Milwaukee Bucks vs Washington Wizards Match Player Stats

The milwaukee bucks vs washington wizards match player stats from December 2, 2025, tell the story of a game that was much closer than the teams’ records suggested. The Washington Wizards defeated the Milwaukee Bucks 129-126 at Capital One Arena in Washington, DC, in front of 13,709 fans. The result gave Washington its third win of the season, while Milwaukee dropped to 9-13 overall and 3-7 on the road.

At first glance, the game appears to be a simple three-point Washington victory. The deeper numbers show something more interesting. Milwaukee shot an excellent 55 percent from the field and made 21 of 38 three-point attempts, also 55 percent. The Bucks had 29 assists and received 30 points from Kevin Porter Jr. and 26 from Giannis Antetokounmpo.

Washington answered with greater volume, stronger rebounding and better ball security. The Wizards attempted 102 field goals compared with Milwaukee’s 84 and finished with 41 rebounds to the Bucks’ 35. They also committed only 10 turnovers, six fewer than Milwaukee.

That combination helped Washington overcome Milwaukee’s superior three-point shooting and turn a 10-point deficit after three quarters into a 129-126 victory.

Game Overview

The December 2 meeting was the second matchup between the teams during the 2025 season. Washington had already beaten Milwaukee 133-120 on October 23. With the Wizards winning again in December, the season series finished tied 1-1 according to the supplied game data.

The final score was:

Washington Wizards 129, Milwaukee Bucks 126

The quarter-by-quarter scoring shows exactly how the game developed:

Quarter	Milwaukee Bucks	Washington Wizards
1st	34	28
2nd	32	30
3rd	28	33
4th	32	38
Final	126	129

Milwaukee led 34-28 after the opening quarter and remained ahead at halftime, 66-58. Washington then began closing the gap in the third quarter before producing its decisive 38-point fourth quarter.

That fourth-quarter performance was the central turning point.

Milwaukee scored 32 points in the final period, which would normally be enough to give a team a strong chance of winning. Washington simply scored more, producing 38 points and turning a three-point deficit into a three-point victory.

Milwaukee Bucks vs Washington Wizards Match Player Stats: Leading Scorers

The scoring leaders provide the clearest starting point for understanding the game.

Kevin Porter Jr. led Milwaukee with 30 points

Kevin Porter Jr. was Milwaukee’s leading scorer with 30 points.

His scoring output was particularly important because the Bucks needed significant production outside of Giannis Antetokounmpo. Porter Jr. gave Milwaukee a reliable scoring option while the team generated 21 made three-pointers.

A 30-point performance in a three-point loss is also a reminder that individual scoring totals do not always translate directly into victories. Milwaukee scored 126 points, which is an extremely strong offensive total, but Washington found enough ways to create additional possessions and finish the game on top.

Giannis Antetokounmpo scored 26 points

Giannis Antetokounmpo finished with 26 points, making him Milwaukee’s second-leading scorer.

His 26 points were part of a balanced Bucks scoring attack. Rather than depending entirely on one player, Milwaukee received major contributions from both Antetokounmpo and Porter Jr.

The bigger issue was what happened around those scoring performances.

Milwaukee had 16 turnovers and 35 rebounds. Washington had 10 turnovers and 41 rebounds. Those six additional rebounds and six fewer turnovers gave the Wizards more opportunities to stay competitive despite Milwaukee’s exceptional three-point shooting.

CJ McCollum led Washington with 28 points

CJ McCollum was Washington’s leading scorer with 28 points.

His scoring came in a game where Washington had to overcome a major efficiency gap from beyond the arc. The Wizards made only 13 of 36 three-point attempts, or 36 percent.

That number was considerably lower than Milwaukee’s 21-for-38 performance.

Washington therefore needed to find production in other areas. Its 102 field-goal attempts compared with Milwaukee’s 84 were a major part of that equation.

Marvin Bagley III added 22 points

Marvin Bagley III finished with 22 points, making him Washington’s second-leading scorer.

His production gave the Wizards another significant scoring option alongside McCollum. Washington’s offensive approach was not based entirely on outside shooting. The team attempted 102 field goals and made 53 of them.

That volume helped compensate for a three-point percentage that was well below Milwaukee’s.

How the Team Statistics Explain the Result

Individual scoring tells only part of the story. The team statistics reveal why Washington won despite Milwaukee’s impressive shooting numbers.

Field-goal shooting favored Milwaukee

The Bucks made 46 of 84 field-goal attempts, a 55 percent rate.

The Wizards made 53 of 102, or 52 percent.

Milwaukee therefore had the better overall field-goal percentage. However, Washington made seven more field goals because it attempted 18 more shots.

That difference is critical.

A team can shoot more efficiently and still lose if its opponent creates significantly more opportunities.

In this game, Washington’s 102 attempts created enough additional scoring chances to offset Milwaukee’s superior efficiency.

Three-point shooting strongly favored Milwaukee

This was one of the most striking statistical differences.

Milwaukee:

• 21 made three-pointers
• 38 attempts
• 55 percent from three

Washington:

• 13 made three-pointers
• 36 attempts
• 36 percent from three

The Bucks made eight more three-pointers than the Wizards.

That is a substantial advantage.

Milwaukee’s 21 made threes were also a major reason the Bucks reached 126 points. Washington had to overcome that perimeter disadvantage through field-goal volume, rebounding and ball security.

Free-throw shooting was relatively close

Milwaukee went 13-for-21 from the free-throw line, or 62 percent.

Washington went 10-for-15, or 67 percent.

The Wizards had the better free-throw percentage, but neither team had a huge advantage in total free throws made.

This means the free-throw line was not the main reason Washington won.

Washington controlled the rebounding battle

Rebounding was one of the clearest areas where Washington had an advantage.

The Wizards collected 41 rebounds.

The Bucks collected 35.

That six-rebound difference matters because rebounds can generate additional possessions, prevent second chances and help a team control the rhythm of a close game.

Washington’s rebounding advantage was especially valuable because Milwaukee was already shooting 55 percent from the field. The Wizards could not afford to simply exchange efficient possessions with the Bucks. They needed more opportunities.

They got them.

Turnovers were another major difference

Milwaukee committed 16 turnovers.

Washington committed 10.

That six-turnover advantage gave the Wizards an important possession edge.

When a game ends with a three-point margin, six additional turnovers can become highly significant. Every lost possession reduces a team’s ability to convert its offensive efficiency into points.

Milwaukee’s 16 turnovers therefore stand out as one of the most important numbers in the box score.

Assists were even

Both teams recorded 29 assists.

That is an interesting detail because it shows that neither offense was completely dependent on isolated individual play.

The Bucks and Wizards both produced 29 assisted baskets according to the supplied statistics.

The difference came elsewhere, particularly in turnovers, rebounding and shot volume.

Steals favored Washington

Washington recorded nine steals.

Milwaukee had five.

The Wizards therefore held a four-steal advantage.

Combined with their six fewer turnovers, the defensive activity contributed to Washington gaining additional possessions and opportunities to attack.

Blocks were identical

Both teams recorded four blocks.

This statistic was completely even and therefore did not distinguish the winner.

Why Washington Won Despite Shooting Worse From Three

This is probably the most useful lesson from the game.

If someone looks only at three-point shooting, Milwaukee appears to have had a major advantage. The Bucks made 21 threes at a 55 percent rate, while Washington made 13 at 36 percent.

Yet Washington won.

The explanation is possession volume.

The Wizards attempted 102 field goals compared with Milwaukee’s 84. They also had six more rebounds and committed six fewer turnovers.

That combination created a larger opportunity base.

A simple way to understand the game is this:

Milwaukee was more efficient. Washington generated more opportunities.

When the game was decided by only three points, the additional opportunities mattered enormously.

This is why looking at a single shooting percentage can be misleading. Basketball results are influenced by efficiency, volume, turnovers, rebounds, free throws and the timing of scoring.

Washington’s fourth-quarter execution brought all those factors together at the right time.

The Fourth Quarter Decided Everything

The Wizards scored 38 points in the fourth quarter.

The Bucks scored 32.

Washington entered the final period trailing after Milwaukee had built a 10-point advantage in the first half and maintained a lead through three quarters.

The fourth quarter therefore represented the game’s decisive swing.

A six-point scoring advantage in a single quarter is meaningful, but the context makes it even more important. The final margin was only three points.

Washington’s 38-point fourth quarter was enough to overcome the Bucks’ offensive consistency and finish the comeback.

For Milwaukee, the problem was not a lack of scoring. The Bucks scored 126 points.

The problem was that Washington scored 129.

That distinction matters when evaluating close games. A team can have a strong offensive performance and still lose because the opponent executes better during the final possessions.

Milwaukee’s Starting Lineup

The Bucks’ listed starters were:

• Giannis Antetokounmpo
• Myles Turner
• Kevin Porter Jr.
• AJ Green
• Ryan Rollins

This lineup combined size, scoring ability and perimeter shooting.

Antetokounmpo provided the star power and interior threat. Porter Jr. supplied the team’s highest individual scoring total with 30 points. Myles Turner added frontcourt size, while AJ Green and Ryan Rollins were part of the starting group used against Washington.

The overall team numbers show that Milwaukee’s offensive structure worked well for much of the night.

The Bucks scored 126 points and shot 55 percent from the field.

The issue was not an inability to score. It was the balance between scoring efficiency and possession management.

Washington’s Starting Lineup

Washington’s listed starters were:

• Khris Middleton
• Marvin Bagley III
• Kyshawn George
• CJ McCollum
• Bilal Coulibaly

The lineup featured McCollum as the primary scoring leader, with Bagley III providing 22 points.

Washington’s starting group helped the team remain competitive despite the Bucks’ three-point advantage.

The Wizards’ 41 rebounds and nine steals illustrate that their overall contribution was not limited to scoring.

The victory came from multiple statistical areas working together.

What the Box Score Says About Milwaukee

The Bucks’ numbers suggest a team that was offensively capable but vulnerable in possession-based areas.

Three statistics stand out:

1. 55 percent field-goal shooting
2. 21 made three-pointers
3. 16 turnovers

The first two numbers are excellent.

The third is the concern.

When a team shoots 55 percent from the field and makes 21 threes, losing by three points indicates that other parts of the game significantly affected the outcome.

Milwaukee’s 16 turnovers and 35 rebounds were particularly important.

The Bucks also had fewer total field-goal attempts despite their superior shooting percentage.

That creates an interesting analytical conclusion: Milwaukee did not necessarily need to shoot better. It needed to protect possessions and create more opportunities.

What the Box Score Says About Washington

Washington’s statistics tell a different story.

The Wizards were less efficient from three but compensated with volume and physical production.

Their key numbers were:

• 53 made field goals
• 102 field-goal attempts
• 41 rebounds
• 29 assists
• 10 turnovers
• 9 steals
• 129 total points

The 102 field-goal attempts are especially important.

Washington made 53 field goals, compared with Milwaukee’s 46. The Wizards therefore converted seven more shots overall.

The Wizards did not need to win every efficiency category. They needed to create enough additional chances to make up for the categories they lost.

That is exactly what happened.

Comparing the Four Leading Scorers

The top four scorers from the supplied game data were:

Player	Team	Points
Kevin Porter Jr.	Milwaukee Bucks	30
CJ McCollum	Washington Wizards	28
Giannis Antetokounmpo	Milwaukee Bucks	26
Marvin Bagley III	Washington Wizards	22

These four players accounted for 106 combined points.

That is a significant share of the game’s 255 total points.

Porter Jr. led everyone with 30 points, while McCollum’s 28 gave Washington a reliable offensive centerpiece. Antetokounmpo followed with 26, and Bagley III added 22.

The scoring distribution shows that both teams had multiple high-level contributors.

The difference was what happened around those four players.

Milwaukee Bucks vs Washington Wizards Match Player Stats: Key Takeaways

The most useful milwaukee bucks vs washington wizards match player stats are not limited to the four leading scorers.

The broader numbers explain the result more effectively.

Milwaukee’s biggest advantage

The Bucks dominated three-point shooting.

They made 21 threes at 55 percent.

That was an elite shooting performance and helped them produce 126 points.

Washington’s biggest advantage

Washington created more opportunities.

The Wizards attempted 102 field goals, collected 41 rebounds and committed only 10 turnovers.

That combination allowed Washington to compensate for its weaker three-point shooting.

The biggest statistical warning for Milwaukee

Sixteen turnovers.

When the final margin is three points, giving away 16 possessions becomes a major issue.

The biggest positive for Washington

Fourth-quarter execution.

The Wizards scored 38 points in the final period and turned a close game into a 129-126 win.

A Closer Look at Possession Efficiency

One of the best ways to understand basketball is to separate efficiency from opportunity.

Milwaukee’s offense was highly efficient.

A 55 percent field-goal percentage is strong. A 55 percent three-point percentage is even more notable.

But efficiency cannot fully compensate for lost possessions.

Washington’s six additional rebounds and six fewer turnovers helped create a different type of advantage.

Consider the basic relationship:

Efficient possessions × number of possessions = scoring opportunity

Milwaukee performed well on the efficiency side.

Washington performed better on the opportunity side.

The result was a game in which both teams scored at a high level, but Washington finished with three more points.

This is also why raw points per game can sometimes hide the reasons behind a win or loss. A complete analysis needs to consider how those points were generated.

The Importance of the Season Series

The December 2 game was the second meeting between Milwaukee and Washington during the 2025 season.

The first matchup took place on October 23, with Washington winning 133-120.

The second meeting ended with another Washington victory, 129-126.

The supplied data identifies the season series after the December game as tied 1-1, although the two listed game results themselves show Washington winning both meetings. Because that information conflicts internally, the season-series label should be treated cautiously unless it is verified against an official schedule or standings source.

This is an important data-quality point.

A trustworthy sports article should not silently repeat conflicting information simply because it appears in a supplied dataset.

The individual game figures and final scores provided for December 2 are clear. The season-series summary, however, deserves separate verification.

Attendance and Venue

The game was played at Capital One Arena in Washington, DC.

Reported attendance was 13,709.

The venue provided the setting for a game that ended with one of Washington’s more notable wins of the season based on the supplied records.

At the time of the game, Milwaukee was listed at 9-13 overall and 3-7 away.

Washington was listed at 3-16 overall and 2-6 at home.

Those records make the result more significant from a contextual perspective. Washington entered with a much weaker overall record but still found a way to beat Milwaukee by controlling key possession statistics and producing a strong fourth quarter.

What This Game Teaches About Player Statistics

Player statistics are most useful when they are connected to team outcomes.

Kevin Porter Jr.’s 30 points deserve recognition, but those points do not explain the entire game.

Giannis Antetokounmpo’s 26 points were important, but the Bucks still lost.

CJ McCollum’s 28 points helped Washington, but he was not the only reason the Wizards won.

Marvin Bagley III’s 22 points provided another major contribution, but Washington’s rebounding, turnover control and fourth-quarter scoring were equally important.

This is why a good player-stat analysis should move beyond a simple list of points.

The right questions are:

• Who scored?
• How efficiently did the team score?
• How many opportunities did the team create?
• How many possessions did it lose?
• Who controlled the boards?
• Which team performed better late?
• Which statistics directly explain the final margin?

In this matchup, the answers point toward a possession advantage for Washington.

Why the Three-Point Difference Was Not Enough

Milwaukee made eight more three-pointers.

That is a huge shooting advantage.

Yet Washington still won.

This is one of the strongest reasons to study the full box score rather than relying on highlights or individual scoring totals.

The Wizards made 13 threes compared with Milwaukee’s 21, but they also made seven more field goals overall.

Washington made 53 field goals.

Milwaukee made 46.

The Wizards’ 102 attempts gave them enough volume to overcome the Bucks’ superior perimeter accuracy.

This also illustrates why basketball analytics often focus on possession efficiency rather than one isolated shooting category.

The Role of Ball Security

Turnovers are particularly important in a close game.

Washington committed 10.

Milwaukee committed 16.

The difference was six turnovers.

Washington also recorded nine steals compared with Milwaukee’s five.

That suggests the Wizards were more disruptive defensively and more effective at turning defensive pressure into additional possessions.

Milwaukee’s offensive shooting numbers were excellent, but the team gave Washington opportunities to respond.

In a 129-126 game, that can be decisive.

The Role of Rebounding

Washington’s 41 rebounds compared with Milwaukee’s 35.

The six-rebound advantage is not enormous in isolation, but it becomes more meaningful when combined with the turnover difference.

Washington had:

• 6 more rebounds
• 6 fewer turnovers
• 4 more steals

Those figures point toward stronger possession control.

Milwaukee had:

• 9 more made three-pointers
• 3 more free throws made
• better field-goal percentage
• the same number of assists
• the same number of blocks

The game was therefore not decided by one dominant statistical category.

It was decided by a combination of Washington’s advantages overcoming Milwaukee’s shooting superiority.

How Fans Should Read Player Stats More Effectively

When evaluating a box score, it is tempting to sort players by points and stop there.

A better approach is to use several layers.

First, identify the scoring leaders

This shows which players carried the offensive workload.

In this game, Porter Jr., McCollum, Antetokounmpo and Bagley III were the four leading scorers.

Second, compare team efficiency

Look at field-goal and three-point percentages.

Milwaukee clearly won this part of the statistical battle.

Third, examine possession statistics

Look at rebounds, turnovers and steals.

Washington performed better in these areas.

Fourth, study the game flow

The quarter scores reveal when the result changed.

Washington’s 38-point fourth quarter was the decisive period.

Fifth, compare the final margin

A three-point result means small statistical differences can have a large impact.

This approach produces a much more useful interpretation than simply saying one player scored more than another.

Important Data Note

The analysis in this article is based on the game information supplied for the December 2, 2025 matchup.

The supplied data contains detailed team statistics, player scoring leaders, starting lineups, venue information, attendance and officiating information. One internal inconsistency appears in the season-series summary: the listed October 23 and December 2 results both show Washington winning, while the supplied season-series field says the series was tied 1-1.

Rather than inventing a correction, this article preserves the individual game results and flags the inconsistency.

That distinction matters when publishing sports statistics. A trustworthy article should clearly separate confirmed figures from information that requires additional verification.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who led the Bucks in scoring against the Wizards on December 2, 2025?

Kevin Porter Jr. led Milwaukee with 30 points. Giannis Antetokounmpo was the Bucks’ second-leading scorer with 26 points.

Who led the Wizards in scoring against Milwaukee?

CJ McCollum led Washington with 28 points. Marvin Bagley III followed with 22 points.

What was the final score of Bucks vs Wizards?

The Washington Wizards defeated the Milwaukee Bucks 129-126 on December 2, 2025, according to the supplied game data.

Why did Washington win despite Milwaukee’s better three-point shooting?

Washington made more total field goals, attempted far more shots, collected six more rebounds and committed six fewer turnovers. The Wizards also scored 38 points in the fourth quarter.

How many three-pointers did Milwaukee make?

Milwaukee made 21 of 38 three-point attempts, a 55 percent shooting rate from beyond the arc.

How many turnovers did each team have?

Milwaukee committed 16 turnovers, while Washington committed 10.

Conclusion

The milwaukee bucks vs washington wizards match player stats from December 2, 2025 show why a box score needs to be read as a complete story rather than a list of individual scoring totals.

Kevin Porter Jr. led Milwaukee with 30 points, while Giannis Antetokounmpo added 26. CJ McCollum paced Washington with 28 points, and Marvin Bagley III contributed 22.

Milwaukee was the more efficient shooting team. The Bucks shot 55 percent from the field and made 21 three-pointers at a 55 percent rate. Those numbers would normally provide a strong foundation for a win.

Washington found another route.

The Wizards attempted 102 field goals, collected 41 rebounds, committed only 10 turnovers and recorded nine steals. They then produced a 38-point fourth quarter to finish the game with a 129-126 victory.

The central lesson from this matchup is simple: shooting efficiency matters, but possession control can be just as important.

Milwaukee’s shooting was excellent. Washington’s opportunity creation and late-game execution were better.

That is what ultimately separated the teams by three points.

The supplied game information also demonstrates why sports statistics should be checked carefully before publication. The individual game result and player figures are clear, while the supplied season-series summary contains an inconsistency that should not be presented as fact without verification.

For readers trying to understand what really happened in this matchup, the most meaningful numbers are not just the points scored by the stars. The bigger story is the relationship between shooting, possessions, rebounds, turnovers and fourth-quarter performance.

That combination explains how Washington could overcome Milwaukee’s remarkable three-point shooting and leave Capital One Arena with a 129-126 victory.