San Antonio Spurs vs Utah Jazz Match Player Stats
The san antonio spurs vs utah jazz match player stats from the July 15, 2026 NBA Summer League game provide a useful look at how individual performances shaped San Antonio’s 94-82 victory over Utah in Las Vegas. The Spurs combined strong perimeter shooting, a 43-38 rebounding advantage, and major contributions from Ja’Kobi Gillespie and Hyunjung Lee to pull away from the Jazz. Gillespie led all scorers with 25 points, while Lee added 22 points off the bench. Utah received 16 points from Tamar Bates and 15 from Darryn Peterson, but struggled to convert from three-point range.
This Summer League matchup was particularly useful for anyone looking beyond the final score. The box score shows a game where San Antonio did not simply win because one player had a big scoring night. The Spurs created separation through several connected areas, including three-point shooting, defensive rebounding, second-chance opportunities, and efficient scoring from their leading guards.
The game was played at Pavilion in Las Vegas as part of the 2026 NBA Summer League. San Antonio entered the contest with a strong Summer League record, and the victory moved the Spurs to 3-1 while Utah fell to 1-3 according to the NBA’s official game coverage.
San Antonio Spurs vs Utah Jazz Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The final score was:
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Final |
| Utah Jazz | 18 | 26 | 20 | 18 | 82 |
| San Antonio Spurs | 24 | 22 | 30 | 18 | 94 |
San Antonio’s 12-point victory was built primarily during the third quarter. The Spurs scored 30 points in the third while holding Utah to 20. That 10-point advantage became the decisive stretch of the game.
The opening quarter was also important. Utah started competitively, but San Antonio finished the period with a strong run and took a 24-18 lead. The Jazz responded in the second quarter by scoring 26 points, cutting the halftime deficit to two points.
That made the third quarter the turning point.
San Antonio increased its lead from two points at halftime to 12 points entering the final period. Utah managed to match San Antonio’s 18 points in the fourth quarter, but the damage had already been done.
The official NBA game page lists the contest at Pavilion in Las Vegas, with Prime Video as the broadcast outlet.
San Antonio Spurs Player Stats
San Antonio finished the game with 32 made field goals on 78 attempts, good for 41.0 percent shooting. The Spurs also made 13 of 38 three-point attempts, or 34.2 percent, and converted all eight of their free throws.
The combination of 41 percent overall shooting and 34.2 percent three-point shooting gave San Antonio an important offensive advantage.
Ja’Kobi Gillespie
Ja’Kobi Gillespie was the leading scorer and one of the most influential players in the game.
He finished with:
- 25 points
- 10-for-21 shooting
- 3-for-8 from three-point range
- 1-for-1 from the free-throw line
- 1 rebound
- 5 assists
- 2 steals
- 6 turnovers
- 4 personal fouls
- +9 plus/minus
His 25 points came on 21 field-goal attempts, showing how central he was to San Antonio’s offensive attack.
Gillespie’s playmaking was also important. His five assists tied the team high, and his two steals contributed to San Antonio’s defensive activity.
There was one notable weakness in his box score: six turnovers. That number is significant because San Antonio finished with 16 turnovers as a team. Gillespie therefore accounted for a substantial portion of those mistakes.
Still, his scoring and creation were major reasons the Spurs were able to generate enough offense to reach 94 points. The NBA’s official recap identified Gillespie as the game-high scorer and noted his 25-point performance.
Hyunjung Lee
Hyunjung Lee provided one of the most valuable scoring performances for San Antonio.
He recorded:
- 22 points
- 5-for-11 field goals
- 4-for-7 three-pointers
- 4-for-4 free throws
- 5 rebounds
- 2 steals
- 1 block
- 2 turnovers
- +15 plus/minus
His three-point shooting was especially important.
Lee made four of his seven attempts from beyond the arc, producing a 57.1 percent three-point rate. That gave San Antonio a reliable perimeter scoring source alongside Gillespie.
His +15 plus/minus was also among the strongest marks on the Spurs. While plus/minus should never be treated as a complete player evaluation by itself, the number fits the broader game story because San Antonio built its largest advantage while several of its key contributors were producing efficiently.
The NBA’s official game coverage specifically highlighted Lee’s 22 points and four made three-pointers.
RJ Davis
RJ Davis produced a particularly useful all-around statistical line.
He finished with:
- 14 points
- 5-for-12 shooting
- 1-for-6 from three
- 1-for-1 from the free-throw line
- 12 rebounds
- 1 assist
- 1 steal
- 4 turnovers
- +3 plus/minus
His 12 rebounds were the most by any player in the game.
That contribution deserves attention because San Antonio’s overall rebounding advantage was 43-38. Davis alone collected 12 boards, including 11 defensive rebounds.
The rebounding figure also helped San Antonio limit Utah’s opportunities after missed shots. The Jazz did collect 13 offensive rebounds, but the Spurs’ 31 defensive rebounds helped protect their advantage.
Davis was not particularly effective from three-point range, shooting 1-for-6, but his rebounding provided significant value beyond his scoring total.
Igor Milicic Jr.
Igor Milicic Jr. added 10 rebounds in 21:50 of playing time.
His final line included:
- 4 points
- 1-for-4 field goals
- 10 rebounds
- 1 assist
- 2 steals
- 5 personal fouls
Milicic’s scoring was limited, but his rebounding was useful for a Spurs team that controlled the overall glass.
Nine of his 10 rebounds came on the defensive end, making him one of the players who helped San Antonio finish with 31 defensive rebounds.
Maliq Brown
Maliq Brown contributed efficiently despite a relatively modest offensive workload.
He posted:
- 7 points
- 2-for-3 field goals
- 1-for-1 from three
- 1-for-1 free throws
- 4 rebounds
- 1 assist
- 2 steals
- 1 turnover
- +14 plus/minus
His 66.7 percent field-goal shooting and +14 plus/minus were notable supporting contributions.
Miles Kelly
Miles Kelly finished with:
- 8 points
- 3-for-5 field goals
- 2-for-3 three-pointers
- 2 rebounds
- 2 assists
- 3 turnovers
- 2 personal fouls
Kelly’s 60 percent shooting from the field and 66.7 percent three-point shooting gave San Antonio another efficient perimeter contributor.
Utah Jazz Player Stats
Utah finished with 28 made field goals on 75 attempts, shooting 37.3 percent from the field.
The biggest statistical problem was three-point shooting.
The Jazz made only five of 24 three-point attempts, a rate of 20.8 percent. The NBA’s game coverage also identified Utah’s 5-for-24 performance from beyond the arc as a major factor in the loss.
Utah did shoot 11-for-15 from the free-throw line, or 73.3 percent, but the team did not generate enough efficient perimeter scoring to keep pace with San Antonio.
Tamar Bates
Tamar Bates led Utah with 16 points.
His line was:
- 16 points
- 5-for-9 field goals
- 1-for-2 three-pointers
- 2-for-2 free throws
- 2 offensive rebounds
- 2 total rebounds
- 1 turnover
- 2 personal fouls
- -5 plus/minus
Bates was one of Utah’s more efficient offensive players. He converted 55.6 percent of his field-goal attempts and 50 percent of his three-point attempts.
His 16 points made him Utah’s leading scorer, although the Jazz needed greater production from several other offensive areas to overcome San Antonio’s shooting advantage.
Darryn Peterson
Darryn Peterson scored 15 points.
His final statistics included:
- 15 points
- 4-for-16 field goals
- 0-for-3 three-pointers
- 4-for-5 free throws
- 4 rebounds
- 4 assists
- 1 steal
- 4 turnovers
- -7 plus/minus
Peterson’s line illustrates one of the central themes of the game.
He contributed in multiple areas, particularly with four assists and four rebounds, but his shooting efficiency was difficult for Utah to overcome. He made only four of 16 field-goal attempts and missed all three of his three-point attempts.
The NBA’s official recap noted that Peterson finished with 15 points and four rebounds and assists while shooting 4-for-16.
Bez Mbeng
Bez Mbeng produced one of Utah’s most efficient individual performances.
He recorded:
- 12 points
- 4-for-5 field goals
- 1-for-1 three-pointers
- 2-for-2 free throws
- 4 rebounds
- 5 assists
- 1 steal
- 1 personal foul
- 0 turnovers
His 80 percent field-goal shooting was the best among Utah’s primary scorers.
More importantly, Mbeng’s five assists tied Gillespie for the game-high total.
He also finished without a turnover, giving Utah a highly efficient offensive contribution even though the overall team result went against the Jazz.
Orlando Robinson
Orlando Robinson added 11 points.
He finished 4-for-11 from the field and made one of five three-point attempts. Robinson also collected seven rebounds, four assists, two steals, and one block.
His four assists and seven rebounds made him an important secondary contributor, although his shooting efficiency was below the level needed to compensate for Utah’s overall perimeter struggles.
Jonas Aidoo
Jonas Aidoo recorded nine rebounds, the most on the Jazz.
His line included:
- 2 points
- 0-for-4 field goals
- 1-for-1 free throw
- 9 rebounds
- 2 blocks
- 2 turnovers
- -13 plus/minus
Aidoo’s nine rebounds helped Utah stay competitive on the glass, particularly because the Jazz finished with 13 offensive rebounds.
His two blocks were also tied for the Utah team high.
Team Statistical Comparison
The overall numbers explain why San Antonio won.
| Category | Utah Jazz | San Antonio Spurs |
| Points | 82 | 94 |
| Field Goals | 28-75 | 32-78 |
| Field Goal % | 37.3% | 41.0% |
| Three-Pointers | 5-24 | 13-38 |
| Three-Point % | 20.8% | 34.2% |
| Free Throws | 11-15 | 8-8 |
| Free Throw % | 73.3% | 100% |
| Rebounds | 38 | 43 |
| Assists | 18 | 14 |
| Turnovers | 14 | 16 |
| Steals | 11 | 11 |
| Blocks | 6 | 3 |
| Offensive Rebounds | 13 | 12 |
| Defensive Rebounds | 25 | 31 |
| Personal Fouls | 14 | 22 |
The most obvious difference was three-point production.
San Antonio made eight more three-pointers than Utah.
That is an enormous difference in a game decided by 12 points. The Spurs scored 39 points from three-point range compared with Utah’s 15.
The Jazz therefore needed to make up 24 points elsewhere, and they could not.
Why Three-Point Shooting Changed the Game
Three-point shooting was arguably the clearest statistical separator.
San Antonio attempted 38 three-pointers and made 13. Utah attempted 24 and made five.
The Spurs therefore generated 39 points from three-point shots, while Utah produced only 15.
That 24-point difference exceeded the final 12-point margin.
This does not mean three-point shooting was the only reason San Antonio won. Basketball results come from several interacting factors. However, the shooting gap is too large to ignore.
San Antonio’s 34.2 percent rate was not extraordinary by itself. The important factor was the contrast with Utah’s 20.8 percent.
Utah’s offense received strong efficiency from Bates and Mbeng, but the team did not receive enough perimeter production from several of its other contributors.
Peterson’s 0-for-3 three-point shooting was especially relevant because he attempted 16 field goals overall.
The Third Quarter Was the Turning Point
The third quarter deserves special attention when reviewing the san antonio spurs vs utah jazz match player stats.
At halftime, San Antonio led 46-44.
After three quarters, the score was 76-64.
The Spurs therefore added 10 points to their lead during the third period.
San Antonio scored 30 points in that quarter while Utah scored 20.
That was the point where the game shifted from a close contest into a game San Antonio could control.
The Spurs combined perimeter scoring with rebounding and defensive activity during that stretch.
Once San Antonio entered the fourth quarter with a 12-point advantage, Utah needed a major offensive surge. Instead, both teams scored 18 points in the final period.
That meant Utah never reduced the deficit.
Rebounding Advantage Helped San Antonio Control Possessions
San Antonio finished with 43 rebounds compared with Utah’s 38.
The difference was not huge, but the distribution matters.
The Spurs collected 31 defensive rebounds.
Utah had 25 defensive rebounds.
San Antonio also received 12 offensive rebounds, while Utah had 13.
That means Utah actually had a slight advantage on the offensive glass, but San Antonio was stronger at securing defensive rebounds.
RJ Davis was the standout rebounder with 12 total boards.
Igor Milicic Jr. added 10.
Together, those two players accounted for 22 of San Antonio’s 43 rebounds.
That is more than half of the team’s total.
Assists and Ball Security Tell a Different Story
One interesting part of the box score is that Utah actually recorded more assists.
The Jazz finished with 18 assists.
The Spurs had 14.
Utah also committed fewer turnovers, with 14 compared with San Antonio’s 16.
At first glance, those numbers might suggest Utah had the cleaner offensive process.
But the final score demonstrates why individual categories should not be examined in isolation.
Utah’s superior assist and turnover numbers did not overcome the team’s shooting disadvantage.
San Antonio also generated 11 steals, matching Utah’s total.
Gillespie contributed two steals, while several Spurs players recorded multiple defensive plays.
Individual Efficiency Versus Volume
The box score also shows an important difference between scoring volume and scoring efficiency.
Gillespie scored 25 points on 21 shots.
Lee scored 22 points on 11 shots.
That means Lee produced almost the same scoring total while taking roughly half as many field-goal attempts.
Lee’s four made three-pointers were central to that efficiency.
For Utah, Bates scored 16 points on nine field-goal attempts, while Peterson scored 15 on 16 attempts.
Those differences are useful when evaluating the game beyond the final score.
A player’s point total tells you how much he scored.
It does not necessarily tell you how efficiently those points were produced.
Plus/Minus From the Box Score
Plus/minus can provide additional context, although it should always be interpreted alongside the rest of the statistics.
San Antonio had several positive individual plus/minus figures.
RJ Melendez recorded the largest listed plus/minus at +21.
Hyunjung Lee finished at +15.
Maliq Brown was +14.
Ja’Kobi Gillespie finished at +9.
For Utah, the highest listed positive mark belonged to Orlando Robinson at +1, while several players finished in negative territory.
Jonas Aidoo finished at -13.
Harrison Gray recorded -18.
These numbers should not be treated as standalone player grades. Plus/minus is influenced by lineup combinations, opponent matchups, and the stretches in which players share the floor.
Still, the distribution broadly reflects San Antonio’s stronger overall performance.
What the Box Score Says About San Antonio
The Spurs’ victory was more balanced than the headline score might suggest.
Their leading scorer, Gillespie, was important, but the Spurs did not depend exclusively on him.
Lee added 22 points.
Davis added 14.
Kelly and Brown provided efficient supporting offense.
Milicic supplied 10 rebounds.
Davis produced 12 rebounds.
This created several ways for San Antonio to maintain its advantage.
The Spurs also shot 100 percent from the free-throw line, going 8-for-8.
Although the number of attempts was low, there were no missed free throws to leave points at the line.
What the Box Score Says About Utah
Utah’s numbers reveal both positive and negative elements.
The Jazz had 18 assists and only 14 turnovers.
They also recorded 11 steals and six blocks.
Their 13 offensive rebounds were slightly better than San Antonio’s 12.
Those statistics show that Utah competed in several possession-based categories.
The biggest issue was conversion.
A team can create extra possessions through offensive rebounds and turnovers forced, but those possessions still need to become points.
Utah shot 37.3 percent overall and 20.8 percent from three.
That combination made it difficult to keep pace with a San Antonio team shooting 41 percent overall and 34.2 percent from outside.
Key Player Matchup: Gillespie vs Peterson
One of the most interesting comparisons from the san antonio spurs vs utah jazz match player stats is between Ja’Kobi Gillespie and Darryn Peterson.
Gillespie:
- 25 points
- 10-for-21 shooting
- 3-for-8 from three
- 5 assists
- 2 steals
Peterson:
- 15 points
- 4-for-16 shooting
- 0-for-3 from three
- 4 assists
- 4 rebounds
- 4 turnovers
Both players were involved heavily in their team’s offensive actions.
The difference was efficiency.
Gillespie converted 47.6 percent of his field-goal attempts.
Peterson converted 25 percent.
Peterson still contributed four assists and four rebounds, showing that his impact was not limited to scoring. However, San Antonio received more efficient offensive production from its primary creator.
Key Player Matchup: Lee vs Utah’s Perimeter Defense
Hyunjung Lee’s performance also deserves attention.
He made four of seven three-point attempts.
Utah’s overall three-point defense allowed San Antonio to attempt 38 shots from outside, and the Spurs converted 13.
Lee alone accounted for four of those makes.
His 22 points represented nearly one-quarter of San Antonio’s 94 total points.
The important point is not simply that Lee scored 22. It is how quickly he accumulated those points through efficient shooting.
The Most Important Numbers From the Game
For readers who want a quick statistical summary, these are the numbers that best explain the contest:
94-82: San Antonio’s final score.
25: Gillespie’s game-high points.
22: Lee’s points.
16: Bates’ team-high scoring total for Utah.
15: Peterson’s points.
43-38: San Antonio’s rebounding advantage.
13-5: San Antonio’s advantage in made three-pointers.
34.2 percent: San Antonio’s three-point shooting.
20.8 percent: Utah’s three-point shooting.
30-20: San Antonio’s third-quarter scoring advantage.
12: Davis’ game-high rebound total.
10: Milicic Jr.’s rebounds.
18: Utah’s assists.
16: San Antonio’s turnovers.
These figures provide a more complete explanation than the final score alone.
How to Read Summer League Player Stats Correctly
Summer League statistics can be useful, but they require context.
The environment is different from the regular NBA season.
Rotations can change quickly. Players may be competing for roster opportunities. Coaches can experiment with lineups and roles. Some players have limited familiarity with their teammates.
That means a single Summer League box score should not automatically be treated as a definitive measure of a player’s long-term NBA role.
Instead, individual games are best viewed as evidence of specific skills.
For example, Gillespie’s 25 points and five assists show that he was able to create offense in this particular game.
Lee’s 22 points on efficient perimeter shooting show his ability to convert outside opportunities in this matchup.
Davis’ 12 rebounds demonstrate his contribution on the glass.
Those are concrete observations from the game.
They should not automatically be transformed into predictions about future NBA success.
Why the Final Score Does Not Tell the Whole Story
The Spurs won by 12 points, but the game was competitive for much of the first half.
Utah led early before San Antonio responded.
The second quarter belonged to Utah by a 26-22 margin.
At halftime, the Spurs were ahead by only two points.
The third quarter changed everything.
San Antonio’s 30-point period created the decisive separation, and the fourth quarter ended evenly at 18-18.
This pattern shows why quarter-by-quarter statistics can be more informative than the final score.
A 94-82 result might look comfortable.
The quarter breakdown shows that San Antonio had to withstand a competitive first half before creating its decisive advantage.
San Antonio Spurs vs Utah Jazz Match Player Stats: Final Statistical Takeaways
The san antonio spurs vs utah jazz match player stats show a game decided by a combination of perimeter efficiency, rebounding, and a dominant third quarter.
Ja’Kobi Gillespie was the headline performer with 25 points and five assists.
Hyunjung Lee provided an equally important scoring contribution with 22 points while making four three-pointers.
RJ Davis quietly delivered one of the game’s strongest all-around performances with 14 points and 12 rebounds.
Igor Milicic Jr. added 10 rebounds, helping San Antonio control the defensive glass.
For Utah, Tamar Bates led the team with 16 points, while Darryn Peterson scored 15 and added four rebounds and four assists.
Bez Mbeng was one of Utah’s most efficient contributors, shooting 4-for-5 and finishing with five assists without committing a turnover.
The largest team-level difference was three-point shooting. San Antonio made 13 threes compared with Utah’s five.
The Spurs also finished with five more rebounds and shot better overall from the field.
Utah’s 18 assists, 14 turnovers, 11 steals, and 13 offensive rebounds demonstrate that the Jazz competed effectively in several areas. However, the 20.8 percent three-point rate limited their scoring efficiency.
The third quarter ultimately provided the decisive separation.
San Antonio entered halftime ahead 46-44 and finished the third quarter leading 76-64. The Spurs then matched Utah’s 18 points in the fourth quarter to preserve the 12-point victory.
For readers studying player performance, this game is a strong example of why a useful box-score analysis should go beyond identifying the highest scorer. Shot efficiency, shooting volume, rebounding, playmaking, turnovers, and quarter-by-quarter scoring all help explain how the result developed.
The official NBA box score records the complete individual statistics for both teams and confirms the 94-82 final score.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who was the leading scorer in the Spurs vs Jazz Summer League game?
Ja’Kobi Gillespie was the leading scorer with 25 points for San Antonio. He shot 10-for-21 from the field and added five assists and two steals.
How many points did Hyunjung Lee score?
Hyunjung Lee scored 22 points for San Antonio. He made five of 11 field-goal attempts, including four of seven from three-point range, and made all four of his free throws.
Who led the game in rebounds?
RJ Davis led all players with 12 rebounds. He collected 11 defensive rebounds and one offensive rebound.
How did Darryn Peterson perform?
Darryn Peterson scored 15 points, grabbed four rebounds, and recorded four assists. He shot 4-for-16 from the field and 0-for-3 from three-point range.
What was the biggest statistical difference between the teams?
Three-point shooting was the clearest difference. San Antonio made 13 of 38 three-point attempts, while Utah made five of 24. The Spurs also held advantages in overall field-goal percentage and total rebounds.
What was the final score of the game?
San Antonio defeated Utah 94-82 at Pavilion in Las Vegas during the 2026 NBA Summer League.
Conclusion
The san antonio spurs vs utah jazz match player stats provide a detailed picture of how San Antonio turned a close first half into a 94-82 victory.
Gillespie’s 25 points led the Spurs, while Lee’s 22 points gave San Antonio another major scoring source. Davis controlled the rebounding battle with 12 boards, and Milicic Jr. added 10.
Utah received productive performances from Bates, Peterson, Mbeng, Robinson, and Aidoo, but the team’s 5-for-24 three-point shooting proved difficult to overcome.
The third quarter was the decisive period. San Antonio outscored Utah 30-20 and transformed a two-point halftime advantage into a 12-point lead.
From a statistical perspective, the game demonstrates the importance of examining several categories together. San Antonio’s victory was supported by better overall shooting, substantially better three-point conversion, a rebounding advantage, and enough secondary scoring to complement Gillespie.
Utah’s stronger assist total and lower turnover count were positive indicators, but they were not enough to compensate for the shooting gap.
For anyone researching Summer League player performance, the most useful takeaway is that the box score should be read as a complete statistical story rather than a simple list of points. The combination of shooting efficiency, volume, rebounding, playmaking, turnovers, and quarter scoring gives a much clearer understanding of what happened on the court.
