Toronto raptors vs celtics match player stats
The toronto raptors vs celtics match player stats from the October 10, 2025 NBA preseason meeting tell a much more interesting story than the final 107-105 score alone. Toronto overcame a 27-point deficit and closed the game with a dramatic fourth-quarter rally, while Boston saw a large lead disappear after a costly turnover sequence late in the contest. Jonathan Mogbo then delivered the winning basket with 1.9 seconds remaining.
The game was played at Scotiabank Arena in Toronto in front of 16,282 spectators. Although the local date in Toronto was October 10, the game time was listed as 11:00 PM Eastern, which placed the contest in the early hours of October 11 in Pakistan. That explains why some databases or searches may display October 11 depending on the time zone being used. The official NBA game record lists the contest as October 10, 2025.
For anyone searching for the toronto raptors vs celtics match player stats, the most useful approach is not simply to identify the highest scorer. The real value comes from understanding how scoring, shooting, turnovers, playmaking, rebounding, bench production, and late-game execution combined to produce one of the more dramatic preseason results of the 2025-26 campaign.
The official NBA box score is the best reference point for the complete statistical record of this game. Official NBA game box score
Toronto Raptors vs Celtics Match Player Stats at a Glance
Toronto defeated Boston 107-105 after trailing by as many as 27 points. The Raptors finished with 38 field goals on 88 attempts, including 16 made three-pointers on 46 attempts. Boston also made 38 field goals, but the Celtics attempted fewer shots from the field and converted only 10 of 38 three-point attempts.
| Category | Boston Celtics | Toronto Raptors |
| Final Score | 105 | 107 |
| Field Goals | 38-83 | 38-88 |
| Field Goal % | 45.8% | 43.2% |
| Three-Pointers | 10-38 | 16-46 |
| Three-Point % | 26.3% | 34.8% |
| Free Throws | 19-21 | 15-21 |
| Free Throw % | 90.5% | 71.4% |
| Rebounds | 54 | 34 |
| Assists | 22 | 30 |
| Turnovers | 28 | 18 |
| Steals | 9 | 12 |
| Blocks | 4 | 0 |
The official NBA line score confirms the final 107-105 result and shows Toronto winning the final two quarters by a combined 65-42 margin after Boston had controlled the first half.
That split is central to understanding the game. Boston was more dominant on the glass and scored 52 points in the paint, but Toronto generated considerably more assists, made six more three-pointers, and committed 10 fewer turnovers.
How the Game Changed Quarter by Quarter
The box score becomes much easier to understand when the game is separated into four periods.
First Quarter: Boston Establishes Control
Boston opened the game with a 27-19 advantage.
The Celtics were able to score efficiently while Toronto struggled to establish consistent offensive rhythm. Gradey Dick did provide an early spark for the Raptors, including a three-pointer, but Boston’s offensive execution allowed the visitors to take control.
Chris Boucher was particularly effective early. His ability to score from inside and outside created problems for Toronto’s defense.
Boston’s first-quarter advantage was not overwhelming, but it established the pattern that would define much of the first half: the Celtics were getting productive possessions while Toronto was not yet generating enough offensive consistency.
Second Quarter: The Celtics Create Separation
The second quarter was the biggest swing toward Boston.
The Celtics scored 36 points compared with only 23 for Toronto. That produced a 63-42 halftime advantage.
Boston’s official game analysis highlighted a 20-3 run late in the second quarter. Payton Pritchard and Luka Garza helped initiate the surge before Boucher added a major scoring burst.
This is an important detail because simply looking at the halftime score does not explain why Boston appeared to have complete control.
The Celtics were not merely edging Toronto. They were producing long stretches in which Toronto could not stop the scoring flow.
Pritchard’s first-half performance was especially important. Boston’s lead was built partly through his scoring pressure and the ability of new-look Celtics players to take advantage of Toronto’s defensive breakdowns.
Third Quarter: Toronto Starts the Comeback
The third quarter changed the direction of the game.
Toronto outscored Boston 35-24.
That 11-point swing reduced Boston’s 21-point halftime advantage to 10 points entering the fourth quarter.
Toronto’s offense began generating more open looks, while the Raptors increased their defensive activity. The team finished with 12 steals, compared with nine for Boston, and its 30 assists showed a greater level of ball movement.
This was the point where the contest stopped looking like a comfortable Boston win and became a genuine fourth-quarter test.
Fourth Quarter: Toronto Completes the Rally
Toronto scored 30 points in the fourth quarter while Boston managed only 18.
The Raptors eventually tied the game at 105-105 with 35.4 seconds remaining. Boston then committed consecutive turnovers, giving Toronto opportunities to win the game.
Jonathan Mogbo converted the decisive layup with 1.9 seconds remaining after receiving an inbound pass from Jared Rhoden. Boston had no timeout remaining and could not convert its final half-court attempt.
That sequence is perhaps the clearest example of why final scores should never be analyzed without looking at possession quality and late-game execution.
Toronto Raptors Player Performance
Toronto’s offensive numbers were spread across several contributors, but Gradey Dick and Chucky Hepburn were particularly important.
Gradey Dick Leads Toronto in Scoring
Gradey Dick finished as Toronto’s leading scorer with 22 points.
He also led the Raptors in rebounding among the listed leaders, collecting six boards.
His scoring was significant because Toronto needed perimeter production during a game in which the team spent much of the first half chasing Boston.
Dick’s ability to contribute from three-point range also fit the larger statistical story. Toronto finished 16-for-46 from beyond the arc, a major advantage over Boston’s 10-for-38 performance.
That six-made-three difference translates into 18 additional points from three-point makes alone. In a two-point game, that is an enormous statistical margin.
Chucky Hepburn Provides the All-Around Spark
Chucky Hepburn was one of the most influential players in the Raptors’ comeback.
He recorded eight assists and four steals while scoring 13 points.
Those numbers demonstrate why a box-score analysis based only on scoring can miss the most important contributors.
Hepburn’s eight assists helped Toronto generate a 30-assist team total. His four steals also contributed to the defensive pressure that helped Toronto change the game’s momentum.
His 13 points were useful, but the combination of scoring, passing, and defensive activity made his overall impact much larger than the scoring total suggests.
Jonathan Mogbo Delivers the Decisive Moment
Jonathan Mogbo did not need to lead Toronto in scoring to become the most important player in the final seconds.
He finished with a team-best plus/minus of +17 according to the supplied game data and scored the winning basket with 1.9 seconds remaining.
The official play-by-play confirms that Jared Rhoden delivered the inbound pass to Mogbo, who converted the layup to make it 107-105.
This is a useful reminder about plus/minus as well.
Plus/minus is not a perfect individual performance measure because it reflects what happens while a player is on the floor. However, when combined with the game sequence, Mogbo’s +17 provides additional evidence that his minutes were highly productive.
Jamison Battle Supplies Perimeter Shooting
Jamison Battle led Toronto with four made three-pointers.
That is especially notable in a game where Toronto’s perimeter shooting became one of the clearest differences between the teams.
Toronto shot 16-for-46 from three-point range, good for 34.8 percent. Boston made only 10 of 38, or 26.3 percent.
Battle’s four made threes therefore represented a meaningful portion of Toronto’s outside scoring.
Sandro Mamukelashvili Starts and Converts His Opportunities
Sandro Mamukelashvili was listed among Toronto’s starters and finished with perfect free-throw shooting, making all three of his attempts.
The bigger story for Toronto, however, was the collective nature of the comeback. The Raptors did not rely on one scorer to erase the deficit. Instead, the team improved its ball movement, generated more perimeter opportunities, and increased its defensive activity.
Boston Celtics Player Performance
Boston’s strongest individual performances came from Chris Boucher, Payton Pritchard, Josh Minott, and several contributors who helped create the large first-half lead.
Chris Boucher Leads Boston in Scoring
Chris Boucher finished with 19 points and nine rebounds.
He also produced a team-best +22 plus/minus in the supplied data.
The official NBA box score shows Boucher shooting 7-for-10 from the field, 2-for-5 from three-point range, and 3-for-4 from the free-throw line. He also recorded two assists, one steal, and one block.
That is an efficient scoring line.
Boucher’s 70 percent field-goal shooting was one of Boston’s most effective individual performances. He was also part of the Celtics’ second-quarter surge that created the massive halftime advantage.
Payton Pritchard Controls Important Offensive Stretches
Payton Pritchard played a major role in Boston’s offensive success.
He finished as one of the Celtics’ leading perimeter threats and made three three-pointers, the most for Boston according to the supplied data.
The official Celtics game analysis noted that Pritchard scored 18 points in the first half, helping Boston establish its large advantage.
His importance was not limited to shooting. Pritchard and Anfernee Simons each recorded three assists among Boston’s starting group in the supplied data.
That combination of shooting and playmaking helped Boston maintain offensive control during the first half.
Josh Minott Adds Efficient Scoring
Josh Minott scored 13 points and shot 6-for-10 from the field.
He also collected six rebounds and finished with a +15 plus/minus.
The official box score records Minott at 60 percent shooting from the field, along with one made three-pointer.
For a player who did not need a high volume of attempts to contribute, that was an efficient performance.
His six rebounds were also useful for a Boston team that ultimately finished with a substantial 54-34 rebounding advantage.
Luka Garza Makes His Presence Felt
Luka Garza scored 12 points for Boston and led the team in free-throw makes, going 6-for-7 from the line according to the supplied data.
His offensive connection with Pritchard was especially important during Boston’s second-quarter run.
The Celtics’ official recap highlighted a play in which Pritchard grabbed an offensive rebound and found Garza for a layup and foul, creating an opportunity for a three-point play.
Garza’s 12 points were therefore part of a broader contribution that helped Boston create separation before halftime.
The Biggest Statistical Difference: Turnovers
If one statistic deserves special attention in this game, it is turnovers.
Boston committed 28 turnovers.
Toronto committed 18.
That is a 10-turnover difference.
In a game decided by two points, that margin is enormous.
The Celtics actually had several statistical advantages. They outrebounded Toronto 54-34. They scored 52 points in the paint compared with Toronto’s 40. They also shot 90 percent from the free-throw line.
Yet those advantages were not enough.
Toronto generated 12 steals and turned Boston’s mistakes into additional possessions. The Raptors also committed fewer turnovers themselves.
Late in the fourth quarter, the problem became decisive.
Boston had the opportunity to protect a tie or potentially regain the lead, but consecutive turnovers gave Toronto another chance. The official Celtics recap specifically identifies Boston’s 28th and 29th turnovers as part of the closing sequence.
This is a powerful lesson when analyzing basketball statistics: possession control can outweigh shooting efficiency, rebounding, and even a large early lead.
Shooting Efficiency vs Shooting Volume
Toronto and Boston made exactly 38 field goals.
That fact is easy to overlook.
Boston shot 38-for-83, while Toronto shot 38-for-88.
So the difference in total made field goals was zero.
The more important difference came from where the shots were taken and how successfully each team converted from three-point range.
Boston made 10 three-pointers.
Toronto made 16.
That six-shot difference from beyond the arc was one of the major reasons Toronto could recover from such a large deficit.
Boston was more efficient from the free-throw line, shooting 19-for-21.
Toronto went 15-for-21.
But free throws alone could not overcome the perimeter difference and turnover gap.
This is why analysts should avoid saying that one team simply “shot better” without specifying the shooting category.
The game had several contrasting shooting stories:
- Boston was better at the free-throw line.
- Boston had a higher overall field-goal percentage.
- Toronto made significantly more three-pointers.
- Toronto attempted more total field goals.
- Toronto’s three-point percentage was substantially higher.
Each statistic tells part of the story.
Rebounding Gives Boston a Major Advantage
Boston dominated the rebounding battle 54-34.
That is a 20-rebound advantage.
It is one of the clearest statistical indicators that Boston was not simply outplayed from start to finish.
The Celtics generated 15 offensive rebounds and 39 defensive rebounds according to the supplied team totals.
Toronto collected 15 offensive rebounds and 19 defensive rebounds.
Boston’s ability to control the glass created additional possessions and limited some of Toronto’s second-chance opportunities.
Yet the Raptors still won.
That contrast is valuable because it shows how a team can lose despite dominating an individual statistical category.
Boston’s rebounding advantage was real.
It simply was not enough to offset the team’s turnover problems and Toronto’s improved perimeter offense.
Toronto’s 30 Assists Tell Another Part of the Story
Toronto finished with 30 assists.
Boston had 22.
That eight-assist advantage reflects a meaningful difference in offensive distribution.
Toronto’s 30 assists came while the team made 38 field goals, meaning a large majority of its baskets were assisted.
Chucky Hepburn’s eight assists were particularly important.
For context, eight assists from one player represented more than one-quarter of Toronto’s entire assist total.
This is exactly the type of statistic that can be overlooked if the focus remains on the leading scorer.
Gradey Dick led Toronto with 22 points, but Hepburn’s passing helped create the offensive structure that allowed Toronto to recover.
The Plus/Minus Numbers Add Context
Plus/minus should not be treated as a complete measure of individual quality, especially in preseason basketball.
Still, the numbers can be useful when interpreted alongside game flow.
Chris Boucher led Boston at +22.
Josh Minott finished at +15.
Jared Rhoden was listed at +14 despite playing only a short stretch.
For Toronto, Jonathan Mogbo led the team at +17.
These numbers reinforce an important point: some of the players who were most effective in their minutes were not necessarily the highest scorers.
Boucher’s +22 is particularly striking because it aligns with his 19 points and nine rebounds.
Mogbo’s +17 is equally interesting because he became the player who delivered the decisive basket.
Why Boston’s 27-Point Lead Did Not Survive
The Raptors trailed by as many as 27 points.
That is a massive deficit in any NBA game.
For Toronto to overcome it, several things had to change.
First, the Raptors improved their three-point production.
Second, their ball movement became more effective.
Third, defensive pressure increased.
Fourth, Boston’s turnovers became a major problem.
Fifth, Toronto continued to attack after reducing the deficit rather than simply settling for a close finish.
The official NBA recap confirms that Toronto completed the comeback after trailing by as many as 27 points.
The comeback therefore should not be reduced to one lucky final shot.
Mogbo’s basket decided the game, but the comeback was built over approximately two quarters of improved team performance.
What the Player Numbers Reveal About Toronto
The Raptors’ statistics point toward a team that became increasingly effective as the game progressed.
Their 30 assists indicate strong ball movement.
Their 12 steals indicate active defense.
Their 16 made three-pointers indicate willingness to generate perimeter offense.
Their 18 turnovers show that they still gave away possessions, but significantly fewer than Boston.
Most importantly, Toronto had multiple contributors.
Dick scored 22.
Hepburn scored 13 and added eight assists and four steals.
Battle made four three-pointers.
Mogbo produced a +17 plus/minus and the winning basket.
That distribution matters.
A comeback from a 27-point deficit usually requires contributions beyond a single player.
What the Numbers Reveal About Boston
Boston’s statistical profile was almost the reverse.
The Celtics were excellent on the glass.
They shot 90 percent from the free-throw line.
Boucher was extremely efficient.
Minott shot 60 percent from the field.
Pritchard helped create major offensive runs.
But the 28 turnovers were the defining weakness.
The Celtics also struggled from three-point range, making just 26.3 percent of their attempts.
That combination created a difficult equation.
Boston generated extra possessions through offensive rebounding but then gave away possessions through turnovers.
The Celtics scored 105 points, which was enough to win many preseason games.
It was not enough against Toronto because the Raptors found ways to exploit the possession imbalance late.
Preseason Context Matters
One important caution is necessary when interpreting these numbers.
This was an NBA preseason game.
Preseason statistics can reveal useful information about player roles, chemistry, shooting confidence, rotation combinations, and defensive habits, but they should not automatically be treated as a direct forecast of regular-season performance.
Rotations can be experimental.
Minutes can be distributed differently.
Established players may sit.
Young players may receive larger opportunities.
Coaches can test lineups that would be unusual in a competitive regular-season situation.
That context matters when evaluating the game.
For example, the supplied starting groups were:
Boston Celtics starters: Chris Boucher, Josh Minott, Neemias Queta, Payton Pritchard, and Anfernee Simons.
Toronto Raptors starters: Sandro Mamukelashvili, Collin Murray-Boyles, Ochai Agbaji, Jamal Shead, and Gradey Dick.
The official box score also records several Boston players as DNPs by coach’s decision, including Scottie Barnes, RJ Barrett, Brandon Ingram, Jakob Poeltl, and Immanuel Quickley on the Celtics’ side of the box score presentation, while the official game data identifies the participating and non-participating players.
Because preseason lineups are often experimental, individual results should be evaluated in context rather than treated as a complete representation of each team’s eventual regular-season rotation.
Why the Previous Season Series Record Can Mislead
The supplied game data notes that Boston had won the previous season series 4-0.
That historical result provides useful background, but it does not explain the October 2025 preseason contest.
Different rosters, different rotations, different player availability, and different coaching objectives can completely change a single game.
The 107-105 result should therefore be analyzed on its own terms.
The previous season’s 4-0 record does not erase Toronto’s comeback, and Toronto’s preseason win does not automatically reverse the competitive balance between the teams over a full season.
Historical matchup records are context, not a substitute for current-game analysis.
The Most Important Player Takeaways
When all of the numbers are considered together, several individual conclusions stand out.
Gradey Dick: Primary Scoring Production
Dick’s 22 points made him Toronto’s leading scorer.
His scoring was particularly valuable because Toronto needed reliable perimeter offense during the comeback.
Chucky Hepburn: Complete Statistical Impact
Hepburn’s 13 points, eight assists, and four steals made him one of Toronto’s most complete performers.
His contribution demonstrates why assists and defensive plays can be just as important as scoring in a close game.
Jonathan Mogbo: Clutch Impact
Mogbo’s +17 plus/minus and game-winning layup made him one of the defining figures of the contest.
His final basket was the single most important scoring play.
Chris Boucher: Boston’s Most Efficient Contributor
Boucher’s 19 points, nine rebounds, 70 percent field-goal shooting, and +22 plus/minus made him Boston’s most statistically efficient standout.
Payton Pritchard: Offensive Catalyst
Pritchard’s three made threes and major first-half scoring contribution helped Boston establish its large lead.
Josh Minott: Efficient Secondary Scoring
Minott’s 13 points on 6-for-10 shooting gave Boston another productive offensive option.
What Decided the Final Two Minutes?
The closing sequence can be summarized simply:
- Toronto erased the deficit.
- The Raptors tied the game at 105-105.
- Boston committed consecutive late turnovers.
- Toronto gained the final meaningful possession.
- Jared Rhoden inbounded to Jonathan Mogbo.
- Mogbo scored with 1.9 seconds left.
- Boston’s final half-court attempt missed.
The official play-by-play confirms the final sequence and the 107-105 finish.
That sequence is the clearest explanation for the final score.
A Deeper Statistical Interpretation
The most interesting feature of this matchup is that neither team dominated every category.
Boston won the rebounding battle by 20.
Toronto won the assist battle by eight.
Toronto made six more three-pointers.
Toronto committed 10 fewer turnovers.
Boston shot much better from the free-throw line.
Toronto generated more steals.
Boston scored more points in the paint.
The final result came from the interaction of these categories rather than one isolated statistic.
This is why box-score analysis is most useful when it asks a second question after every number:
Did this advantage create enough winning possessions to matter?
Boston’s rebounding advantage created extra opportunities.
Toronto’s lower turnover count preserved possessions.
Toronto’s three-point shooting produced additional scoring value.
Boston’s free-throw accuracy helped compensate for some of its shooting issues.
But when the game became tight, Boston’s turnovers became more damaging than its rebounding advantage was helpful.
That is the statistical heart of the matchup.
Who Was the Best Overall Player?
If “best” means the highest-scoring player, Gradey Dick’s 22 points make him the answer for Toronto.
If the question is which player had the strongest all-around statistical impact, Chucky Hepburn has a compelling case because of his 13 points, eight assists, and four steals.
If the question is which Boston player had the most efficient overall performance, Chris Boucher stands out with 19 points, nine rebounds, strong shooting efficiency, and a +22 plus/minus.
If the question is who had the biggest clutch impact, Jonathan Mogbo is the obvious answer because he scored the game-winning basket.
Those are four different questions, and the statistics produce four slightly different answers.
That is a better way to evaluate individual performance than simply naming the highest scorer.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the final score between Toronto and Boston?
Toronto defeated Boston 107-105 in the preseason game at Scotiabank Arena. The Raptors overcame a deficit that reached 27 points.
Who led Toronto in scoring?
Gradey Dick led the Raptors with 22 points.
Who led Boston in scoring?
Chris Boucher led the Celtics with 19 points and also collected nine rebounds.
Who recorded the most assists for Toronto?
Chucky Hepburn led the Raptors with eight assists.
Who scored the game-winning basket?
Jonathan Mogbo scored the winning layup with 1.9 seconds remaining after receiving an inbound pass from Jared Rhoden.
Which team had more turnovers?
Boston had 28 turnovers compared with 18 for Toronto. The 10-turnover difference was one of the most important statistical factors in the two-point game.
Conclusion
The toronto raptors vs celtics match player stats from this preseason meeting reveal a game defined by contrast.
Boston controlled the first half, dominated the boards, scored efficiently inside, and built a lead that reached 27 points. Chris Boucher led the Celtics with 19 points and nine rebounds, while Payton Pritchard and Josh Minott also made important offensive contributions.
Toronto responded by changing the rhythm of the game.
The Raptors improved their three-point production, generated 30 assists, forced 12 steals, and committed 10 fewer turnovers than Boston. Gradey Dick’s 22 points led the scoring, while Chucky Hepburn’s eight assists and four steals highlighted his all-around influence.
The decisive moment came from Jonathan Mogbo.
His winning layup with 1.9 seconds remaining completed a remarkable comeback and gave Toronto a 107-105 victory.
The most important lesson from the statistics is that a large lead does not guarantee victory when possession control deteriorates. Boston’s 54-34 rebounding advantage and 90 percent free-throw shooting were impressive, but 28 turnovers and poor three-point accuracy left the Celtics vulnerable once Toronto found its offensive rhythm.
For readers evaluating individual performances, the game also demonstrates why scoring totals should be viewed alongside assists, steals, shooting efficiency, rebounding, turnovers, and plus/minus. The final score was only two points apart, but the statistical story behind those two points was much deeper.
