Brooklyn Nets vs San Antonio Spurs Match Player Stats
The brooklyn nets vs san antonio spurs match player stats from October 26, 2025, tell a much more detailed story than the final 118-107 score suggests. San Antonio built a 21-point halftime advantage, Brooklyn responded with a strong third quarter, and the Spurs eventually controlled the closing period to secure the win at Frost Bank Center. Cam Thomas produced an outstanding 41-point performance for Brooklyn, while Victor Wembanyama delivered an all-around performance with 31 points, 14 rebounds, 4 assists, 3 steals, and 6 blocks. Dylan Harper also made a major impact from the bench with 20 points, 8 assists, 6 rebounds, and a remarkable +33 plus-minus. The official NBA play-by-play and box-score records confirm the game details and scoring flow.
Brooklyn Nets vs San Antonio Spurs Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The October 26 matchup was the third game of the 2025-26 regular season for Brooklyn and the third for San Antonio. The Spurs entered the game unbeaten at 2-0, while the Nets were searching for their first victory after opening the season 0-2.
The game was played at Frost Bank Center in San Antonio, Texas, with an announced attendance of 19,016.
San Antonio eventually won 118-107, improving to 3-0 while Brooklyn fell to 0-3. The final margin was 11 points, but the game had several distinct phases.
The Spurs dominated the first half.
Brooklyn then produced its best basketball of the night during the third quarter.
San Antonio answered in the fourth quarter and prevented the Nets from completing the comeback.
Final Score by Quarter
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Final |
| Brooklyn Nets | 24 | 24 | 33 | 26 | 107 |
| San Antonio Spurs | 31 | 38 | 19 | 30 | 118 |
The 69-48 halftime score was the defining statistical point of the game. San Antonio created a 21-point advantage before halftime, then survived Brooklyn’s 33-point third quarter.
That sequence is important when evaluating individual performances. A player can post excellent numbers while his team still loses because basketball production has to be viewed within the larger team context.
Game Context and Why the Box Score Matters
A basic box score tells you who scored the most points. A useful box-score analysis should go further.
For this matchup, the most important questions are:
- Who created the most scoring pressure?
- Which team shot more efficiently?
- Which players contributed outside scoring?
- Who controlled the glass?
- Which players affected the game defensively?
- Which bench players changed the momentum?
- Did the final score accurately represent the overall flow?
The answers reveal why San Antonio won despite Brooklyn having the game’s highest individual scorer.
The Nets shot 34-of-87 from the field, or 39 percent. They made 16 of 50 three-point attempts, or 32 percent, and went an excellent 23-of-24 from the free-throw line.
San Antonio shot 39-of-78 from the field, or 50 percent. The Spurs also made 12 of 27 three-pointers, good for 44 percent, while shooting 28-of-36 at the free-throw line.
That shooting gap was substantial.
Brooklyn scored 107 points, but San Antonio needed fewer field-goal attempts to reach 118. The Spurs also had a significant advantage in total rebounds, winning that category 45-34.
Those two differences helped explain the result.
Brooklyn Nets Player Statistics
Brooklyn received its biggest offensive contribution from Cam Thomas, who scored 41 points in only 32 minutes.
Michael Porter Jr. provided secondary scoring and playmaking, while several reserves made useful contributions during the Nets’ third-quarter rally.
Cam Thomas
Cam Thomas was unquestionably Brooklyn’s leading scorer.
He finished with:
| Statistic | Cam Thomas |
| Minutes | 32 |
| Points | 41 |
| FG | 11-25 |
| 3PT | 5-12 |
| FT | 14-14 |
| Rebounds | 2 |
| Assists | 0 |
| Turnovers | 3 |
| Steals | 0 |
| Blocks | 0 |
| Plus/Minus | -7 |
The most impressive part of Thomas’ scoring line was his free-throw efficiency. He converted all 14 attempts.
He also made five three-pointers, giving him multiple scoring avenues instead of relying entirely on difficult mid-range attempts or drives.
His 41 points accounted for a very large portion of Brooklyn’s offensive output. However, the zero assists also show the limitations of his individual offensive impact in this particular game.
This does not mean his performance was poor. Quite the opposite. Thomas carried an enormous scoring load.
The more important analytical point is that individual scoring and team offensive efficiency are not the same thing.
Brooklyn shot 39 percent overall, while Thomas himself shot 44 percent from the field. His offensive production was therefore one of the clearest positives for the Nets.
Michael Porter Jr.
Michael Porter Jr. played 38 minutes and produced a balanced stat line:
| Statistic | Michael Porter Jr. |
| Minutes | 38 |
| Points | 15 |
| Rebounds | 6 |
| Assists | 4 |
| FG | 5-15 |
| 3PT | 3-9 |
| FT | 2-3 |
| Turnovers | 0 |
| Steals | 2 |
| Plus/Minus | -6 |
Porter Jr. did not match Thomas’ scoring output, but his overall contribution was broader.
He grabbed six rebounds, created four assists, recorded two steals, and committed no turnovers.
That zero-turnover figure is particularly useful when assessing his offensive role. He handled the ball and helped facilitate the offense without giving away possessions.
His shooting, however, was inconsistent at 5-of-15 overall.
For Brooklyn, a more efficient scoring night from its second major offensive option could have changed the pressure on the Spurs’ defense.
Nic Claxton
Nic Claxton finished with 10 points and five rebounds in 26 minutes.
He shot 4-of-7 from the field and 2-of-2 at the free-throw line.
His line was efficient offensively, but the plus-minus was -25, one of the most notable figures on Brooklyn’s side.
Plus-minus should never be treated as a standalone player rating because it reflects the team’s performance during a player’s minutes. Still, a -25 figure is relevant when examining how the game unfolded.
Claxton’s presence also mattered defensively because the Spurs featured a difficult interior matchup in Victor Wembanyama.
Wembanyama’s combination of length, rebounding and shot blocking created problems that went beyond the traditional scoring numbers.
Terance Mann
Terance Mann contributed seven points, six rebounds, three assists and two steals.
He shot 3-of-7 from the field and 1-of-3 from three-point range.
Mann’s six rebounds were valuable from a perimeter position, while his three assists helped Brooklyn move the ball.
His two steals also reflected defensive activity.
However, the Nets needed more scoring from the supporting cast because Thomas was carrying such a large offensive burden.
Ben Saraf
Ben Saraf played 15 minutes and finished without a point.
His offensive line was 0-of-4 from the field and 0-of-2 from three-point range.
Yet the zero-point total does not fully describe his contribution.
Saraf recorded five assists, one rebound and one steal without committing a turnover.
Five assists with zero turnovers is an encouraging playmaking statistic, especially in a game where Brooklyn needed more efficient creation around Thomas.
Jalen Wilson
Jalen Wilson was one of Brooklyn’s most efficient scorers.
He scored nine points in 15 minutes while shooting 3-of-4 from the field and 3-of-4 from three-point range.
That means every one of his made field goals came from beyond the arc.
His 3-of-4 shooting from deep was particularly useful during a game in which Brooklyn made only 16 of 50 attempts from three-point range as a team.
Ziaire Williams
Ziaire Williams scored five points in 13 minutes.
He shot 1-of-4 from the field and 1-of-4 from three-point range while making both of his free throws.
He also recorded one rebound and one steal.
His limited minutes meant his overall statistical influence was modest, but his ability to stretch the floor remained part of Brooklyn’s perimeter approach.
Noah Clowney
Noah Clowney scored seven points in 24 minutes.
He went 2-of-8 from the field, 2-of-7 from three-point range and 1-of-1 at the free-throw line.
Clowney’s seven three-point attempts show how heavily Brooklyn relied on perimeter shooting.
He also collected three rebounds and two assists.
Day’Ron Sharpe
Day’Ron Sharpe produced one of the more unusual individual lines of the game.
He scored six points on 3-of-4 shooting, added three rebounds, one assist and two steals, but committed four turnovers.
His plus-minus was +15, the best figure among Nets players listed in the supplied box score.
That is an excellent reminder that plus-minus can reveal something different from the basic scoring line.
Sharpe did not score a large number of points, but Brooklyn performed well during his minutes.
Tyrese Martin
Tyrese Martin scored four points in 12 minutes.
He added two rebounds and three assists while shooting 1-of-4 from the field.
His two free throws were both successful.
Martin also finished with a +2 plus-minus, another positive indicator among the Nets’ reserves.
Egor Demin
Egor Demin scored three points in 19 minutes.
He shot 1-of-5 overall and 1-of-5 from three-point range.
Demin also recorded four rebounds and one assist.
His shooting efficiency was the biggest weakness in his statistical profile on this night.
San Antonio Spurs Player Statistics
The Spurs had a much more balanced offensive attack.
Victor Wembanyama led the scoring, but he was supported by Dylan Harper, Keldon Johnson, Devin Vassell and Julian Champagnie.
That balance was a major difference between the two teams.
Victor Wembanyama
Victor Wembanyama produced the most complete individual performance of the game.
His numbers were:
| Statistic | Victor Wembanyama |
| Minutes | 36 |
| Points | 31 |
| Rebounds | 14 |
| Assists | 4 |
| FG | 9-21 |
| 3PT | 3-6 |
| FT | 10-15 |
| Turnovers | 2 |
| Steals | 3 |
| Blocks | 6 |
| Plus/Minus | +13 |
Wembanyama’s six blocks immediately stand out.
Six blocks in one game represents a major defensive influence, but his three steals make the defensive performance even more interesting. He was not only protecting the rim. He was also generating defensive plays away from the basket.
His 14 rebounds helped San Antonio win the overall rebounding battle.
Offensively, Wembanyama scored 31 points and made three three-pointers. He also reached the free-throw line 15 times and converted 10 attempts.
His four assists indicate that his influence was not limited to scoring.
This was a classic example of why evaluating a superstar through points alone can miss much of the value.
Dylan Harper
Dylan Harper was arguably the most impactful non-Wembanyama player in the game.
He scored 20 points in 29 minutes.
His complete line was:
| Statistic | Dylan Harper |
| Minutes | 29 |
| Points | 20 |
| FG | 8-11 |
| 3PT | 0-0 |
| FT | 4-4 |
| Rebounds | 6 |
| Assists | 8 |
| Turnovers | 0 |
| Steals | 2 |
| Plus/Minus | +33 |
The +33 plus-minus was the highest mark in the game.
More importantly, Harper shot 8-of-11 from the field and 4-of-4 from the free-throw line while recording eight assists without a turnover.
That combination of scoring efficiency and playmaking is extremely valuable.
He did not need to rely on three-point shooting to create an offensive impact. His 8-of-11 shooting shows how effectively he converted the opportunities available to him.
Keldon Johnson
Keldon Johnson scored 19 points in 29 minutes.
He shot 5-of-9 from the field, 2-of-4 from three-point range and a perfect 7-of-7 at the free-throw line.
He also recorded six rebounds, one assist and one steal.
His +19 plus-minus was another strong figure for San Antonio.
Johnson’s efficiency was important because he gave the Spurs reliable scoring without requiring a huge volume of attempts.
Devin Vassell
Devin Vassell scored 16 points in 35 minutes.
His shooting line was particularly efficient:
- 6-of-12 from the field
- 4-of-6 from three-point range
- 3 rebounds
- 1 assist
- 2 turnovers
- 1 steal
- +12 plus-minus
Vassell’s four made three-pointers were an important part of San Antonio’s perimeter efficiency.
While Brooklyn made more total three-pointers, the Spurs were much more accurate from long range.
That distinction matters.
Julian Champagnie
Julian Champagnie scored 13 points and was one of San Antonio’s most efficient perimeter players.
He made 4-of-5 field-goal attempts and 3-of-4 three-point attempts.
He also added six rebounds and two assists.
A player shooting 80 percent from the field while making three three-pointers can have a significant offensive impact even without taking many shots.
Champagnie’s +1 plus-minus was modest compared with several Spurs teammates, but his shooting efficiency was valuable.
Stephon Castle
Stephon Castle finished with 13 points, six rebounds and three assists.
He shot 5-of-10 from the field and 3-of-5 from the free-throw line.
His five turnovers were the main negative statistic.
Castle’s -7 plus-minus was also unusual because San Antonio won comfortably.
This illustrates why plus-minus should always be considered alongside the rest of the box score.
Castle contributed in several areas, but turnovers reduced the overall efficiency of his night.
Harrison Barnes
Harrison Barnes had a quieter game.
He scored four points on 2-of-9 shooting and missed all five of his three-point attempts.
He collected three rebounds and one assist.
His -6 plus-minus was one of the weaker figures among San Antonio’s major rotation players.
The important point is that the Spurs won despite Barnes having an inefficient shooting night.
That speaks to the depth of their offensive contribution.
Bench Contributions
Keldon Johnson and Dylan Harper were the most important bench scorers in the supplied data.
Johnson scored 19 points.
Harper scored 20.
Together, they produced 39 points.
That is a major difference when compared with Brooklyn’s supporting production.
The Spurs did not need Wembanyama to carry every offensive possession because multiple teammates were able to create efficient scoring opportunities.
Team Shooting Comparison
The shooting numbers provide one of the clearest explanations for the final result.
| Category | Brooklyn Nets | San Antonio Spurs |
| Field Goals | 34-87 | 39-78 |
| Field-Goal % | 39% | 50% |
| Three-Pointers | 16-50 | 12-27 |
| Three-Point % | 32% | 44% |
| Free Throws | 23-24 | 28-36 |
| Free-Throw % | 96% | 78% |
| Rebounds | 34 | 45 |
| Assists | 22 | 20 |
| Turnovers | 11 | 12 |
| Steals | 9 | 7 |
| Blocks | 0 | 6 |
Brooklyn actually made four more three-pointers than San Antonio.
However, the Spurs attempted far fewer three-point shots and converted them at a much higher rate.
The biggest difference was overall field-goal percentage.
San Antonio made half of its field-goal attempts.
Brooklyn made fewer than four out of every ten.
That 11-percentage-point difference was enormous over the course of a full game.
The Rebounding Battle
San Antonio won the rebounding battle 45-34.
That gave the Spurs an 11-rebound advantage.
Wembanyama led the way with 14 rebounds, while several other Spurs players added six apiece.
Brooklyn received six rebounds each from Michael Porter Jr. and Terance Mann, but the Nets did not match San Antonio’s collective interior production.
Rebounding is particularly important against a team featuring Wembanyama because second-chance opportunities can quickly turn into additional scoring possessions.
San Antonio’s 11 offensive rebounds were also important.
Brooklyn had 11 offensive rebounds as well, according to the supplied team statistics, but San Antonio’s overall defensive rebounding advantage helped limit Brooklyn’s opportunities.
The Defensive Difference
The most obvious defensive statistical difference was blocked shots.
Brooklyn recorded zero blocks.
San Antonio recorded six.
Wembanyama accounted for all six Spurs blocks listed in the supplied player data.
That does not mean every missed Brooklyn shot was caused by Wembanyama, but his presence changes the geometry of the court.
Players may hesitate to attack the basket when a long, mobile rim protector is waiting near the paint.
The Spurs also had seven steals, compared with nine for Brooklyn.
Therefore, San Antonio did not dominate every defensive statistic.
Its biggest defensive advantage came from rim protection and overall shooting efficiency.
The Third-Quarter Comeback
The third quarter was the most interesting period from a game-flow perspective.
Brooklyn scored 33 points.
San Antonio scored only 19.
That gave the Nets a 14-point advantage in the quarter.
After trailing 69-48 at halftime, Brooklyn reduced the deficit significantly.
The Nets’ offense became more aggressive, and Thomas was especially important.
The official play-by-play shows Thomas making consecutive scoring plays during the third quarter, including a driving layup and a three-pointer that helped reduce the Spurs’ advantage.
This stretch demonstrates why the final score alone does not tell the entire story.
Brooklyn was not simply outplayed for 48 minutes.
The Nets found an effective response after halftime.
The problem was sustaining it.
Why San Antonio Regained Control
San Antonio responded in the fourth quarter by scoring 30 points to Brooklyn’s 26.
That restored control.
The Spurs had already established their offensive efficiency earlier in the game, and the fourth-quarter response prevented Brooklyn from turning the third-quarter rally into a complete comeback.
This is where the team statistics become more useful than individual scoring totals.
Thomas had 41 points.
Wembanyama had 31.
But the Spurs had more players producing efficient offensive possessions.
That balance allowed San Antonio to withstand Brooklyn’s best run.
Brooklyn Nets vs San Antonio Spurs Match Player Stats: Who Had the Biggest Impact?
- If the question is simply who scored the most, Cam Thomas is the answer.
- If the question is who produced the most complete individual performance, Wembanyama has the strongest case.
- If the question is which player had the most statistically dominant all-around impact relative to the game’s flow, Dylan Harper deserves serious consideration.
The three performances illustrate three different types of value.
Best Scoring Performance: Cam Thomas
Thomas scored 41 points and went 14-of-14 at the free-throw line.
His scoring kept Brooklyn competitive and helped fuel the third-quarter comeback.
Best All-Around Performance: Victor Wembanyama
Wembanyama combined 31 points with 14 rebounds, four assists, three steals and six blocks.
That is the broadest statistical contribution in the game.
Most Efficient Supporting Performance: Dylan Harper
Harper’s 20 points on 8-of-11 shooting, combined with eight assists and zero turnovers, produced one of the most efficient lines of the night.
His +33 plus-minus was also the game’s best.
What the Plus-Minus Numbers Tell Us
Plus-minus is one of the most misunderstood numbers in basketball.
It measures the team’s point differential while a player is on the court.
It does not measure only individual performance.
That distinction matters in this game.
Dylan Harper finished +33.
Keldon Johnson finished +19.
Wembanyama finished +13.
On Brooklyn’s side, Day’Ron Sharpe finished +15 despite scoring only six points.
Meanwhile, Nic Claxton finished -25 despite contributing 10 points and five rebounds.
These numbers should not automatically be interpreted as rankings of player quality.
Instead, they provide clues about which lineups performed well during specific stretches.
Sharpe’s +15 is particularly interesting because it shows that Brooklyn had productive stretches with him on the court.
Claxton’s -25 suggests that his minutes coincided with significant Spurs advantages, but it does not prove that he personally caused the deficit.
Efficiency Versus Volume
One of the biggest lessons from this matchup is the difference between volume and efficiency.
Thomas scored 41 points on 25 field-goal attempts.
That is impressive volume.
Harper scored 20 points on only 11 field-goal attempts.
That is impressive efficiency.
Champagnie scored 13 points on five field-goal attempts.
Vassell scored 16 on 12 attempts.
Johnson scored 19 on nine attempts.
San Antonio received several efficient contributions simultaneously.
Brooklyn had one dominant scorer but fewer efficient secondary scoring performances.
That difference is central to understanding the result.
Free-Throw Shooting
Brooklyn’s free-throw shooting was excellent.
The Nets made 23 of 24 attempts, or 96 percent.
Thomas was perfect at 14-of-14.
San Antonio made 28 of 36, or 78 percent.
At first glance, that might suggest Brooklyn had the advantage.
But free throws were not enough to compensate for the Spurs’ field-goal efficiency.
San Antonio’s 50 percent shooting from the field gave it a much stronger base of offensive production.
This is an important analytical lesson: being better in one efficiency category does not automatically mean winning the overall efficiency battle.
Three-Point Shooting
Brooklyn made 16 three-pointers.
San Antonio made 12.
So the Nets won the raw three-point total.
But the percentages tell a different story.
Brooklyn shot 32 percent from three.
San Antonio shot 44 percent.
The Spurs therefore needed fewer attempts to generate efficient perimeter scoring.
Brooklyn’s 50 three-point attempts represented a large portion of its offense.
When those attempts fell at only a 32 percent rate, the Nets had to rely heavily on free throws and individual shot creation.
Thomas delivered the individual scoring.
The team efficiency still favored San Antonio.
Assists and Ball Movement
Brooklyn recorded 22 assists.
San Antonio recorded 20.
That means the Nets actually finished with the higher assist total.
Ben Saraf had five assists.
Porter Jr. had four.
Mann had three.
San Antonio was led by Harper with eight assists and Wembanyama with four.
The assist numbers therefore do not explain the result by themselves.
The more revealing statistic is what happened after those passes.
San Antonio converted its field-goal opportunities at a much higher rate.
That is why two teams can have similar assist totals but produce very different offensive results.
Turnovers
Brooklyn committed 11 turnovers.
San Antonio committed 12.
The Nets therefore had a slight advantage in ball security.
Again, this was not enough to overcome the larger shooting and rebounding differences.
Castle committed five turnovers for San Antonio, while Sharpe committed four for Brooklyn.
Harper, meanwhile, had zero turnovers while producing eight assists.
That was one of the cleanest ball-handling performances in the game.
What This Game Says About Both Teams
For Brooklyn, the biggest positive was offensive scoring potential.
Thomas demonstrated that he could create a huge scoring night.
The Nets also had several players capable of contributing rebounds, assists and perimeter shooting.
The challenge was consistency.
A 33-point third quarter showed what Brooklyn could accomplish when its offense became efficient.
The 19-point second quarter, however, shows the opposite side of the equation.
For San Antonio, the strongest takeaway was balance.
Wembanyama was the headline performer, but the Spurs received meaningful production from Harper, Johnson, Vassell and Champagnie.
The team also combined efficient shooting with a strong rebounding performance and six blocks.
That made the offense less dependent on one player.
How to Read These Player Stats Correctly
Readers often make the mistake of sorting the box score by points and assuming that the highest scorer played the best game.
That approach is too simple.
A better method is to examine five areas:
- Scoring volume: How many points did the player generate?
- Efficiency: How many attempts were needed?
- Creation: Did the player generate assists or create advantages?
- Defense: Did the player contribute steals, blocks or strong rebounding?
- Lineup impact: What happened while the player was on the floor?
Using that framework produces a more accurate interpretation.
Thomas dominates scoring.
Wembanyama dominates all-around production.
Harper stands out for efficiency and playmaking.
Johnson and Vassell provide efficient secondary scoring.
Sharpe’s plus-minus provides an interesting counterpoint from Brooklyn’s bench.
This is much more informative than simply saying that San Antonio won 118-107.
Matchup Summary
The game can be reduced to several major statistical themes.
San Antonio’s biggest advantages:
- 50 percent field-goal shooting
- 44 percent three-point shooting
- 45 rebounds
- Six blocks
- 28 made free throws
- Multiple efficient scorers
- Dylan Harper’s +33 plus-minus
Brooklyn’s biggest advantages:
- Cam Thomas’ 41 points
- 96 percent free-throw shooting
- 22 assists
- 16 made three-pointers
- Nine steals
- Strong third-quarter response
- 11 turnovers compared with San Antonio’s 12
The Spurs won because their strengths were more influential across the full 48 minutes.
Brooklyn Nets vs San Antonio Spurs Match Player Stats: Key Takeaways
The most important takeaway from the brooklyn nets vs san antonio spurs match player stats is that individual scoring did not determine the winner.
Cam Thomas scored 41 points, the highest total by any player.
Victor Wembanyama scored 31 and dominated the glass and defensive end.
Dylan Harper produced one of the game’s most efficient performances with 20 points, eight assists, six rebounds and zero turnovers.
San Antonio also received 19 points from Keldon Johnson and 16 from Devin Vassell.
That balanced scoring helped the Spurs survive Brooklyn’s third-quarter comeback.
The team-level numbers are equally important.
San Antonio shot 50 percent from the field compared with Brooklyn’s 39 percent.
The Spurs won the rebounding battle 45-34.
They blocked six shots while Brooklyn recorded none.
Brooklyn shot free throws at a spectacular 96 percent rate, but San Antonio’s superior field-goal and three-point efficiency proved more important.
The final 118-107 score therefore reflects a game in which San Antonio controlled the first half, Brooklyn mounted a serious third-quarter response, and the Spurs regained control in the fourth.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who was the top scorer in the Brooklyn Nets vs San Antonio Spurs game?
Cam Thomas was the game’s top scorer with 41 points for Brooklyn. He shot 11-of-25 from the field, made five three-pointers and went 14-of-14 from the free-throw line.
How many points did Victor Wembanyama score against the Nets?
Victor Wembanyama scored 31 points. He also recorded 14 rebounds, four assists, three steals and six blocks.
Who had the best plus-minus in the game?
Dylan Harper had the best plus-minus at +33. He scored 20 points, grabbed six rebounds and recorded eight assists without a turnover.
What was the final score between Brooklyn and San Antonio?
The San Antonio Spurs defeated the Brooklyn Nets 118-107 on October 26, 2025, at Frost Bank Center.
Which team shot better from the field?
San Antonio shot 50 percent from the field, making 39 of 78 attempts. Brooklyn shot 39 percent, making 34 of 87.
Did Brooklyn win any major statistical categories?
Yes. Brooklyn made more three-pointers, shooting 16-of-50 compared with San Antonio’s 12-of-27. The Nets also had 22 assists and 11 turnovers compared with the Spurs’ 20 assists and 12 turnovers. Brooklyn also shot 96 percent from the free-throw line.
Conclusion
The brooklyn nets vs san antonio spurs match player stats show why a complete box-score analysis should go beyond the final score and the leading scorer.
Cam Thomas’ 41-point performance was the standout scoring achievement for Brooklyn. He gave the Nets enough offensive firepower to produce a strong third-quarter comeback. Michael Porter Jr., Ben Saraf, Jalen Wilson and Day’Ron Sharpe also provided useful contributions in different areas.
San Antonio, however, had greater balance.
Victor Wembanyama delivered 31 points, 14 rebounds, four assists, three steals and six blocks. Dylan Harper added 20 points and eight assists while shooting 8-of-11. Keldon Johnson contributed 19 points, Devin Vassell added 16 and Julian Champagnie scored 13 on highly efficient shooting.
The team statistics reinforce that difference.
San Antonio shot 50 percent from the field and 44 percent from three, while Brooklyn shot 39 percent overall and 32 percent from deep. The Spurs also won the rebounding battle 45-34 and produced six blocks.
Brooklyn’s 96 percent free-throw shooting and 16 made three-pointers were impressive, but they could not offset San Antonio’s superior overall shooting efficiency and balanced production.
For readers studying the game from a player-statistics perspective, the most useful conclusion is simple: Thomas won the scoring battle, Wembanyama won the all-around statistical battle, Harper delivered exceptional efficiency and playmaking, and San Antonio won the team battle.
The result was a 118-107 Spurs victory, giving San Antonio a 1-0 lead in the season series after the first listed matchup.
