Cleveland Cavaliers vs Pacers Match Player Stats

The cleveland cavaliers vs pacers match player stats from the July 10, 2026 NBA Summer League meeting in Las Vegas tell a more interesting story than the final score alone. Indiana Pacers defeated the Cleveland Cavaliers 99-93 at the Pavilion, overcoming a strong Cleveland fourth-quarter push after building a major advantage through the middle two periods.

Cleveland finished with 93 points on 34-of-88 shooting, while Indiana scored 99 points on 31-of-71 shooting. The Cavaliers were more aggressive on the offensive glass and converted free throws efficiently, but Indiana’s superior field-goal percentage, rebounding edge, assists, and eight blocked shots helped the Pacers protect their lead.

For readers searching for cleveland cavaliers vs pacers match player stats, the most important takeaway is that Cleveland actually had several individual performances that stood out. Nae’Qwan Tomlin and Meleek Thomas each scored 20 points, while Malaki Branham added 15. Indiana countered with 16 points apiece from Rienk Mast and Taevion Kinsey, plus a 15-point, five-assist, five-block performance from Jalen Slawson.

The box score also reveals why the game remained competitive. Cleveland scored 37 points in the fourth quarter, its best offensive period of the night, but Indiana had already created enough separation by scoring 64 points across the second and third quarters.

Table of Contents

Cleveland Cavaliers vs Pacers Match Player Stats at a Glance

The game was played on July 10, 2026, with the listed game time of 1:30 AM on July 11 in Las Vegas. ESPN2 carried the matchup.

Category	Cleveland Cavaliers	Indiana Pacers
Final Score	93	99
Field Goals	34-88	31-71
FG Percentage	39%	44%
Three-Pointers	8-32	11-38
3PT Percentage	25%	29%
Free Throws	11-13	17-25
FT Percentage	85%	68%
Total Rebounds	39	43
Assists	17	21
Turnovers	9	14
Steals	12	6
Blocks	3	8
Offensive Rebounds	15	12
Defensive Rebounds	24	31
Personal Fouls	31	18

One of the clearest statistical differences was shot efficiency. Indiana attempted 17 fewer field goals and still scored six more points. The Pacers made 44% of their attempts compared with Cleveland’s 39%.

That does not mean Cleveland played an inefficient game in every area. The Cavaliers shot 85% from the free-throw line, considerably better than Indiana’s 68%. Their 15 offensive rebounds also created additional opportunities.

The bigger issue was that those second-chance opportunities did not fully compensate for Indiana’s efficiency and defensive activity.

Cleveland Cavaliers Player Stats

Cleveland’s scoring was led by two players who reached 20 points.

Nae’Qwan Tomlin

Nae’Qwan Tomlin was one of Cleveland’s most complete performers:

29 minutes
20 points
6 rebounds
4 assists
3 steals
1 block
2 turnovers
+6 plus/minus

His line stands out because it went beyond scoring. Tomlin contributed across the glass, moved the ball, generated defensive pressure and finished with a positive plus/minus despite Cleveland losing the game.

His three steals were especially valuable. Cleveland finished with 12 steals as a team, so Tomlin was an important part of the team’s ability to create defensive events.

The four assists also matter in the context of Cleveland’s 17 total assists. He accounted for a substantial portion of the team’s playmaking production.

Meleek Thomas

Meleek Thomas matched Tomlin with 20 points:

27 minutes
20 points
5 rebounds
3 assists
1 steal
0 blocks
0 turnovers
+10 plus/minus

The zero-turnover figure is particularly notable. Thomas produced 20 points while avoiding a single turnover, giving Cleveland efficient possession management from one of its leading scorers.

His +10 plus/minus was also the best among Cleveland’s primary contributors listed in the supplied statistics.

When evaluating a Summer League box score, it is useful not to focus exclusively on points. Thomas’s combination of scoring, rebounding, passing and ball security makes his performance more complete than a basic scoring total suggests.

Malaki Branham

Malaki Branham supplied the next-highest scoring total for Cleveland:

22 minutes
15 points
4 rebounds
2 assists
2 steals
1 block
3 turnovers
0 plus/minus

Branham contributed defensively with two steals and one block, but the three turnovers were a drawback.

His zero plus/minus indicates that the Cavaliers’ scoring margin was even during his listed minutes. That is useful context because a player can have a respectable scoring night without necessarily being part of a lineup that creates a positive overall margin.

Riley Minix

Riley Minix played 25 minutes and recorded:

10 points
5 rebounds
1 assist
1 turnover
-25 plus/minus

The scoring and rebounding numbers were useful, but the -25 was the lowest plus/minus among Cleveland players in the supplied box score.

Plus/minus should never be treated as a standalone measure of individual quality, particularly in a Summer League environment. Still, the number provides context when evaluating how Cleveland’s lineups performed during different stretches.

Jaxson Robinson

Jaxson Robinson provided Cleveland with nine points in 21 minutes:

9 points
4 rebounds
2 assists
1 steal
1 turnover
+7 plus/minus

The +7 suggests Cleveland had a relatively productive stretch with Robinson on the floor.

Ernest Udeh Jr.

Ernest Udeh Jr. finished with:

4 points
2 rebounds
1 assist
1 steal
0 turnovers
-10 plus/minus

He played 20 minutes and maintained ball security, but his offensive contribution was limited.

Other Cleveland Contributors

The remaining Cavaliers players recorded the following lines:

Player	MIN	PTS	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	+/-
Tristan Enaruna	6	2	3	0	1	0	0	+2
Dane Goodwin	16	4	3	2	2	0	0	-15
Xaivian Lee	13	2	1	1	0	0	0	-16
Rashaun Agee	14	4	5	0	1	1	2	+9
Sean East II	8	3	1	1	0	0	0	+2

This group shows how different aspects of the box score can tell different stories.

Rashaun Agee, for example, scored only four points but recorded five rebounds, a steal and a block while finishing +9. Dane Goodwin also scored four points but ended at -15.

Those numbers demonstrate why evaluating a Summer League game requires more than ranking players by points.

Indiana Pacers Player Stats

Indiana’s leading individual performance came from Rienk Mast, while Taevion Kinsey also scored 16. Jalen Slawson produced perhaps the most unusual statistical line of the game with five blocks.

Rienk Mast

Rienk Mast led Indiana’s rebounding effort and tied for the team scoring lead:

32 minutes
16 points
11 rebounds
3 assists
1 steal
0 blocks
1 turnover
-9 plus/minus

His double-double was one of the most significant individual achievements of the game.

Mast’s 11 rebounds were the highest total recorded by any player in the matchup. He also contributed three assists while committing only one turnover.

Interestingly, his -9 plus/minus was negative despite Indiana winning by six. This is another reminder that plus/minus describes the team’s scoring margin during a player’s minutes rather than serving as a direct player efficiency rating.

Taevion Kinsey

Kinsey also scored 16 points:

16 minutes
16 points
1 rebound
1 assist
1 turnover
+11 plus/minus

The most striking aspect of Kinsey’s performance is the relationship between his scoring total and minutes played.

He scored 16 points in only 16 minutes and finished +11. That made him one of Indiana’s most productive players relative to playing time.

Jalen Slawson

Slawson’s statistical line was arguably the most unusual:

23 minutes
15 points
6 rebounds
5 assists
1 steal
5 blocks
3 turnovers
-13 plus/minus

Five blocks from a player who also scored 15 points and distributed five assists is an extremely productive box-score combination.

His defensive production was especially important because Indiana finished with eight blocks as a team. Slawson alone accounted for five of them.

The three turnovers and -13 plus/minus provide counterpoints, but they do not erase the impact of his rim protection and offensive involvement.

Braden Smith

Braden Smith contributed:

30 minutes
5 points
8 rebounds
4 assists
3 steals
4 turnovers
-5 plus/minus

Smith’s scoring was modest, but his eight rebounds, four assists and three steals show a broader role.

The four turnovers were the largest concern in his individual line. Indiana committed 14 turnovers as a team, so Smith accounted for a significant share of them.

Keion Brooks Jr.

Brooks played 14 minutes and posted:

11 points
5 rebounds
1 assist
1 block
1 turnover
+18 plus/minus

His +18 was one of Indiana’s best plus/minus marks and came with 11 points and five rebounds.

Gabe McGlothan

McGlothan recorded:

6 points
5 rebounds
1 block
0 turnovers
+19 plus/minus

The +19 was the highest plus/minus in the supplied Indiana statistics.

Again, this does not mean McGlothan was automatically Indiana’s best player. It does indicate that the Pacers outscored Cleveland by 19 during his listed minutes.

Yuki Kawamura

Kawamura finished with:

8 points
1 rebound
4 assists
1 turnover
+4 plus/minus

His four assists were tied with Smith’s total and helped Indiana reach 21 team assists.

Other Indiana Contributors

Player	MIN	PTS	REB	AST	STL	BLK	TO	+/-
Tamin Lipsey	18	4	4	0	1	0	1	-5
Taelon Peter	24	13	0	3	0	0	2	-5
Keba Keita	8	5	2	0	0	1	0	+15

These performances demonstrate Indiana’s depth. The Pacers had several players contributing in different statistical categories rather than relying on one scorer to carry the offense.

Cleveland Cavaliers vs Pacers Match Player Stats: Top Performers

Looking only at the supplied individual statistics, several players clearly separated themselves.

Cleveland’s Top Performers

Nae’Qwan Tomlin: 20 points, 6 rebounds, 4 assists and 3 steals.

Meleek Thomas: 20 points, 5 rebounds, 3 assists and 0 turnovers.

Malaki Branham: 15 points, 4 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 steals and 1 block.

Tomlin and Thomas were tied as Cleveland’s leading scorers. Their performances were different in style: Tomlin produced more defensive and playmaking statistics, while Thomas combined scoring with excellent ball security.

Indiana’s Top Performers

Rienk Mast: 16 points and 11 rebounds.

Taevion Kinsey: 16 points in 16 minutes with a +11 plus/minus.

Jalen Slawson: 15 points, 6 rebounds, 5 assists and 5 blocks.

Slawson arguably had the broadest statistical profile, while Mast controlled the glass and Kinsey delivered efficient scoring relative to his playing time.

Quarter-by-Quarter Breakdown

The quarter scores explain the final result better than the final six-point margin might suggest.

Quarter	Cleveland	Indiana	Indiana Margin
Q1	14	11	+3
Q2	27	32	+5
Q3	15	32	+17
Q4	37	24	-13
Total	93	99	+6

Cleveland won the fourth quarter by 13 points, but Indiana’s third-quarter performance was the defining stretch.

First Quarter

Cleveland scored 14 points while Indiana scored 11.

The low-scoring opening period suggested a defensive game early. Neither team immediately found an offensive rhythm.

Second Quarter

Indiana responded with 32 points compared with Cleveland’s 27.

That five-point swing gave the Pacers a 43-41 halftime lead.

Third Quarter

This was the decisive period.

Indiana scored 32 points while Cleveland managed only 15. The Pacers therefore won the quarter by 17 points.

That single period transformed a close halftime contest into a game in which Cleveland needed a major comeback.

Fourth Quarter

Cleveland produced its best offensive quarter, scoring 37 points.

Indiana scored 24, meaning the Cavaliers won the fourth quarter by 13.

The comeback was significant, but the deficit created in the third quarter was too large to erase completely.

Why Indiana Won the Game

The final score was 99-93, but several statistical factors explain Indiana’s advantage.

Better Overall Shooting

Indiana shot 44% from the field, compared with Cleveland’s 39%.

The Pacers also made 11 three-pointers on 38 attempts, while Cleveland made eight on 32 attempts.

The three-point percentages were not dramatically different, with Indiana at 29% and Cleveland at 25%. However, Indiana’s combination of slightly better accuracy and three additional made threes gave it an important scoring advantage.

Rebounding Edge

Indiana collected 43 rebounds to Cleveland’s 39.

The difference was even clearer on the defensive glass. Indiana grabbed 31 defensive rebounds compared with Cleveland’s 24.

Cleveland did have more offensive rebounds, 15 to 12, which helped generate second-chance opportunities.

Still, Indiana’s overall rebounding advantage helped limit Cleveland’s extra possessions.

Indiana Created More Assists

The Pacers finished with 21 assists compared with Cleveland’s 17.

That four-assist advantage suggests Indiana generated more scoring through shared ball movement.

Slawson, Smith and Kawamura each contributed four or more assists, while several other players added additional playmaking.

Cleveland Forced More Turnovers

One category clearly favored Cleveland.

The Cavaliers committed only nine turnovers, while Indiana committed 14.

Cleveland also recorded 12 steals compared with Indiana’s six.

This was an important defensive success for the Cavaliers. The problem was that Cleveland’s advantage in turnovers did not translate into enough overall scoring efficiency to overcome Indiana’s shooting and third-quarter dominance.

Indiana’s Rim Protection

Indiana recorded eight blocks.

Cleveland had only three.

Jalen Slawson’s five blocks were the biggest individual reason for that difference.

In a game decided by six points, five additional blocked shots compared with Cleveland’s total represent an important defensive component.

What the Shooting Numbers Really Say

A basic reading might suggest Indiana simply shot better, but the numbers deserve closer examination.

Cleveland attempted 88 field goals and made 34. Indiana attempted 71 and made 31.

That means Cleveland took 17 more field-goal attempts but made only three more shots.

This is a major clue.

Cleveland generated additional possessions through offensive rebounding and Indiana turnovers, but its shooting efficiency limited the value of those extra opportunities.

Indiana, meanwhile, did more with fewer field-goal attempts.

The free-throw numbers also tell an interesting story. Cleveland made 11 of 13 free throws, an excellent 85%. Indiana made 17 of 25 for 68%.

So Cleveland actually had the better free-throw efficiency.

The Pacers’ advantage came from other areas: field-goal percentage, three-point production, rebounding, assists and the third quarter.

The Importance of Cleveland’s Fourth-Quarter Rally

The Cavaliers’ 37-point fourth quarter should not be overlooked.

It demonstrates that the team could generate offense at a high level when it found its rhythm.

However, the timing of that production mattered.

Cleveland scored only 15 points in the third quarter. Indiana scored 32.

That 17-point difference was greater than the final six-point margin.

In other words, the fourth quarter nearly changed the outcome, but the third-quarter collapse left Cleveland with too much ground to recover.

This is an important lesson when reading game statistics. A team’s final scoring average can hide major shifts in performance from one period to another.

Plus/Minus: How Should It Be Interpreted?

Plus/minus is one of the most misunderstood statistics in basketball.

The Cavaliers’ best listed plus/minus values included:

Meleek Thomas: +10
Nae’Qwan Tomlin: +6
Rashaun Agee: +9
Jaxson Robinson: +7

At the other end, Riley Minix finished -25, Dane Goodwin -15 and Xaivian Lee -16.

For Indiana, the strongest listed marks included:

Gabe McGlothan: +19
Keion Brooks Jr.: +18
Keba Keita: +15
Taevion Kinsey: +11

Meanwhile, Mast finished -9 and Slawson -13 despite both producing strong individual statistical lines.

That contrast is important.

A player’s plus/minus depends heavily on what happens while that player is on the court. It can be influenced by teammates, opponents, substitutions and lineup combinations.

Therefore, the best analysis combines plus/minus with points, rebounds, assists, shooting, turnovers and defensive statistics rather than using one number in isolation.

The Turnover Battle Was Surprisingly One-Sided

Cleveland had nine turnovers.

Indiana had 14.

That five-turnover advantage favored the Cavaliers.

Cleveland also recorded 12 steals, twice Indiana’s six.

At first glance, those numbers suggest Cleveland should have had a much stronger chance to win.

But basketball is rarely determined by one statistical category.

Indiana’s 44% field-goal shooting, 43 rebounds and 21 assists helped offset the turnover disadvantage.

The Pacers also made three more three-pointers.

The key lesson is that Cleveland successfully disrupted Indiana’s possession management but did not convert that defensive pressure into enough efficient offense.

Rebounding and Second-Chance Opportunities

Cleveland’s 15 offensive rebounds were one of the strongest team statistics in the game.

Offensive rebounds can create possessions that a team’s original shooting percentage does not capture.

However, Cleveland still finished with only 93 points.

That suggests its extra possessions did not completely compensate for its lower shooting efficiency.

Indiana’s 31 defensive rebounds also mattered because defensive rebounds end possessions. The Pacers were able to secure the ball often enough to prevent Cleveland from turning every missed shot into another opportunity.

The four-rebound overall difference may look small, but the distribution between offensive and defensive rebounds provides much more information.

Defensive Activity Was High on Both Sides

Cleveland recorded 12 steals and three blocks.

Indiana recorded six steals and eight blocks.

This creates an interesting contrast in defensive style.

Cleveland generated more disruption through steals.

Indiana generated more protection around the basket.

The difference between six and eight blocks may appear modest at the team level, but Slawson’s five-block performance was a major individual contribution.

The Cavaliers’ 12 steals, meanwhile, show that Indiana did not have complete control of the ball.

This was not a game in which one team dominated every defensive category.

Instead, each side had a different statistical strength.

What the Game Says About Individual Evaluation

The cleveland cavaliers vs pacers match player stats provide a useful example of why player evaluation should use multiple categories.

Consider Thomas.

He scored 20 points, grabbed five rebounds, had three assists and committed zero turnovers. His +10 plus/minus adds further support to the value of his performance.

Now consider Slawson.

He scored 15 points, grabbed six rebounds, delivered five assists and blocked five shots. His -13 plus/minus tells us that his team was outscored during his minutes, but it does not erase his defensive production.

Mast presents another example.

His 16 points and 11 rebounds produced a double-double, yet his plus/minus was -9.

These differences show why a box score should be read as a collection of evidence rather than a single ranking system.

A Practical Method for Reading Summer League Stats

Summer League statistics should be interpreted somewhat differently from regular-season NBA numbers.

Players may have different roles, minutes can change rapidly, and teams are often evaluating combinations rather than relying on established rotations.

A useful approach is to examine five areas:

Scoring efficiency: Look beyond points and check field-goal and three-point percentages.
Possession control: Compare turnovers, steals and assists.
Rebounding: Separate offensive and defensive rebounds.
Defensive impact: Consider steals and blocks alongside team defense.
Context: Compare individual production with minutes and plus/minus.

This method gives a more complete picture than simply identifying the highest scorer.

Key Statistical Takeaways

The most important numbers from the matchup are straightforward:

Indiana won 99-93.
Cleveland’s two leading scorers each had 20 points.
Rienk Mast recorded the game’s only listed double-double with 16 points and 11 rebounds.
Jalen Slawson recorded five blocks.
Cleveland had 12 steals compared with Indiana’s six.
Indiana had eight blocks compared with Cleveland’s three.
Cleveland committed nine turnovers compared with Indiana’s 14.
Indiana outrebounded Cleveland 43-39.
Indiana shot 44% from the field compared with Cleveland’s 39%.
Cleveland shot 85% from the free-throw line.
Indiana scored 32 points in both the second and third quarters.
Cleveland scored 37 points in the fourth quarter.
Indiana’s 32-point third quarter was the biggest turning point.

Where to Find Authoritative Basketball Information

For readers who want to compare this game with official league statistics, the best practice is to cross-check player and team data against the official NBA statistics database.

This is particularly useful when researching shooting percentages, advanced statistics, historical performances or player-by-player game logs.

FAQs About Cleveland Cavaliers vs Pacers Match Player Stats

Who scored the most points for Cleveland?

Nae’Qwan Tomlin and Meleek Thomas tied for Cleveland’s scoring lead with 20 points each.

Who was Indiana’s leading scorer?

Rienk Mast and Taevion Kinsey each scored 16 points, making them Indiana’s joint leading scorers.

Who had the most rebounds in the game?

Rienk Mast led all listed players with 11 rebounds.

Who recorded the most blocks?

Jalen Slawson led the game with five blocks. Indiana finished with eight team blocks.

Which team won the game?

The Indiana Pacers defeated the Cleveland Cavaliers 99-93.

Why did Indiana win despite committing more turnovers?

Indiana offset its 14 turnovers with better field-goal shooting, more rebounds, more assists, more made three-pointers and a dominant third quarter. Cleveland’s nine turnovers were a clear advantage, but they were not enough to overcome the Pacers’ other statistical strengths.

Conclusion

The July 10, 2026 Summer League matchup between Cleveland and Indiana was decided by a combination of efficiency, rebounding and momentum rather than one individual statistic.

Cleveland received excellent scoring from Nae’Qwan Tomlin and Meleek Thomas, with both players reaching 20 points. Tomlin added six rebounds, four assists and three steals, while Thomas protected the ball exceptionally well with zero turnovers. Malaki Branham also contributed 15 points along with defensive activity.

Indiana had a more balanced statistical attack. Rienk Mast produced 16 points and 11 rebounds, Taevion Kinsey scored 16 points in only 16 minutes, and Jalen Slawson filled the box score with 15 points, six rebounds, five assists and five blocks.

The team statistics explain the six-point result even more clearly. Indiana shot 44% compared with Cleveland’s 39%, outrebounded the Cavaliers 43-39 and finished with 21 assists to Cleveland’s 17. Cleveland’s 12 steals and nine turnovers were impressive advantages, but Indiana’s third-quarter explosion created a deficit that Cleveland’s 37-point fourth quarter could not completely erase.

For anyone studying cleveland cavaliers vs pacers match player stats, the most useful lesson is to read the entire box score rather than focusing only on points. The matchup demonstrates how shooting efficiency, possession quality, rebounding, rim protection and quarter-by-quarter performance can combine to determine a result.