rebounds, and KJ Simpson produced 8 assists.
charlotte hornets vs oklahoma city thunder match player stats
The most important numbers from the March 22 matchup can be summarized quickly:
| Category | Charlotte Hornets | Oklahoma City Thunder |
| Final Score | 106 | 141 |
| Field Goals | 37-80 | 54-94 |
| Field Goal Percentage | 46% | 57% |
| 3-Pointers | 19-41 | 21-39 |
| 3-Point Percentage | 46% | 54% |
| Free Throws | 13-13 | 12-17 |
| Rebounds | 29 | 43 |
| Assists | 29 | 29 |
| Turnovers | 16 | 7 |
| Steals | 6 | 10 |
| Blocks | 4 | 7 |
| Leading Scorer | Miles Bridges, 20 | Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, 30 |
| Leading Rebounder | Jusuf Nurkic, 9 | Isaiah Hartenstein, 10 |
| Leading Assists | KJ Simpson, 8 | Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, 9 |
One of the most revealing parts of the table is the assist total. Both teams finished with 29 assists, yet Oklahoma City won by 35 points. That tells us that assists alone cannot explain offensive quality. The Thunder combined similar playmaking volume with much better shooting efficiency and significantly fewer turnovers.
That distinction is important when interpreting player statistics. A team can produce a healthy assist total and still struggle to generate enough efficient scoring possessions.
Final score and game flow
The Thunder won 141-106, but the quarter-by-quarter scoring shows that this was not a single late-game collapse by Charlotte.
First quarter: Oklahoma City establishes control
Oklahoma City opened the game with 34 points while Charlotte scored only 14.
That 20-point first-quarter difference immediately created a difficult situation for the Hornets. Charlotte eventually scored 35 points in the second quarter, but Oklahoma City still added another 32.
At halftime, the Thunder had built a substantial advantage, and Charlotte’s strong second quarter was not enough to erase the damage from the opening period.
Second quarter: Charlotte responds offensively
Charlotte scored 35 points in the second quarter, its highest-scoring period of the game.
That response is worth recognizing because the final score can make the matchup look completely one-sided from beginning to end. It was not. Charlotte showed offensive resistance and eventually finished with 106 points.
The problem was that Oklahoma City continued to score efficiently. The Thunder added 32 points in the second quarter, meaning Charlotte gained only three points on the margin during the period.
Third quarter: Thunder pressure returns
Oklahoma City scored 37 points in the third quarter compared with Charlotte’s 27.
This restored the Thunder’s control and made a comeback increasingly unrealistic.
A 10-point advantage in a single quarter is significant, particularly when it comes after a team has already built a large lead. Charlotte needed a major swing at this stage, but Oklahoma City’s offense continued to generate points at a high rate.
Fourth quarter: Oklahoma City finishes strongly
The Thunder scored 38 points in the final quarter while Charlotte scored 30.
Oklahoma City therefore did not simply protect its lead. It continued adding to it.
The quarter totals were:
- Charlotte: 14, 35, 27, 30
- Oklahoma City: 34, 32, 37, 38
The pattern is one of sustained offensive superiority. Oklahoma City reached at least 32 points in every quarter. Charlotte reached 30 points in only the second and fourth quarters.
That consistency is one of the clearest explanations for the 141-point performance.
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander leads Oklahoma City’s attack
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander was Oklahoma City’s leading scorer with 30 points and also led the team in assists with 9.
That combination is particularly important because it illustrates how the Thunder could pressure Charlotte in multiple ways. A player who is scoring at a high level while also creating opportunities for teammates puts additional strain on the opposing defense.
His 30-point performance was the game’s highest individual scoring output listed in the supplied statistics.
The 9 assists also show that his impact was not limited to scoring. Oklahoma City’s team total was 29 assists, meaning Gilgeous-Alexander accounted for a substantial share of the Thunder’s recorded assists.
From a statistical perspective, his performance fits the broader story of the game: efficient individual production supporting efficient team offense.
Miles Bridges leads the Hornets
Miles Bridges was Charlotte’s leading scorer with 20 points.
Twenty points is a respectable individual scoring performance, but the context matters. Bridges’ 20 points were 10 fewer than Gilgeous-Alexander’s 30, and Charlotte needed more consistent production because Oklahoma City reached 141 points.
The key lesson is that a leading scorer’s raw total does not necessarily tell us whether the player had enough offensive support.
Charlotte scored 106 points, which means the team was not completely ineffective offensively. In fact, a 46 percent field-goal percentage and 46 percent three-point percentage are not poor shooting numbers.
The larger problem was that Oklahoma City was even more efficient and created more possessions through its advantage on the glass and its ability to force turnovers.
Jusuf Nurkic provides Charlotte’s rebounding presence
Jusuf Nurkic led Charlotte with 9 rebounds.
Oklahoma City’s Isaiah Hartenstein, however, finished with 10 rebounds, giving the Thunder a narrow advantage between the two leading individual rebounders.
The bigger story is the team rebounding gap.
Charlotte collected 29 rebounds.
Oklahoma City collected 43.
That is a 14-rebound difference.
Rebounding is often treated as a secondary box-score statistic, but a gap of 14 is large enough to affect the entire structure of a game. Defensive rebounds end possessions. Offensive rebounds can create additional scoring opportunities.
Even without breaking down every possession, the team totals demonstrate that Oklahoma City was consistently better positioned to control missed shots.
KJ Simpson’s 8 assists stand out
KJ Simpson led Charlotte with 8 assists.
That is an important positive from the Hornets’ perspective. Despite the large final margin, Charlotte’s offense still generated 29 total assists, and Simpson was responsible for a significant portion of that playmaking.
The interesting comparison is that Simpson’s 8 assists were only one fewer than Gilgeous-Alexander’s 9.
This demonstrates why individual statistics need context.
If someone looked only at the assist column, the two performances might appear relatively close. But the overall game result shows that playmaking volume was not the deciding factor.
Oklahoma City’s advantage came from combining playmaking with shooting efficiency, rebounding, defensive activity, and ball security.
Shooting efficiency explains much of the 35-point margin
The field-goal numbers are among the strongest indicators of what happened.
Charlotte:
- 37 made field goals
- 80 attempts
- 46 percent shooting
Oklahoma City:
- 54 made field goals
- 94 attempts
- 57 percent shooting
The Thunder made 17 more field goals than Charlotte.
That is enormous.
The percentage difference was also substantial. Oklahoma City shot 57 percent from the field, while Charlotte shot 46 percent.
This means the Thunder were both more productive and more efficient.
Three-point shooting was strong on both sides
Charlotte shot 19-for-41 from three-point range, or 46 percent.
Oklahoma City shot 21-for-39, or 54 percent.
Charlotte’s three-point shooting was actually quite good. The Hornets made nearly half of their attempts from beyond the arc.
Yet Oklahoma City still had the advantage because the Thunder made two more threes while attempting two fewer.
That is a strong example of why percentage and volume should be considered together.
A team can shoot well from three and still lose badly if the opponent shoots even better while also dominating other areas.
Free throws were not the deciding factor
Charlotte went 13-for-13 from the free-throw line.
That is a perfect 100 percent.
Oklahoma City went 12-for-17, or 71 percent.
So Charlotte actually had the better free-throw percentage and made one more free throw.
This is useful because it eliminates free-throw shooting as a major explanation for the result.
The Thunder’s advantage came primarily from field-goal production, three-point efficiency, rebounding, turnovers, and defensive activity.
Turnovers may be the most underrated statistic
Oklahoma City committed only 7 turnovers.
Charlotte committed 16.
That means the Hornets gave the Thunder 9 more possessions through turnovers than Oklahoma City gave Charlotte.
In a high-scoring game, extra possessions can become extremely valuable.
Oklahoma City scored 141 points while giving the ball away only seven times. That is a strong combination of offensive efficiency and possession control.
Charlotte’s 16 turnovers did not necessarily mean every mistake directly produced points for Oklahoma City, but the possession disadvantage clearly worked against the Hornets.
This is one reason the final score cannot be explained by shooting alone.
Oklahoma City’s defense created additional pressure
The defensive statistics also favored the Thunder.
Charlotte recorded:
- 6 steals
- 4 blocks
Oklahoma City recorded:
- 10 steals
- 7 blocks
The Thunder therefore had advantages in both categories.
The four-block difference and four-steal difference indicate greater defensive disruption.
More importantly, Oklahoma City’s 10 steals compared with Charlotte’s 6 fit with the turnover numbers. The Thunder were not merely protecting the rim. They were also creating problems away from the basket.
That type of defensive activity can produce transition opportunities and prevent an opponent from establishing a comfortable offensive rhythm.
Why 141 points is more significant than it looks
Scoring 141 points is impressive in any NBA game, but the number becomes more meaningful when combined with the other statistics.
Oklahoma City:
- Shot 57 percent from the field
- Shot 54 percent from three
- Made 21 three-pointers
- Collected 43 rebounds
- Recorded 29 assists
- Committed only 7 turnovers
- Recorded 10 steals
- Recorded 7 blocks
That is an unusually complete statistical profile.
The Thunder were not dependent on one category.
They shot efficiently.
They protected possessions.
They rebounded.
They created turnovers.
They defended the rim.
They also moved the ball effectively enough to produce 29 assists.
That combination explains why Charlotte struggled to keep pace despite shooting 46 percent overall and 46 percent from three.
The 14-rebound gap deserves special attention
A 14-rebound advantage can be easy to overlook because it does not appear as dramatic as a 35-point scoring margin.
But it is one of the clearest structural differences in this game.
Charlotte had 29 rebounds.
Oklahoma City had 43.
Suppose two teams shoot at similar rates. In that situation, controlling the rebound battle can determine how many additional scoring opportunities each team receives.
Here, the Thunder already had a shooting advantage. The rebounding advantage then strengthened that advantage.
The Thunder were more likely to finish defensive possessions and had greater access to second-chance opportunities.
For Charlotte, improving the rebounding battle would have been one of the clearest ways to reduce the possession gap.
The 16-to-7 turnover difference
The turnover margin was equally important.
Charlotte: 16 turnovers.
Oklahoma City: 7 turnovers.
That nine-turnover difference represents a major possession imbalance.
It also creates a useful lesson for anyone analyzing NBA player statistics: not every important contribution appears in points, rebounds, or assists.
A player who helps his team avoid turnovers can have a major effect without accumulating a flashy scoring total.
Likewise, defensive players who force turnovers can create value that is only partly reflected in traditional individual statistics.
The Thunder’s overall performance demonstrates this principle clearly.
Comparing the leading players
The central individual comparison was between Shai Gilgeous-Alexander and Miles Bridges.
Gilgeous-Alexander:
- 30 points
- 9 assists
- Oklahoma City’s leading scorer
- Oklahoma City’s leading assist producer
Bridges:
- 20 points
- Charlotte’s leading scorer
The scoring gap was 10 points.
But the more interesting comparison involves supporting production.
Oklahoma City had Hartenstein leading the team with 10 rebounds, while Charlotte had Nurkic leading with 9.
Charlotte had Simpson with 8 assists, while Oklahoma City had Gilgeous-Alexander with 9.
So the leading categories were relatively close in rebounding and assists.
The decisive difference was team-wide efficiency.
That is why attributing the 35-point defeat to one player’s performance would be misleading.
A team-statistical perspective on the game
A useful way to analyze the matchup is to separate the game into four major areas:
1. Scoring efficiency
Oklahoma City clearly won.
The Thunder shot 57 percent compared with Charlotte’s 46 percent.
2. Possession control
Oklahoma City clearly won.
The Thunder committed 7 turnovers compared with Charlotte’s 16.
3. Rebounding
Oklahoma City clearly won.
The Thunder collected 43 rebounds compared with Charlotte’s 29.
4. Defensive disruption
Oklahoma City clearly won.
The Thunder had 10 steals and 7 blocks compared with Charlotte’s 6 steals and 4 blocks.
This four-part view provides a better explanation than simply saying Oklahoma City “played better.”
The numbers identify how the Thunder played better.
Charlotte’s positive statistical takeaways
A 35-point defeat does not mean every Charlotte statistic was negative.
There were several encouraging elements.
First, the Hornets shot 46 percent from three-point range. That is strong perimeter efficiency.
Second, Charlotte went 13-for-13 at the free-throw line.
Third, the Hornets recorded 29 assists, matching Oklahoma City’s total.
Fourth, KJ Simpson produced 8 assists, while Miles Bridges led the team with 20 points.
The issue was not a complete offensive collapse.
Charlotte’s biggest problems were relative rather than absolute. Oklahoma City was simply more efficient, more secure with the ball, stronger on the glass, and more disruptive defensively.
Oklahoma City’s strongest statistical takeaways
For the Thunder, the positives were widespread.
The 57 percent field-goal percentage immediately stands out.
The 54 percent three-point shooting is even more striking because Oklahoma City attempted 39 threes.
The Thunder also made 54 field goals compared with Charlotte’s 37.
Then there is the possession battle.
Seven turnovers against 16 from Charlotte gave Oklahoma City a significant advantage.
The 43-29 rebounding edge further strengthened the Thunder’s control.
Taken together, these numbers describe a team that consistently converted its opportunities while limiting Charlotte’s chances to respond.
What the season series tells us
The March 22 game completed a two-game season series between the teams.
Oklahoma City won the season series 2-0.
The supplied game information records the first meeting as a 106-94 Charlotte victory over Oklahoma City on December 29, 2024, followed by Oklahoma City’s 141-106 victory on March 22, 2025.
The season series therefore provides an interesting contrast.
The first meeting was decided by 12 points in Charlotte’s favor.
The second was decided by 35 points in Oklahoma City’s favor.
That swing of 47 points in the margin between the two games illustrates why a single matchup should not automatically be treated as a complete representation of either team’s season.
It also highlights the importance of game context when using head-to-head statistics.
Home and road context
The records entering the game add another layer.
Charlotte entered at 18-52 overall and 7-27 away.
Oklahoma City entered at 58-12 overall and 31-5 at home.
The location therefore favored the Thunder, and the teams’ records showed a significant difference in performance entering the contest.
The final result was consistent with that broader context.
Still, the box score matters because it explains the result rather than merely predicting it.
The Thunder’s home strength was supported by tangible advantages in shooting, rebounding, turnovers, and defensive disruption.
Attendance and game setting
The reported attendance was 18,203 at Paycom Center.
The officiating crew was listed as Bill Kennedy, Sean Corbin, and Brett Nansel.
These details do not directly explain the final score, but they are useful for preserving the full game record and distinguishing this matchup from other meetings between the teams.
For readers researching a specific historical NBA game, date, venue, attendance, and officiating information can be useful verification points alongside player statistics.
How to read this box score correctly
A common mistake when researching NBA player statistics is to focus only on the highest scorer.
That approach would identify Shai Gilgeous-Alexander’s 30 points and Miles Bridges’ 20 points, but it would miss the larger reasons Oklahoma City won.
A better process is:
- Start with the final score.
- Compare field-goal percentage.
- Compare three-point efficiency.
- Check rebounds.
- Check turnovers.
- Review assists.
- Examine steals and blocks.
- Identify the leading individual performers.
- Compare the game with the broader season context.
- Review the season series when relevant.
Using that method makes the March 22 matchup much easier to understand.
The final score was the outcome.
The supporting statistics explain the outcome.
What the player statistics reveal about team basketball
The game is also a useful example of why basketball is difficult to evaluate through one statistic.
Charlotte had 29 assists.
Oklahoma City also had 29.
Charlotte shot 46 percent from the field.
That is a respectable figure.
Charlotte shot 46 percent from three.
Again, that is strong.
Yet the Thunder still won by 35 points.
Why?
Because Oklahoma City combined those advantages differently.
The Thunder shot 57 percent overall, made 21 threes at a 54 percent rate, outrebounded Charlotte by 14, committed nine fewer turnovers, recorded four more steals, and produced three more blocks.
This is the type of multi-category performance that traditional box-score analysis can sometimes hide when readers focus on one headline statistic.
The biggest lessons from the matchup
Several conclusions stand out.
Efficiency was the foundation
Oklahoma City’s 57 percent field-goal shooting was the most obvious offensive advantage.
Ball security created extra opportunities
Seven turnovers compared with 16 gave the Thunder a major possession advantage.
Rebounding strengthened the advantage
The 43-29 rebounding edge meant Oklahoma City controlled more missed-shot situations.
Defense was active
The Thunder recorded 10 steals and 7 blocks.
Individual scoring was important but not sufficient
Gilgeous-Alexander’s 30 points mattered, but the win was produced by the entire statistical profile.
Charlotte had legitimate offensive positives
The Hornets shot 46 percent overall, 46 percent from three, made every free throw, and matched Oklahoma City’s 29 assists.
That balance is important. The final score should not lead to an inaccurate conclusion that Charlotte’s offense was simply ineffective.
What a deeper statistical comparison would examine
Readers looking beyond the traditional box score could examine additional measures such as effective field-goal percentage, true shooting percentage, turnover percentage, offensive rebound percentage, free-throw rate, and estimated possessions.
Those measures can provide more precision because they account for differences in shot value and possession usage.
However, the supplied game data already provides enough evidence to identify the major causes of the result without inventing advanced statistics that were not provided.
That distinction matters.
Good statistical analysis should not create unnecessary numbers simply to appear more sophisticated. It should use the available evidence to answer the reader’s actual question.
Why the raw score can be misleading
A 141-106 score might initially suggest that Charlotte played extremely poorly in every area.
The box score says otherwise.
Charlotte made 19 three-pointers.
The Hornets shot 100 percent from the free-throw line.
They recorded 29 assists.
They shot 46 percent overall.
Those are not the statistics of a completely broken offense.
Instead, the problem was that Oklahoma City produced an even stronger offensive game and paired it with superior possession control and defense.
This distinction is useful for anyone studying historical games.
A large margin does not automatically mean one team failed in every area.
Sometimes it means the winning team was exceptionally efficient across several areas at the same time.
charlotte hornets vs oklahoma city thunder match player stats: the key numbers
For readers searching specifically for the most important player and team statistics, the essential figures are straightforward.
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander led all listed scorers with 30 points and also produced 9 assists.
Miles Bridges led Charlotte with 20 points.
Isaiah Hartenstein led Oklahoma City with 10 rebounds.
Jusuf Nurkic led Charlotte with 9 rebounds.
KJ Simpson led Charlotte with 8 assists.
Both teams finished with 29 assists.
The biggest team statistical differences were Oklahoma City’s 43-29 rebounding advantage, 54-37 field-goal advantage in makes, and 7-16 turnover advantage.
The Thunder also shot 57 percent from the field and 54 percent from three-point range.
Those numbers provide the clearest statistical explanation for the final result.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who led the Hornets in scoring against the Thunder on March 22, 2025?
Miles Bridges led Charlotte with 20 points in the 141-106 loss to Oklahoma City.
Who was Oklahoma City’s leading scorer?
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander led all listed scorers with 30 points. He also recorded 9 assists.
Who had the most rebounds in the game?
Isaiah Hartenstein led Oklahoma City with 10 rebounds. Charlotte’s leading rebounder was Jusuf Nurkic with 9.
How many assists did KJ Simpson have?
KJ Simpson recorded 8 assists, making him Charlotte’s leading assist producer in the matchup.
What was the final score?
Oklahoma City defeated Charlotte 141-106 at Paycom Center on March 22, 2025.
Which team won the 2024-25 season series?
Oklahoma City won the season series 2-0 according to the supplied game record.
Conclusion
The March 22, 2025 matchup between the Charlotte Hornets and Oklahoma City Thunder is best understood as a complete team performance rather than simply a 30-point night from Shai Gilgeous-Alexander.
Oklahoma City won 141-106 because several advantages reinforced one another.
The Thunder shot 57 percent from the field, made 21 three-pointers at a 54 percent rate, collected 43 rebounds, committed only 7 turnovers, recorded 10 steals, and blocked 7 shots. Charlotte, despite shooting a respectable 46 percent overall and from three-point range, could not match that level of efficiency and possession control.
The individual numbers remain important. Gilgeous-Alexander finished with 30 points and 9 assists. Hartenstein led the Thunder with 10 rebounds. Bridges scored 20 for Charlotte, Nurkic grabbed 9 rebounds, and Simpson supplied 8 assists.
But the deeper lesson from the charlotte hornets vs oklahoma city thunder match player stats is that basketball results are usually explained by combinations of statistics rather than one headline number.
Charlotte’s 29 assists matched Oklahoma City’s total, yet the Thunder won by 35. That contrast shows why shooting efficiency, rebounding, turnovers, and defensive disruption must be considered alongside points and assists.
The game also completed a 2-0 Oklahoma City season-series sweep, following the earlier meeting recorded as a 106-94 Charlotte win on December 29, 2024.
For anyone studying this matchup historically, the most useful takeaway is therefore not simply who scored the most. It is how Oklahoma City converted efficient shooting, strong rebounding, defensive pressure, and exceptional ball security into a decisive victory.
