Golden State Warriors vs Pacers Match Player Stats
The golden state warriors vs pacers match player stats from January 11, 2025, tell a much clearer story than the final score alone. The Indiana Pacers defeated the Golden State Warriors 108-96 at Gainbridge Fieldhouse in Indianapolis, completing a 2-0 season sweep. Indiana combined efficient shooting, strong rebounding, balanced scoring, and a major second-half push to control the game. Pascal Siakam and Tyrese Haliburton led the Pacers with 25 points apiece, while Bennedict Mathurin added 21 points and 10 rebounds. For Golden State, Buddy Hield led the team with 17 points, while Trayce Jackson-Davis recorded 10 rebounds and Kyle Anderson finished with five assists.
This was not simply a game in which one team happened to make a few more shots. The statistical profile shows a meaningful difference in efficiency. Indiana shot 52 percent from the field compared with 42 percent for Golden State, won the rebounding battle 48-42, and produced eight blocks against only two from the Warriors. Those numbers help explain why the Pacers were able to build separation despite Golden State receiving useful contributions from its bench.
Game Overview and Final Score
The Pacers entered the matchup with a 21-18 record and an 11-6 home mark. Golden State arrived at 19-19 overall and 9-9 on the road. The game therefore featured two teams entering with relatively similar overall records but different levels of home and road performance.
Indiana ultimately won each quarter:
| Quarter | Warriors | Pacers |
| First | 24 | 27 |
| Second | 21 | 23 |
| Third | 25 | 30 |
| Fourth | 26 | 28 |
| Final | 96 | 108 |
The most important stretch came after halftime. Indiana outscored Golden State 30-25 in the third quarter and then added another four-point advantage in the fourth. The Warriors were never completely out of the contest, but they could not generate the offensive efficiency needed to close the gap.
The final 108-96 score also needs to be viewed in the context of the first meeting between these teams during the season. Indiana had already defeated Golden State 111-105 on December 24, 2024. With the January victory, the Pacers completed a 2-0 season sweep.
Golden State Warriors vs Pacers Match Player Stats: Team Comparison
The team numbers provide the foundation for understanding the individual performances.
| Team Statistic | Warriors | Pacers |
| Field Goals | 38-91 | 43-82 |
| Field Goal Percentage | 42% | 52% |
| Three-Pointers | 10-38 | 9-27 |
| Three-Point Percentage | 26% | 33% |
| Free Throws | 10-13 | 13-19 |
| Free Throw Percentage | 77% | 68% |
| Rebounds | 42 | 48 |
| Assists | 25 | 27 |
| Turnovers | 13 | 15 |
| Steals | 11 | 8 |
| Blocks | 2 | 8 |
The biggest difference was shooting efficiency.
Golden State attempted nine more field goals than Indiana, but the Pacers still scored 12 more points. That is a crucial detail. The Warriors had more shot volume, but Indiana converted its opportunities at a much higher rate.
Golden State made 38 of 91 field-goal attempts. Indiana made 43 of 82. In percentage terms, the difference was approximately 10 percentage points.
The three-point numbers also favored Indiana. The Warriors made 10 of 38 attempts, while the Pacers made 9 of 27. Golden State therefore made one more three-pointer but needed 11 additional attempts to do it.
That is an important lesson when evaluating basketball statistics. Three-point totals alone do not tell the full story. Efficiency matters just as much as volume.
How Indiana Won the Statistical Battle
Indiana’s victory can be broken into several connected advantages.
1. Superior Field-Goal Efficiency
The Pacers shot 52 percent from the field. That was the clearest statistical advantage in the game.
Pascal Siakam was particularly efficient, making 12 of 16 field-goal attempts. Tyrese Haliburton also shot exceptionally well, going 8 of 10 from the field.
Together, those two players made 20 of 26 shots.
That efficiency placed significant pressure on the Warriors defense. Golden State could not rely on forcing repeated difficult attempts from Indiana’s leading offensive players.
2. Better Interior Production
Indiana’s eight blocks compared with two from Golden State. Myles Turner accounted for three of those Pacers blocks.
The difference suggests that Indiana had greater success protecting the paint while also creating problems for Golden State’s interior scoring opportunities.
Turner’s defensive contribution was especially important because his offensive line was not spectacular, but his 11 points, eight rebounds, and three blocks provided value across multiple areas.
3. Rebounding Advantage
Indiana collected 48 rebounds compared with 42 for Golden State.
That six-rebound advantage does not look enormous in isolation, but it mattered in a game where the Warriors struggled to convert efficiently. More rebounds gave Indiana additional control over possessions and helped limit Golden State’s opportunities to turn missed shots into second-chance points.
Bennedict Mathurin led the Pacers with 10 rebounds despite primarily being recognized for his scoring ability in this game.
4. Balanced Offensive Distribution
Indiana received major scoring contributions from multiple players.
Siakam scored 25.
Haliburton scored 25.
Mathurin scored 21.
T.J. McConnell added 10 from the bench.
This meant Golden State could not focus its defensive attention exclusively on one scorer.
The Pacers also recorded 27 assists, slightly ahead of Golden State’s 25. Haliburton was responsible for 10 of those assists, giving him a double-double through 25 points and 10 assists.
Pascal Siakam’s 25-Point Performance
Pascal Siakam was one of the defining players in the game.
He finished with:
- 25 points
- 12-of-16 shooting
- 1-of-4 from three-point range
- 9 rebounds
- 1 steal
- Plus/minus of +21
- 30 minutes
The most impressive number is arguably his 12-of-16 shooting.
Siakam converted 75 percent of his field-goal attempts. His scoring did not require an unusually large number of possessions. Instead, he produced 25 points through highly efficient shooting.
His +21 plus/minus also reflects how strongly Indiana performed during his minutes.
For analysts, this is an excellent example of why points should not be evaluated without shooting efficiency and lineup impact. A player scoring 25 points on 16 attempts has a very different statistical profile from a player needing 25 or 30 attempts to reach the same total.
Siakam’s nine rebounds also added value on the glass. He was not simply an offensive contributor.
Tyrese Haliburton Controls the Game
Tyrese Haliburton matched Siakam with 25 points but added an even broader statistical contribution.
His line included:
- 25 points
- 8-of-10 field goals
- 2-of-4 three-pointers
- 7-of-7 free throws
- 2 rebounds
- 10 assists
- 3 steals
- Plus/minus of +18
- 35 minutes
The 25-point, 10-assist combination made Haliburton one of the most complete offensive players on the floor.
His eight made field goals came on only 10 attempts. He also made all seven of his free throws.
Perhaps more importantly, Haliburton created opportunities for teammates. Ten assists meant he was directly involved in a substantial portion of Indiana’s offensive production.
His three steals added defensive value as well.
This is why a traditional points-only evaluation would undersell his performance. Haliburton influenced scoring through both finishing and playmaking.
Bennedict Mathurin Provides a Two-Way Contribution
Bennedict Mathurin recorded 21 points and 10 rebounds in 34 minutes.
His statistical line was:
- 21 points
- 9-of-18 field goals
- 3-of-8 three-pointers
- 10 rebounds
- 2 assists
- Plus/minus of +22
Mathurin’s +22 was the highest plus/minus among the Pacers starters listed in the supplied game data.
His 10 rebounds also produced a double-double.
The combination of scoring and rebounding made Mathurin particularly valuable. He did not need to lead the team in scoring to have a major influence on the result.
His 9-of-18 shooting equates to 50 percent from the field, which was considerably better than the overall Warriors team percentage.
Myles Turner Adds Defensive Protection
Myles Turner scored 11 points, but his defensive numbers deserve significant attention.
He finished with:
- 11 points
- 3-of-9 field goals
- 1-of-4 three-pointers
- 4-of-6 free throws
- 8 rebounds
- 2 assists
- 3 blocks
- Plus/minus of +21
Turner’s three blocks were more than the entire Golden State team produced.
This is a useful reminder that a center’s impact cannot be evaluated solely through points. His rim protection helped Indiana finish with eight total blocks.
His eight rebounds also supported the Pacers’ overall advantage on the glass.
Andrew Nembhard’s Quiet Contribution
Andrew Nembhard had one of the quieter offensive games among Indiana’s starters.
He recorded:
- 4 points
- 2-of-6 shooting
- 4 rebounds
- 5 assists
- Plus/minus of +12
The four points are easy to notice, but the five assists and four rebounds show why the performance should not be judged solely by scoring.
Nembhard contributed to ball movement and possession control while remaining part of a starting lineup that produced a strong overall result.
This is an important distinction when reviewing player statistics. A low-scoring starter can still be valuable when the team is getting efficient scoring from other players.
T.J. McConnell’s Bench Impact
T.J. McConnell provided an important spark in 17 minutes.
His line:
- 10 points
- 4-of-8 field goals
- 2-of-2 free throws
- 2 rebounds
- 6 assists
- 1 block
- Plus/minus of +5
Six assists in 17 minutes is particularly notable.
McConnell gave Indiana a secondary creator who could maintain offensive organization when the primary starters were not handling every possession.
His 10 points also helped Indiana’s bench contribute meaningful offense.
Golden State’s Leading Scorer: Buddy Hield
Buddy Hield led Golden State with 17 points.
His complete line was:
- 17 points
- 6-of-19 field goals
- 3-of-12 three-pointers
- 2-of-2 free throws
- 4 rebounds
- 5 assists
- Plus/minus of -16
- 35 minutes
Hield’s scoring total was respectable, but his efficiency reveals one of the central problems for Golden State.
He needed 19 field-goal attempts to produce 17 points and made only three of 12 attempts from beyond the arc.
His five assists and four rebounds were useful, but the shooting inefficiency limited his overall offensive impact.
The three-point shooting was especially important because Golden State attempted 38 threes as a team and made only 10.
Dennis Schroder’s 12 Points
Dennis Schroder finished with 12 points in 29 minutes.
His statistics:
- 12 points
- 5-of-13 field goals
- 1-of-6 three-pointers
- 1-of-1 free throws
- 2 rebounds
- 4 assists
- 2 steals
- Plus/minus of -10
Schroder contributed in several categories. His four assists and two steals added value beyond his scoring.
However, like Hield, he struggled from three-point range.
The Warriors needed more efficient perimeter production to match Indiana’s 52 percent shooting.
Trayce Jackson-Davis Provides Rebounding
Trayce Jackson-Davis was one of Golden State’s most productive players in terms of interior statistics.
He finished with:
- 9 points
- 3-of-6 field goals
- 3-of-4 free throws
- 10 rebounds
- 1 assist
- 2 steals
- 1 block
- Plus/minus of -6
- 27 minutes
His 10 rebounds led Golden State.
He also produced two steals and one block, demonstrating defensive activity.
Jackson-Davis did not score at a high volume, but his rebounding was a meaningful positive. The problem was that Golden State needed more players to combine that interior work with efficient scoring.
Kyle Anderson’s All-Around Line
Kyle Anderson recorded eight points, seven rebounds, and five assists.
His line included:
- 26 minutes
- 8 points
- 4-of-9 field goals
- 0-of-2 three-pointers
- 7 rebounds
- 5 assists
- 1 steal
- 1 block
- Plus/minus of -23
The five assists tied him with the Warriors’ highest individual assist total in the supplied statistics.
However, his -23 plus/minus was the lowest among the listed Golden State players.
That contrast is interesting. Anderson contributed in multiple categories, yet the team was outperformed during his minutes.
Plus/minus should never be treated as an isolated measurement of individual quality, but it can provide useful context when combined with the rest of the box score.
Lindy Waters III’s Starting Performance
Lindy Waters III played 35 minutes and finished with seven points.
He recorded:
- 3-of-8 field goals
- 1-of-5 three-pointers
- 5 rebounds
- 2 assists
- Plus/minus of -13
Waters provided 35 minutes of floor time but converted only one of five three-point attempts.
For a Warriors lineup that attempted 38 three-pointers overall, perimeter efficiency was especially important.
His five rebounds were useful, but the limited scoring efficiency contributed to Golden State’s broader offensive struggles.
Gui Santos and Moses Moody Give Golden State Positive Bench Minutes
Gui Santos was one of Golden State’s most efficient offensive players.
He played 24 minutes and recorded:
- 11 points
- 4-of-5 field goals
- 2-of-2 three-pointers
- 3 rebounds
- 3 assists
- 2 steals
- Plus/minus of +9
His four-of-five shooting and perfect two-of-two three-point shooting stood out.
The +9 plus/minus was also notable because it was the strongest figure among the listed Warriors players.
Moses Moody also contributed 7 points, two rebounds, two assists, and two steals in 23 minutes. His plus/minus was +7.
These bench performances show that Golden State did have productive stretches. The issue was consistency across the entire rotation.
Golden State Warriors vs Pacers Match Player Stats and the Shooting Gap
When examining the golden state warriors vs pacers match player stats, the most important statistical theme is efficiency.
Golden State:
- 42% from the field
- 26% from three
- 77% from the free-throw line
Indiana:
- 52% from the field
- 33% from three
- 68% from the free-throw line
Golden State actually had the better free-throw percentage.
But free throws could not compensate for the field-goal difference.
Indiana made 43 of 82 field goals. Golden State made 38 of 91.
That means Indiana made five more field goals while taking nine fewer attempts.
This is the clearest statistical explanation for the final score.
Why Three-Point Volume Did Not Help Golden State
Golden State attempted 38 three-pointers.
Indiana attempted 27.
At first glance, more three-point attempts might seem like an advantage. But the Warriors made only 10 of those attempts.
Their 26 percent three-point shooting was significantly below Indiana’s 33 percent.
The difference becomes even clearer when individual shooting is considered.
Hield made 3 of 12.
Schroder made 1 of 6.
Waters made 1 of 5.
Meanwhile, Gui Santos made both of his attempts from deep.
This created a strange statistical contrast: Golden State’s best three-point efficiency among the listed contributors came from a player who attempted only two threes, while several higher-volume shooters struggled.
Rebounding and Possession Control
Indiana won the rebounding battle 48-42.
Golden State’s best individual rebounder was Jackson-Davis with 10.
Indiana had 10 rebounds from Mathurin, nine from Siakam, and eight from Turner.
That distribution matters.
Golden State relied heavily on Jackson-Davis for its strongest individual rebounding production. Indiana received strong rebounding contributions from several key players.
The Pacers therefore had more collective control of the glass.
Turnovers Did Not Decide the Game
Golden State committed 13 turnovers.
Indiana committed 15.
This is one area where the Warriors actually had an advantage.
However, that advantage was not large enough to overcome Indiana’s shooting efficiency.
Golden State also recorded 11 steals compared with eight from Indiana.
So the defensive activity was not completely one-sided.
The Warriors forced turnovers and generated steals, but their own offensive efficiency prevented those advantages from translating into a win.
This is why box-score analysis should look at several categories together rather than selecting a single statistic that supports a preferred narrative.
The Second Half Changed the Game
The Pacers led by only three points after the first quarter and two more points after the second.
The halftime scoring margin was therefore manageable.
Then Indiana produced a 30-point third quarter.
That third-quarter surge created the separation that Golden State could not erase.
The Warriors scored 25 in the third, which is not a disastrous offensive quarter. The issue was that Indiana scored 30 while maintaining superior efficiency.
The fourth quarter followed a similar pattern, with Indiana scoring 28 and Golden State scoring 26.
The Warriors kept competing, but they did not generate the necessary scoring burst.
What the Plus/Minus Numbers Reveal
Plus/minus can be controversial because it reflects team performance during a player’s minutes rather than measuring only individual actions.
Still, several numbers from this game provide useful context.
For Indiana:
- Mathurin: +22
- Siakam: +21
- Turner: +21
- Haliburton: +18
- Nembhard: +12
- McConnell: +5
Every listed Pacers player had a positive plus/minus.
For Golden State:
- Gui Santos: +9
- Moses Moody: +7
- Jackson-Davis: -6
- Schroder: -10
- Waters: -13
- Hield: -16
- Anderson: -23
That contrast is striking.
Indiana’s listed players all finished with positive figures, while several Golden State starters finished significantly below zero.
Again, plus/minus is not proof that a player individually caused a particular result. But the team-wide pattern supports the broader conclusion that Indiana controlled the game during its primary rotations.
Player Status and Missing Contributors
The supplied game data lists two notable inactive players.
Draymond Green was listed as DNP due to a back injury.
Aaron Nesmith was listed as DNP due to a left ankle sprain.
Their absence is important context when evaluating the final statistics, particularly because availability can affect defensive assignments, rotation depth, rebounding responsibilities, and lineup combinations.
A responsible statistical article should distinguish between what the box score proves and what might be inferred from player availability.
The data clearly establishes that both players did not participate. It does not, by itself, prove exactly how much their absence changed the final outcome.
Season Series: Indiana Wins 2-0
The Pacers won both meetings during the season.
December 24, 2024
Indiana won 111-105.
January 11, 2025
Indiana won 108-96.
The second victory therefore completed a 2-0 season sweep.
The combined scoring margin across the two games was also meaningful. Indiana won the first meeting by six points and the second by 12, producing a combined 18-point advantage across the season series.
That consistency suggests the Pacers were able to solve the matchup successfully on both occasions.
Golden State Warriors vs Pacers Match Player Stats: Key Takeaways
The golden state warriors vs pacers match player stats provide several clear lessons for anyone analyzing this matchup.
Indiana’s stars were exceptionally efficient
Siakam and Haliburton both scored 25 points.
Siakam did it on 12-of-16 shooting.
Haliburton did it on 8-of-10 shooting.
That level of efficiency made it difficult for Golden State to keep pace.
Mathurin delivered a double-double
Mathurin’s 21 points and 10 rebounds gave Indiana another major contributor.
His +22 plus/minus was also the highest among the listed Pacers starters.
Haliburton was the primary creator
His 10 assists were the highest total for either team.
He combined scoring, playmaking, and three steals in a highly productive 35-minute performance.
Golden State’s perimeter shooting was inefficient
The Warriors made only 10 of 38 three-point attempts.
That 26 percent rate was one of the biggest obstacles to an offensive comeback.
Golden State’s bench had bright spots
Gui Santos and Moses Moody both posted positive plus/minus figures.
Santos was particularly efficient, making four of five field goals and both of his three-point attempts.
Indiana controlled the interior
The Pacers had eight blocks and 48 rebounds.
Turner alone produced three blocks.
That defensive presence helped Indiana maintain control even when Golden State generated steals and forced turnovers.
What the Numbers Mean for Basketball Analysis
A useful box-score analysis should go beyond identifying the highest scorer.
This game demonstrates why several layers of statistical context are necessary.
Points tell us who scored.
Field-goal percentage tells us how efficiently those points were produced.
Assists help reveal playmaking.
Rebounds show possession control.
Blocks and steals provide defensive activity.
Plus/minus adds lineup context.
When those categories point in the same direction, the overall story becomes much stronger.
In this matchup, many of the major indicators favored Indiana. The Pacers shot better, rebounded better, blocked more shots, and received highly efficient performances from their leading scorers.
Golden State had advantages in steals, turnovers, and free-throw percentage, but those strengths were not enough to offset the shooting gap.
A Practical Way to Read This Box Score
If you are reviewing the game for fantasy basketball, player evaluation, matchup research, or general NBA analysis, start with these five questions:
- Who scored the most?
Siakam and Haliburton each scored 25 for Indiana. - Who scored efficiently?
Siakam and Haliburton were especially efficient, while several Golden State perimeter players struggled. - Who controlled the boards?
Indiana won 48-42, with Mathurin leading the Pacers at 10 rebounds. - Who created opportunities?
Haliburton led all listed players with 10 assists. - Which team controlled defensive possessions?
Indiana’s eight blocks and six-rebound advantage were major contributors to its defensive control.
This method provides a more complete understanding than simply looking at the final score.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Warriors vs Pacers game on January 11, 2025?
The Indiana Pacers defeated the Golden State Warriors 108-96 at Gainbridge Fieldhouse in Indianapolis.
Who was the leading scorer for the Warriors?
Buddy Hield led Golden State with 17 points. He shot 6-of-19 from the field and 3-of-12 from three-point range.
Who led the Pacers in scoring?
Pascal Siakam and Tyrese Haliburton each scored 25 points for Indiana.
Who had the most rebounds in the game?
Trayce Jackson-Davis and Bennedict Mathurin each recorded 10 rebounds, making them the leading rebounders for their respective teams.
How many assists did Tyrese Haliburton have?
Haliburton recorded 10 assists along with 25 points, two rebounds, and three steals.
Did the Pacers sweep the Warriors during the season series?
Yes. Indiana won both meetings, defeating Golden State 111-105 on December 24, 2024, and 108-96 on January 11, 2025.
Conclusion
The January 11, 2025 matchup between Indiana and Golden State was ultimately decided by efficiency and consistency. Indiana did not need a huge three-point advantage or a dramatic turnover margin. Instead, the Pacers consistently converted their offensive opportunities and received strong contributions across the starting lineup.
Pascal Siakam and Tyrese Haliburton each scored 25 points while shooting at an extremely efficient rate. Bennedict Mathurin added 21 points and 10 rebounds, while Myles Turner contributed eight rebounds and three blocks. The Pacers also received valuable bench production from T.J. McConnell.
Golden State had several positives. Buddy Hield led the team with 17 points, Trayce Jackson-Davis grabbed 10 rebounds, and Gui Santos delivered one of the team’s most efficient performances. The Warriors also forced more turnovers and recorded more steals.
However, the overall statistical balance favored Indiana. The Pacers shot 52 percent compared with 42 percent for Golden State, won the rebounding battle 48-42, and produced eight blocks. The Warriors’ 26 percent three-point shooting was another major obstacle.
The result completed Indiana’s 2-0 season sweep and provided a strong example of how shooting efficiency, interior defense, rebounding, and balanced scoring can outweigh advantages in isolated statistical categories.
