Celtics vs Oklahoma city thunder match player stats
The celtics vs oklahoma city thunder match player stats from the March 2026 meeting show why the 104-102 Thunder victory was decided by efficiency, late-game execution, and a few high-impact individual possessions. Oklahoma City finished with a better overall field-goal percentage, while Boston made 95% of its free throws and won the rebounding battle. The difference came from how efficiently the Thunder converted their opportunities, particularly through Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, who led all scorers with 35 points, 9 assists, 6 rebounds, 2 steals, and 3 blocks.
The game was played at Paycom Center in Oklahoma City and finished with one of the smallest possible margins. Boston led 28-27 after the opening quarter, Oklahoma City responded with a 29-31 second quarter advantage, and both teams scored 24 points in the third. The Thunder then produced 24 points in the fourth while Boston scored 19, creating the two-point final margin.
For readers examining the box score rather than simply the final result, this matchup offers several useful details. Boston shot 40.2% from the field and 31.0% from three-point range, while Oklahoma City shot 47.6% overall and 25.0% from three. Boston also committed 12 turnovers, matching Oklahoma City, so turnovers did not explain the result by themselves. Instead, the larger shooting-efficiency gap and Oklahoma City’s ability to generate quality offense around its lead scorer became central to the outcome.
Game overview
The Celtics and Thunder entered the matchup with strong records. Boston was 43-23 overall and 22-13 on the road, while Oklahoma City was 52-15 overall and 28-7 at home.
The final score was:
Oklahoma City Thunder 104, Boston Celtics 102
The game was played at Paycom Center in Oklahoma City, with an announced attendance of 18,203.
The scoring by quarter was:
| Quarter | Boston Celtics | Oklahoma City Thunder |
| Q1 | 28 | 27 |
| Q2 | 31 | 29 |
| Q3 | 24 | 24 |
| Q4 | 19 | 24 |
| Final | 102 | 104 |
The first three quarters were extremely close. Boston actually entered the fourth quarter with a scoring advantage across the first three periods, but Oklahoma City closed the game more effectively.
That fourth-quarter difference is important because it explains why looking only at the halftime or three-quarter score can be misleading. The Thunder did not need to dominate the entire contest. They needed to execute slightly better when the game was decided.
celtics vs oklahoma city thunder match player stats: Boston Celtics
Boston’s offense was led by Jaylen Brown, who produced 34 points in 40 minutes and 34 seconds.
Brown’s complete line was:
| Player | MIN | PTS | FG | 3PT | FT | REB | AST | STL | BLK | TO |
| Jaylen Brown | 41 | 34 | 10-25 | 1-4 | 13-14 | 6 | 7 | 2 | 1 | 6 |
| Payton Pritchard | 39 | 14 | 6-17 | 2-9 | 0-0 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Baylor Scheierman | 34 | 11 | 4-10 | 3-8 | 0-0 | 7 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Sam Hauser | 27 | 8 | 3-10 | 2-8 | 0-0 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 |
| Neemias Queta | 27 | 4 | 1-4 | 0-0 | 2-2 | 10 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
These figures highlight the different ways Boston’s leading contributors affected the game.
Jaylen Brown’s 34-point performance
Brown was clearly Boston’s primary scoring option. He finished with 34 points, 6 rebounds, and 7 assists while shooting 10-for-25 from the field.
His free-throw shooting was particularly strong. Brown made 13 of 14 attempts, giving him a 92.9% free-throw percentage.
The most interesting part of his line is that the 34 points did not come from highly efficient perimeter shooting. Brown went 1-for-4 from three and 10-for-25 overall. His production was heavily supported by his ability to get to the free-throw line.
Brown also contributed seven assists, showing that his influence extended beyond scoring. However, six turnovers were a major part of his statistical profile. In a two-point game, that is an important figure to examine because turnovers can remove scoring opportunities even when a player is producing heavily in other areas.
His final line included:
- 34 points
- 6 rebounds
- 7 assists
- 2 steals
- 1 block
- 6 turnovers
- 13-for-14 at the free-throw line
Brown’s box score therefore tells a more complicated story than the scoring total alone. He carried a large offensive workload, created for teammates, and generated free throws, but the six turnovers also represented a significant amount of lost possession value.
Payton Pritchard’s contribution
Payton Pritchard played 38 minutes and 43 seconds and finished with 14 points, 4 rebounds, and 4 assists.
He shot 6-for-17 from the field and 2-for-9 from three.
The three-point percentage is particularly relevant because Boston attempted 42 threes as a team but converted only 13. Pritchard’s 2-for-9 shooting accounted for a substantial portion of those attempts.
He did not attempt a free throw in the game, so his 14 points came entirely from field goals.
Baylor Scheierman provides secondary production
Baylor Scheierman scored 11 points and added seven rebounds and five assists.
His 4-for-10 shooting included three made three-pointers on eight attempts. That gave him a 37.5% three-point rate for the game.
His seven rebounds were tied for the second-highest total among the listed Boston contributors, while his five assists showed useful secondary playmaking.
Scheierman’s three offensive rebounds were also notable. Extra possessions are especially valuable in a game decided by two points, and offensive rebounds can create opportunities without requiring another defensive stop.
Sam Hauser’s shooting night
Sam Hauser finished with eight points in 27 minutes.
He made 3 of 10 field-goal attempts and 2 of 8 three-point attempts. He also recorded four rebounds, one assist, and two steals.
Hauser’s role was primarily connected to perimeter spacing and shooting, so his 2-for-8 performance from deep was an important part of Boston’s overall three-point efficiency.
Neemias Queta’s rebounding impact
Neemias Queta produced a different type of contribution.
He scored only four points but grabbed 10 rebounds and blocked two shots. He shot 1-for-4 from the field and made both free throws he attempted.
His 10 rebounds were the highest total among the Boston players listed in the supplied data.
That is an important reminder that scoring does not fully describe a player’s value in a close basketball game. Queta provided interior rebounding and rim protection even though his scoring total was modest.
Boston’s team shooting profile
Boston finished the game with:
- 35 made field goals on 87 attempts
- 40.2% field-goal shooting
- 13 made three-pointers on 42 attempts
- 31.0% three-point shooting
- 19 made free throws on 20 attempts
- 95.0% free-throw shooting
- 44 total rebounds
- 20 assists
- 12 turnovers
- 8 steals
- 4 blocks
- 18 personal fouls
The free-throw number stands out immediately.
Boston made 19 of 20 attempts, which is excellent efficiency at the foul line. Yet the Celtics still lost because their overall field-goal shooting was significantly less efficient than Oklahoma City’s.
Boston’s 42 three-point attempts also deserve attention. The Celtics made 13, meaning they generated 39 points from beyond the arc. However, their 31% three-point rate was not enough to compensate for the difference in two-point and overall field-goal efficiency.
Oklahoma City Thunder player statistics
Oklahoma City received its biggest contribution from Shai Gilgeous-Alexander.
His final statistical line was:
| Player | MIN | PTS | FG | 3PT | FT | REB | AST | STL | BLK | TO |
| Shai Gilgeous-Alexander | 39 | 35 | 13-18 | 2-5 | 7-8 | 6 | 9 | 2 | 3 | 4 |
| Ajay Mitchell | 30 | 15 | 6-10 | 1-3 | 2-3 | 4 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Chet Holmgren | 28 | 14 | 5-10 | 1-4 | 3-3 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Jaylin Williams | 20 | 9 | 3-5 | 3-5 | 0-0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Alex Caruso | 23 | 7 | 3-11 | 1-8 | 0-0 | 4 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| Aaron Wiggins | 15 | 9 | 4-6 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander leads Oklahoma City
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander finished with 35 points, making him the game’s leading scorer.
His efficiency was one of the defining statistical differences between the teams.
He made 13 of 18 field-goal attempts, a remarkable 72.2% shooting rate. He also converted two of five three-point attempts and seven of eight free throws.
Beyond scoring, Gilgeous-Alexander recorded:
- 6 rebounds
- 9 assists
- 2 steals
- 3 blocks
- 4 turnovers
The combination of 35 points and nine assists shows how much of Oklahoma City’s offensive creation went through him.
His three blocks were also notable because they added defensive value to an already dominant offensive performance.
According to the NBA’s official game recap, Gilgeous-Alexander’s 35-point performance also extended his streak of consecutive games with at least 20 points to 127, surpassing Wilt Chamberlain’s previous mark of 126. That achievement added historical significance to an already important regular-season game.
Ajay Mitchell’s efficient supporting role
Ajay Mitchell scored 15 points while shooting 6-for-10 from the field.
He also made one of three three-point attempts and two of three free throws.
His four rebounds and six assists made his contribution more than a scoring role. The six assists were second among Oklahoma City’s listed players behind Gilgeous-Alexander.
Mitchell committed only one turnover, which is especially useful when evaluating a secondary ball handler.
His combination of efficient shooting, six assists, and limited turnovers helped Oklahoma City maintain offensive balance around its primary scorer.
Chet Holmgren’s inside contribution
Chet Holmgren finished with 14 points, nine rebounds, and one turnover.
He shot 5-for-10 from the field and made one of four three-point attempts. He was perfect from the free-throw line, converting all three attempts.
Holmgren’s nine rebounds were just one short of a double-double.
He also recorded three offensive rebounds, which helped Oklahoma City create additional possessions. His overall scoring was not as high as Gilgeous-Alexander’s, but his rebounding and interior presence were important in a game where possession value was high.
The decisive ending also involved Holmgren. With the score tied at 102, he was fouled with less than a second remaining and made both free throws, giving Oklahoma City the final two-point advantage.
Jaylin Williams adds perimeter shooting
Jaylin Williams scored nine points in 20 minutes.
His shooting line was efficient:
- 3-for-5 overall
- 3-for-5 from three
- 2 rebounds
- 1 assist
- 1 turnover
His three made three-pointers were particularly useful because Oklahoma City did not shoot well from beyond the arc as a team.
A 3-for-5 performance from deep can therefore look even more valuable when compared with the team’s overall 11-for-44 three-point shooting.
Alex Caruso’s defensive activity
Alex Caruso scored seven points and shot 3-for-11 from the field.
His three-point shooting was difficult, with only one make in eight attempts.
However, his box score also included four rebounds, two assists, two steals, one block, and one turnover.
That statistical profile shows why evaluating a defensive-minded player solely through points can be misleading. Caruso’s defensive events contributed to Oklahoma City’s overall activity even though his perimeter shooting was inefficient.
Aaron Wiggins provides efficient bench scoring
Aaron Wiggins scored nine points in 15 minutes.
He made four of six field-goal attempts and added three rebounds, one steal, and two turnovers.
His 66.7% field-goal percentage was one of the more efficient shooting performances among Oklahoma City’s listed contributors.
Because he played only 15 minutes, his nine points represented a useful scoring contribution in limited playing time.
Oklahoma City’s team statistics
The Thunder finished with:
- 40 made field goals on 84 attempts
- 47.6% field-goal shooting
- 11 made three-pointers on 44 attempts
- 25.0% three-point shooting
- 13 made free throws on 17 attempts
- 76.0% free-throw shooting
- 39 rebounds
- 22 assists
- 12 turnovers
- 7 steals
- 4 blocks
- 18 personal fouls
The most important number is the 47.6% field-goal percentage.
Oklahoma City made five more field goals than Boston despite taking three fewer attempts.
Boston attempted 87 shots and made 35.
Oklahoma City attempted 84 shots and made 40.
That five-field-goal difference is substantial in a two-point game.
Shooting efficiency explains much of the final result
One of the clearest lessons from the matchup is that three-point volume does not automatically translate into victory.
Boston attempted 42 three-pointers and made 13.
Oklahoma City attempted 44 and made 11.
So Oklahoma City actually attempted more threes but made fewer.
Yet the Thunder still won.
The reason is their overall shooting efficiency. Oklahoma City made 40 of 84 field goals, while Boston made 35 of 87.
The Thunder’s 47.6% field-goal rate was more than seven percentage points higher than Boston’s 40.2%.
This difference compensated for Oklahoma City’s weaker three-point percentage.
It also demonstrates why a complete box-score analysis should separate three-point shooting from overall field-goal efficiency.
Free throws nearly favored Boston
Boston’s free-throw performance was outstanding.
The Celtics made 19 of 20 attempts.
Oklahoma City made 13 of 17.
That gave Boston six more made free throws.
On most nights, that type of advantage can be enough to swing a close contest.
But the Thunder’s field-goal efficiency helped offset the difference.
This is one of the most useful takeaways from the game. A team can lose despite having a better free-throw percentage and more made free throws if the opponent is considerably more efficient from the field.
Rebounding comparison
Boston won the total rebounding battle.
The Celtics collected 44 rebounds compared with 39 for Oklahoma City.
That five-rebound advantage came from several contributors.
Queta led Boston with 10 rebounds, while Scheierman had seven and Brown had six.
For Oklahoma City, Holmgren led with nine and Gilgeous-Alexander had six.
The Thunder did, however, receive three offensive rebounds from Holmgren, while Boston also generated offensive boards through Scheierman and its frontcourt.
The rebounding numbers therefore show that Oklahoma City did not win by dominating the glass.
Ball movement and turnovers
The Thunder finished with 22 assists.
Boston had 20.
The difference was modest, but it fits the broader picture of Oklahoma City’s slightly more efficient offense.
Both teams committed 12 turnovers according to the supplied team totals.
That is important because it removes turnover volume as a major statistical separator.
Boston had 20 assists against 12 turnovers.
Oklahoma City had 22 assists against 12 turnovers.
The Thunder therefore produced two more assists while committing the same number of turnovers.
Their assist-to-turnover ratio was approximately 1.83, compared with Boston’s approximately 1.67.
That is not a huge difference, but in a game decided by two points, small advantages can matter.
Fourth-quarter execution
The fourth quarter was the defining statistical period.
Boston scored 19 points.
Oklahoma City scored 24.
That five-point difference was larger than the final margin.
The teams were tied at 102 late in the game before Oklahoma City produced the final scoring sequence.
Gilgeous-Alexander hit a foul-line jumper with 29.6 seconds remaining to give the Thunder a 102-100 lead.
Brown then tied the game at 102 with 21.9 seconds remaining.
With 0.8 seconds left, Holmgren was fouled while securing a rebound and made both free throws.
Boston’s final attempt did not fall, and Oklahoma City secured the 104-102 victory.
The closing sequence illustrates why late-game statistics should not be separated from the full box score. Gilgeous-Alexander supplied the late basket, Brown responded for Boston, and Holmgren converted the final two free throws.
What the team totals reveal
The complete team comparison makes the result easier to understand.
| Statistic | Boston | Oklahoma City |
| Points | 102 | 104 |
| FG | 35-87 | 40-84 |
| FG% | 40.2% | 47.6% |
| 3PT | 13-42 | 11-44 |
| 3PT% | 31.0% | 25.0% |
| FT | 19-20 | 13-17 |
| FT% | 95.0% | 76.0% |
| Rebounds | 44 | 39 |
| Assists | 20 | 22 |
| Turnovers | 12 | 12 |
| Steals | 8 | 7 |
| Blocks | 4 | 4 |
| Personal Fouls | 18 | 18 |
The comparison produces several clear observations.
Boston had advantages in three-point percentage, free-throw percentage, rebounds, and steals.
Oklahoma City had advantages in overall field-goal percentage and assists.
Turnovers and blocks were even.
The most important separation came from field-goal efficiency.
Why the three-point numbers are interesting
Both teams relied heavily on the three-point shot.
Boston attempted 42 threes.
Oklahoma City attempted 44.
Combined, the teams attempted 86 three-pointers.
However, the combined three-point shooting percentage was only around 28%.
That means the game was not decided by a barrage of efficient long-range shooting. Instead, the Thunder’s ability to make a much higher percentage of their total field-goal attempts proved more important.
For Boston, the 13 made threes helped keep the game close. For Oklahoma City, the 11 made threes were not particularly efficient, but their 40 total field goals compensated for the lower three-point conversion rate.
The importance of shot selection
The box score does not show the exact location of every shot, but the field-goal totals still provide a useful analytical clue.
Oklahoma City made 40 field goals from 84 attempts.
Boston made 35 from 87.
The Thunder therefore converted 47.6% of their attempts, compared with 40.2% for Boston.
That difference means Oklahoma City needed fewer attempts to generate more made baskets.
Boston’s 42 three-point attempts were also nearly half of its total field-goal attempts. The Celtics made 13 of them, but their overall shooting percentage remained low.
The numbers suggest that Boston’s offense depended heavily on perimeter conversion and free throws, while Oklahoma City’s offense benefited from broader shooting efficiency.
Brown and Gilgeous-Alexander compared
The individual comparison between Jaylen Brown and Shai Gilgeous-Alexander is one of the most useful parts of the box score.
| Category | Jaylen Brown | Shai Gilgeous-Alexander |
| Minutes | 41 | 39 |
| Points | 34 | 35 |
| FG | 10-25 | 13-18 |
| 3PT | 1-4 | 2-5 |
| FT | 13-14 | 7-8 |
| Rebounds | 6 | 6 |
| Assists | 7 | 9 |
| Steals | 2 | 2 |
| Blocks | 1 | 3 |
| Turnovers | 6 | 4 |
The scoring totals were almost identical.
The efficiency was not.
Gilgeous-Alexander made 13 of 18 field-goal attempts, while Brown made 10 of 25.
Brown’s free-throw advantage helped him reach 34 points, while Gilgeous-Alexander generated his 35 points with much more efficient field-goal shooting.
Gilgeous-Alexander also had two more assists and two fewer turnovers.
Both players produced significant all-around numbers, but their routes to those totals were different.
The role of secondary scoring
A close game also depends on the players beyond the primary scorer.
Boston received 14 points from Pritchard, 11 from Scheierman, 8 from Hauser, and 4 from Queta among the listed core contributors.
Oklahoma City received 15 from Mitchell, 14 from Holmgren, 9 from Jaylin Williams, 7 from Caruso, and 9 from Wiggins.
The distribution was relatively balanced on both sides.
Oklahoma City’s secondary contributors combined efficient shooting with playmaking and rebounding.
Boston’s secondary group supplied useful production, but the team needed more efficiency from its perimeter attempts.
Defensive statistics
The defensive box score was balanced in several areas.
Boston recorded eight steals.
Oklahoma City recorded seven.
Both teams had four blocks.
Both teams committed 18 personal fouls.
The individual defensive statistics were also notable.
Brown recorded two steals and one block.
Queta had one steal and two blocks.
Gilgeous-Alexander had two steals and three blocks.
Caruso had two steals and one block.
These numbers show that defensive impact was spread across the roster rather than concentrated in a single player.
What the player stats say about the game
The celtics vs oklahoma city thunder match player stats point to a game where the margins were extremely small, but the underlying statistical profile was not identical.
Boston’s strongest statistical areas included free throws, rebounds, steals, and three-point percentage.
Oklahoma City’s strongest areas included overall shooting efficiency, assists, and late-game execution.
The Celtics also received a huge scoring performance from Brown.
The Thunder received an even more efficient scoring performance from Gilgeous-Alexander, plus important contributions from Mitchell and Holmgren.
The result was therefore not simply a matter of one star scoring more than another. Both stars produced at a high level. The difference was how efficiently Oklahoma City converted its opportunities and how the Thunder performed in the closing possessions.
A closer look at the final possessions
The final sequence deserves special attention because it explains the two-point margin better than the final box score alone.
With 29.6 seconds remaining, Gilgeous-Alexander made a foul-line jumper to put Oklahoma City ahead 102-100.
Boston answered through Brown, who tied the game at 102 with 21.9 seconds remaining.
The Thunder then had the final possession.
With less than one second remaining, Holmgren was fouled on a rebound. He made both free throws.
That gave Oklahoma City a 104-102 lead.
Boston’s last three-point attempt did not go in.
The game therefore ended without overtime.
This sequence also explains why Holmgren’s 14 points should not be viewed only through his 5-for-10 shooting. His final two free throws directly produced the winning margin.
A note about the date
The official NBA game listing identifies this matchup as Boston at Oklahoma City on March 12, 2026, with the game ending in the early hours of March 13 Eastern Time. The NBA recap was published March 13 and describes the 104-102 result.
For consistency with the official game record, the matchup discussed here is the March 12, 2026 game at Paycom Center.
This distinction matters because box-score databases can display the date differently depending on local time, publication time, or the convention used by the database.
How to read these statistics correctly
Readers often search for player statistics because they want quick answers about points, rebounds, assists, shooting, or the leading scorer. Those numbers are useful, but a complete reading should go further.
Start with the final score.
Then compare team shooting.
After that, examine free throws, rebounds, assists, and turnovers.
Finally, look at individual player efficiency and the closing sequence.
For this game, that process produces a much clearer explanation:
- Oklahoma City won 104-102.
- Gilgeous-Alexander led all scorers with 35.
- Brown led Boston with 34.
- Oklahoma City shot 47.6% overall.
- Boston shot 40.2% overall.
- Boston made more free throws and won the rebounding battle.
- Both teams committed 12 turnovers.
- The Thunder scored five more points in the fourth quarter.
- Holmgren’s two late free throws created the final margin.
This is more informative than simply listing the points leaders.
Key statistical takeaways
Several conclusions stand out from the complete box score.
Oklahoma City’s field-goal efficiency mattered
The Thunder made 40 of 84 field goals.
Boston made 35 of 87.
That five-made-basket advantage was the largest basic shooting difference in the game.
Boston’s free-throw shooting was excellent
The Celtics converted 19 of 20 free throws.
That 95% rate was considerably higher than Oklahoma City’s 76%.
Boston won the rebounding battle
The Celtics finished with 44 rebounds.
The Thunder had 39.
Queta’s 10 rebounds and Scheierman’s seven helped Boston control that category.
Gilgeous-Alexander combined scoring and playmaking
His 35 points came alongside nine assists, six rebounds, two steals, and three blocks.
That was a complete statistical performance.
Brown carried a major offensive workload
Brown scored 34 points and added seven assists and six rebounds.
His six turnovers were one of the more significant negative numbers in his otherwise productive box score.
The game was decided late
After three quarters, the scoring was tied at 24-24 in the third.
The Thunder then won the fourth quarter 24-19.
The five-point fourth-quarter advantage became the foundation of the two-point victory.
FAQs
Who was the leading scorer in Celtics vs Oklahoma City Thunder?
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander was the leading scorer with 35 points for Oklahoma City. Jaylen Brown led Boston with 34 points.
What was the final score of the Celtics vs Thunder game?
The Oklahoma City Thunder defeated the Boston Celtics 104-102.
How many points did Jaylen Brown score?
Jaylen Brown scored 34 points. He also recorded six rebounds, seven assists, two steals, one block, and six turnovers.
How many points did Shai Gilgeous-Alexander score?
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander scored 35 points. He also had six rebounds, nine assists, two steals, three blocks, and four turnovers.
Which team shot better from the field?
Oklahoma City shot better overall, making 40 of 84 field-goal attempts for 47.6%. Boston made 35 of 87 for 40.2%.
Who won the Celtics vs Thunder matchup?
The Oklahoma City Thunder won the game 104-102 after Chet Holmgren made two free throws with less than one second remaining.
Conclusion
The celtics vs oklahoma city thunder match player stats show a tightly contested game in which both teams had clear statistical strengths. Boston finished with more rebounds, more steals, a higher free-throw percentage, and a better three-point percentage. Oklahoma City countered with substantially better overall field-goal efficiency and slightly more assists.
Jaylen Brown’s 34-point performance was the centerpiece of Boston’s offense, while Shai Gilgeous-Alexander produced 35 points with nine assists, six rebounds, two steals, and three blocks. Chet Holmgren added 14 points and nine rebounds before converting the two free throws that decided the game.
The final numbers explain why the margin was only two points. Boston’s 19-for-20 free-throw shooting and 44 rebounds kept the Celtics within reach, while Oklahoma City’s 40-for-84 field-goal shooting gave the Thunder enough offensive efficiency to overcome Boston’s advantages in other categories.
The fourth quarter ultimately separated the teams. Oklahoma City scored 24 points to Boston’s 19, and the Thunder executed the final possession successfully. The result was a 104-102 home victory in a game where the smallest details in shooting efficiency and late-game execution mattered.
