Golden State Warriors vs Detroit Pistons Match Player Stats
The golden state warriors vs detroit pistons match player stats from January 31, 2026, show how Detroit earned a 131-124 road victory over Golden State at Chase Center in San Francisco, California. The Pistons combined strong inside scoring, effective free-throw shooting, and aggressive rebounding to secure the win. Cade Cunningham led Detroit with 29 points and 11 assists, while Jalen Duren added 21 points and 13 rebounds. Stephen Curry paced Golden State with 23 points, and De’Anthony Melton contributed 18 points. Despite making 18 three-pointers, the Warriors struggled with turnovers and could not overcome Detroit’s advantage on the boards. The game provides a useful example of how scoring efficiency, possession control, and individual performances can shape an NBA result.
Match Overview: Detroit Pistons vs Golden State Warriors
The January 31 matchup brought two teams with different strengths into a high-scoring contest. Detroit finished with 131 points, while Golden State scored 124. The Pistons built an early advantage and maintained enough offensive production to withstand the Warriors’ fourth-quarter effort.
| Match Detail | Information |
| Date | January 31, 2026 |
| Venue | Chase Center |
| Location | San Francisco, California |
| Attendance | 18,064 |
| Final Score | Detroit Pistons 131, Golden State Warriors 124 |
| Winning Team | Detroit Pistons |
| Losing Team | Golden State Warriors |
| Detroit’s Listed Record | 35-12 overall, 16-7 away |
| Golden State’s Listed Record | 27-23 overall, 17-8 home |
| Detroit’s Leading Scorer | Cade Cunningham, 29 points |
| Golden State’s Leading Scorer | Stephen Curry, 23 points |
| Detroit’s Leading Rebounder | Jalen Duren, 13 rebounds |
| Golden State’s Leading Assister | Brandin Podziemski, 8 assists |
Detroit entered the game with a strong listed record and demonstrated why its balanced offense was difficult to contain. Golden State had home-court advantage, but the Warriors needed more consistent possession management to match the Pistons’ production.
The result was not simply a contest between two leading scorers. Detroit received significant contributions from its primary playmaker, its center, and its supporting players. Golden State also had several productive performers, but its turnovers and rebounding deficit created additional challenges.
Data note: The figures in this article are based on the supplied ESPN game data. Player statistics and team totals are presented as provided, with any limitations identified where relevant.
Golden State Warriors vs Detroit Pistons Match Player Stats: Complete Team Performance
The team statistics explain how Detroit won despite Golden State making more three-pointers. Both teams recorded 31 assists, but Detroit collected more rebounds, committed fewer turnovers, and scored more frequently from the free-throw line.
| Team Statistic | Detroit Pistons | Golden State Warriors |
| Total Points | 131 | 124 |
| Field Goals Made | 46 | 40 |
| Field Goal Attempts | 95 | 90 |
| Field Goal Percentage | 48% | 44% |
| Three-Pointers Made | 10 | 18 |
| Three-Point Attempts | 26 | 52 |
| Three-Point Percentage | 38% | 35% |
| Free Throws Made | 29 | 26 |
| Free-Throw Attempts | 36 | 35 |
| Free-Throw Percentage | 81% | 74% |
| Total Rebounds | 53 | 42 |
| Offensive Rebounds | 15 | 11 |
| Defensive Rebounds | 38 | 31 |
| Assists | 31 | 31 |
| Turnovers | 14 | 18 |
| Steals | 13 | 10 |
| Blocks | 3 | 4 |
| Personal Fouls | 23 | 20 |
What the team statistics reveal
- Detroit was more productive inside the overall shooting profile.
The Pistons made 46 of 95 field-goal attempts, giving them a listed field-goal percentage of 48%. Golden State converted 40 of 90 attempts at 44%. Detroit therefore made six more field goals, helping offset the Warriors’ advantage from beyond the arc.
- Golden State relied heavily on three-point shooting.
The Warriors made 18 three-pointers from 52 attempts. Detroit made 10 from 26 attempts. Golden State’s eight additional three-pointers were a major source of its scoring, but its lower overall field-goal percentage limited the benefit of that long-range volume.
- Free throws helped Detroit maintain its lead.
Detroit converted 29 of 36 free throws, compared with 26 of 35 for Golden State. The Pistons made three more free throws and recorded a higher conversion rate. These additional points mattered in a game decided by seven.
- Rebounding gave Detroit more control of possessions.
The Pistons recorded 53 rebounds, compared with 42 for the Warriors. Detroit also collected 15 offensive rebounds, while Golden State had 11. Extra offensive rebounds can create second-chance scoring opportunities and reduce the opponent’s ability to end defensive possessions cleanly.
- Turnovers were another important difference.
Golden State committed 18 turnovers, four more than Detroit’s 14. Turnovers can prevent teams from taking shots and give opponents opportunities to score in transition. In a game with a narrow final margin, this difference deserves attention.
- Detroit generated more steals.
The Pistons recorded 13 steals, while Golden State had 10. Combined with the turnover figures, this suggests that Detroit was more effective at disrupting Golden State’s possession flow.
These statistics do not prove that one factor alone decided the game. However, the combination of stronger rebounding, fewer turnovers, better overall field-goal accuracy, and more successful free throws offers a clear explanation for Detroit’s seven-point victory.
Quarter-by-Quarter Score Breakdown
The scoring pattern shows that Detroit created its biggest advantage in the opening quarter. Golden State improved its scoring later, but the Warriors could not erase the gap established early in the contest.
| Quarter | Detroit Pistons | Golden State Warriors | Quarter Difference |
| First Quarter | 45 | 37 | Detroit +8 |
| Second Quarter | 32 | 27 | Detroit +5 |
| Third Quarter | 31 | 31 | Tied |
| Fourth Quarter | 23 | 29 | Golden State +6 |
| Final Score | 131 | 124 | Detroit +7 |
First Quarter: Detroit established the advantage
Detroit scored 45 points in the opening quarter, compared with Golden State’s 37. The eight-point difference gave the visitors an early cushion and put pressure on the Warriors to respond.
A 45-point quarter represents substantial offensive production. Detroit’s early scoring meant that Golden State needed to win subsequent stretches by a meaningful margin rather than simply trade baskets.
The Warriors still scored 37 points, so their offense was not ineffective. The problem was that Detroit produced even more during the same period.
Second Quarter: The Pistons extended their lead
Detroit added 32 points in the second quarter, while Golden State scored 27. The Pistons gained another five points on the Warriors, increasing their advantage before halftime.
The first-half scoring totals were:
- Detroit Pistons: 77 points
- Golden State Warriors: 64 points
- Detroit’s halftime advantage: 13 points
This first-half margin became an important part of the final result. Golden State needed to make up 13 points while also preventing Detroit from continuing to score efficiently.
Third Quarter: Both teams matched each other
The teams scored 31 points apiece in the third quarter. Neither side gained ground during this period.
A tied quarter can indicate that both offenses are producing at similar rates, although the score alone does not explain the tactical adjustments behind that outcome. In this case, Detroit retained its 13-point advantage entering the final quarter.
Golden State’s inability to reduce the deficit during the third quarter meant that the fourth-quarter comeback would require a substantial scoring run.
Fourth Quarter: Golden State made a late push
Golden State scored 29 points in the final quarter, while Detroit recorded 23. The Warriors won the quarter by six points, showing that they continued to compete despite the earlier deficit.
However, the improvement came too late to reverse the outcome. Detroit’s 13-point halftime lead, which remained unchanged after the third quarter, was enough to absorb Golden State’s late advantage.
The final margin was seven points, meaning the Warriors narrowed the gap considerably in the closing period without completing the comeback.
Detroit Pistons Player Stats and Individual Performances
Detroit’s victory featured strong production from its leading scorer and center. Cade Cunningham controlled the offense, while Jalen Duren contributed both scoring and rebounding. The supporting cast also played a role in sustaining Detroit’s offensive output.
Cade Cunningham: 29 Points and 11 Assists
Cade Cunningham was Detroit’s leading scorer and primary playmaker in the supplied game statistics.
| Statistic | Performance |
| Points | 29 |
| Assists | 11 |
| Team Role | Primary scorer and playmaker |
Cunningham’s 29 points led all listed scorers in the game. His 11 assists also made him the leading facilitator for Detroit.
These numbers highlight two different aspects of his performance. His scoring helped the Pistons maintain offensive pressure, while his assists reflected his involvement in creating opportunities for teammates.
A player who combines high scoring with double-digit assists can influence a game in several ways. He can finish possessions himself, create open shots for teammates, and help keep the offense moving when the defense focuses on him.
Cunningham’s performance was particularly valuable because Detroit did not need to depend on a single type of scoring. His playmaking helped distribute the offensive workload across the lineup.
Jalen Duren: 21 Points and 13 Rebounds
Jalen Duren delivered one of Detroit’s most important all-around performances. He recorded 21 points and 13 rebounds, leading the Pistons in rebounding.
| Statistic | Performance |
| Points | 21 |
| Rebounds | 13 |
| Team Role | Interior scorer and rebounder |
Duren’s 21 points provided a strong second scoring option behind Cunningham. His 13 rebounds also contributed to Detroit’s overall advantage on the glass.
Rebounding is especially important when facing a team that takes a high volume of three-point shots. Missed long-range attempts can produce rebounds in different areas of the court, and securing them helps a defense complete possessions.
Duren’s production gave Detroit an interior presence to complement Cunningham’s perimeter playmaking. The combination of a leading guard and a productive center can make an offense harder to defend because opponents must account for different scoring areas.
His contribution also reduced the need for Cunningham to carry the entire offensive burden.
Isaiah Stewart: 14 Points From the Bench
Isaiah Stewart was a notable contributor among Detroit’s listed reserves, scoring 14 points.
Bench scoring matters because games are played across multiple lineup combinations. Starters cannot play every minute, and reserves must help maintain the team’s performance when rotations change.
Stewart’s 14 points provided additional support behind Cunningham and Duren. This contribution was meaningful in a game where Detroit finished with 131 points.
His total also illustrates why individual scoring leaders do not tell the entire story. A leading scorer can establish the offensive direction, but supporting players help sustain production throughout the contest.
Detroit’s Other Listed Players
Detroit’s listed starting lineup included Tobias Harris, Duncan Robinson, Jalen Duren, Cade Cunningham, and Ausar Thompson.
The supplied bench list included Ronald Holland II, Isaiah Stewart, Javonte Green, Jaden Ivey, Daniss Jenkins, Paul Reed, Bobi Klintman, Marcus Sasser, and Chaz Lanier.
The available summary identifies several players by name but does not provide complete individual box-score lines for every player. Therefore, points, rebounds, assists, minutes, and shooting figures should not be assigned to those players without verified statistics.
This distinction matters when evaluating player performance. A roster listing establishes which players were included in the game data, but it does not establish how much each player contributed.
Golden State Warriors Player Stats and Individual Performances
Golden State received productive scoring from Stephen Curry and De’Anthony Melton. Brandin Podziemski led the Warriors in both assists and rebounds according to the supplied summary, while Gui Santos provided a notable contribution from the bench.
Stephen Curry: 23 Points
Stephen Curry was Golden State’s leading scorer, finishing with 23 points.
| Statistic | Performance |
| Points | 23 |
| Team Role | Primary perimeter scorer |
Curry’s 23 points represented the highest individual scoring total for the Warriors in the supplied data.
His scoring was part of an offense that made 18 three-pointers. However, Golden State attempted 52 shots from beyond the arc, meaning its perimeter attack relied on a high volume of long-range attempts.
That approach can produce substantial scoring when shots fall consistently. However, it also creates pressure to convert enough attempts to compensate for possessions that end without points.
Golden State made 35% of its three-point attempts, compared with Detroit’s listed 38%. Although the Warriors made eight more three-pointers overall, the Pistons were more accurate from the field as a whole.
Curry’s scoring helped keep the Warriors competitive, but the team needed stronger possession control and greater overall efficiency to overcome Detroit’s advantage.
De’Anthony Melton: 18 Points
De’Anthony Melton recorded 18 points, making him Golden State’s second-highest scorer in the supplied summary.
| Statistic | Performance |
| Points | 18 |
| Team Role | Supporting scorer |
Melton’s 18 points were important because they reduced the scoring burden on Curry. A second productive scorer gives a team another option when the primary offensive player faces defensive pressure.
His contribution also demonstrates that Golden State had scoring support beyond its most recognizable player.
However, individual scoring totals must be considered alongside the team’s broader results. The Warriors scored 124 points, but they also committed 18 turnovers and collected 11 fewer rebounds than Detroit.
Melton’s scoring was a positive element of Golden State’s performance, even though it was not enough to secure the win.
Brandin Podziemski: 8 Assists and 8 Rebounds
Brandin Podziemski led Golden State in assists and rebounds in the supplied game summary, recording eight in each category.
| Statistic | Performance |
| Assists | 8 |
| Rebounds | 8 |
| Team Role | Playmaking and rebounding support |
Podziemski’s contribution extended beyond scoring. His eight assists showed his involvement in creating opportunities for teammates, while his eight rebounds added support on the glass.
These numbers are valuable because they reflect two areas where teams need contributions from more than their leading scorer. Playmaking helps create efficient shots, while rebounding helps control the number of possessions available to both sides.
Despite Podziemski’s all-around contribution, Golden State finished with 42 rebounds, substantially below Detroit’s 53. The Warriors also recorded 18 turnovers, which limited their ability to convert offensive possessions into scoring opportunities.
Gui Santos: 16 Points From the Bench
Gui Santos was Golden State’s notable bench scorer, finishing with 16 points.
His production gave the Warriors another source of offense beyond Curry and Melton. Scoring from reserves can help maintain momentum when starters rest and can provide additional options during a comeback attempt.
Santos’s 16 points were particularly relevant in a game where Golden State needed to close a substantial early deficit. His scoring contributed to the team’s overall total, although Detroit’s lead proved too large to overcome.
Golden State’s Other Listed Players
The supplied starting lineup included Draymond Green, Al Horford, Stephen Curry, Moses Moody, and Brandin Podziemski.
The listed reserves were Gui Santos, Quinten Post, Buddy Hield, De’Anthony Melton, Pat Spencer, Will Richard, Trayce Jackson-Davis, and Gary Payton II.
These names identify the players included in the supplied lineup information. Complete individual statistical lines are not available in the summary for every listed player, so their contributions should not be estimated.
For a full player-by-player breakdown, the ESPN official box score is the appropriate reference for checking individual figures and participation details.
Shooting Efficiency: Why Detroit Scored More With Fewer Three-Pointers
One of the most interesting parts of this matchup is the difference between Detroit’s shooting approach and Golden State’s perimeter-heavy offense.
The Warriors made 18 three-pointers, eight more than Detroit. Yet they still lost by seven points. This result shows why three-point totals alone cannot explain an NBA game.
Field-goal percentage favored Detroit
Detroit converted 46 of 95 field-goal attempts, while Golden State made 40 of 90.
| Shooting Measure | Detroit | Golden State |
| Field Goals Made | 46 | 40 |
| Field-Goal Attempts | 95 | 90 |
| Listed Field-Goal Percentage | 48% | 44% |
| Three-Pointers Made | 10 | 18 |
| Listed Three-Point Percentage | 38% | 35% |
| Free Throws Made | 29 | 26 |
| Listed Free-Throw Percentage | 81% | 74% |
Detroit made six more field goals overall. Golden State’s greater three-point production helped narrow the scoring gap, but it did not erase Detroit’s advantage in total field goals and free throws.
Three-point shooting is valuable because each successful shot is worth three points. However, a team must consider both accuracy and the number of attempts needed to generate those points.
Golden State attempted twice as many three-pointers as Detroit. That approach generated more long-range baskets, but Detroit maintained the higher overall field-goal percentage.
Free-throw shooting added another advantage
Detroit made 29 free throws from 36 attempts, while Golden State converted 26 from 35 attempts.
The difference was three successful free throws. Although that is not a huge gap by itself, it contributed directly to the final margin.
Free throws are also important because they allow teams to score without making a field goal. A team that consistently earns trips to the line can maintain its scoring even when perimeter shots are not falling.
Detroit’s 81% listed free-throw percentage was better than Golden State’s 74%. This gave the Pistons an additional source of scoring outside their regular field-goal attempts.
What the shooting figures mean for the final result
The combined shooting figures suggest that Detroit used a more balanced scoring approach. The Pistons made more field goals, converted more free throws, and collected more rebounds.
Golden State depended more heavily on three-point attempts. Its 18 successful shots from distance were a major positive, but the team’s overall shooting percentage remained lower.
The broader lesson is that an offense should not be evaluated by its best statistical category alone. Three-point production, interior scoring, free throws, and offensive rebounds all contribute to the final score.
Rebounding and Turnovers: Two Differences That Favored Detroit
The rebounding and turnover numbers offer a second explanation for Detroit’s victory. Both statistics influence how many opportunities a team receives to score.
Detroit’s 53 rebounds created a clear advantage
Detroit collected 53 rebounds, compared with Golden State’s 42.
The difference was 11 rebounds, including a four-rebound advantage on the offensive glass.
| Rebounding Statistic | Detroit | Golden State |
| Total Rebounds | 53 | 42 |
| Offensive Rebounds | 15 | 11 |
| Defensive Rebounds | 38 | 31 |
Offensive rebounds are valuable because they give a team another opportunity after a missed shot. These second chances can extend possessions and create additional scoring opportunities.
Defensive rebounds have a different purpose. They help end the opponent’s possession and allow the rebounding team to begin its own offense.
Detroit’s 38 defensive rebounds helped it finish defensive possessions, while its 15 offensive rebounds provided additional opportunities at the other end.
Golden State’s 42 rebounds were not insignificant, but the 11-rebound gap favored the Pistons considerably.
Golden State committed four more turnovers
The Warriors committed 18 turnovers, compared with Detroit’s 14.
A turnover ends an offensive possession without a field-goal attempt being completed in the usual way. Depending on the situation, it can also create a transition opportunity for the opposing team.
Four additional turnovers do not automatically translate into a specific number of points. The outcome depends on what happens after each turnover. However, they represent opportunities that Golden State failed to use for a shot.
Detroit’s lower turnover total suggests that the Pistons protected their possessions more effectively according to the supplied team statistics.
Why these two categories work together
Rebounding and turnovers are closely related when evaluating possession control.
- Offensive rebounds can extend possessions that would otherwise end after a missed shot.
- Defensive rebounds help prevent opponents from receiving additional chances.
- Fewer turnovers allow a team to reach more of its intended offensive possessions.
- Steals can disrupt the opponent’s attack and potentially create transition scoring opportunities.
Detroit led in total rebounds, offensive rebounds, defensive rebounds, and steals. Golden State committed more turnovers.
Taken together, these figures provide a stronger explanation of the outcome than simply comparing points scored by individual players.
Assists and Ball Movement: Both Teams Reached 31
Both teams recorded 31 assists, suggesting that each offense generated considerable scoring through passes that led to baskets.
Assists do not measure every aspect of ball movement, but they help show how frequently teammates created scoring opportunities for one another.
Detroit’s 31 assists complemented Cunningham’s 11. As the team’s leading playmaker, Cunningham accounted for a substantial portion of Detroit’s recorded assists.
Golden State also recorded 31 assists. Podziemski led the Warriors with eight, according to the supplied data.
The equal team totals are worth noting because Detroit’s victory was not based on a clear advantage in this category. Instead, the teams reached the same assist total while producing different results in rebounding, turnovers, and overall shooting.
This distinction helps separate offensive creation from offensive efficiency. Two teams can generate the same number of assisted baskets while differing in how many shots they make, how many possessions they lose, and how often they collect missed shots.
Detroit’s result illustrates why assists should be interpreted alongside other measures rather than treated as a standalone indicator of offensive quality.
Defensive Performance: Steals, Blocks, and Fouls
Defense involves more than preventing successful shots. Teams must also disrupt passing lanes, challenge attempts near the basket, and avoid giving opponents easy scoring opportunities.
The supplied team statistics show that Detroit recorded 13 steals and three blocks. Golden State registered 10 steals and four blocks.
| Defensive Statistic | Detroit | Golden State |
| Steals | 13 | 10 |
| Blocks | 3 | 4 |
| Personal Fouls | 23 | 20 |
| Turnovers Committed | 14 | 18 |
Detroit recorded three more steals, while Golden State recorded one more block. These numbers point to different defensive contributions rather than a complete picture of defensive quality.
A steal can end an opponent’s possession and potentially create a fast-break opportunity. A block can prevent or alter a shot, but not every block changes possession or leads directly to a scoring chance.
Personal fouls also matter because they can send opponents to the free-throw line, depending on the situation and applicable rules. Detroit committed 23 personal fouls, while Golden State committed 20.
Despite committing more fouls, Detroit converted its free throws at a higher rate and made three more than Golden State.
It would be misleading to conclude that the Pistons had better defense in every respect. Golden State recorded more blocks and fewer personal fouls. However, Detroit’s advantage in steals, rebounds, and turnovers suggests that its defensive activity helped disrupt the Warriors’ offensive rhythm.
Key Factors Behind the Pistons’ Seven-Point Victory
Several elements combined to produce Detroit’s 131-124 win. No single statistic completely explains the outcome, but the following factors stand out in the supplied data.
1. The opening quarter created an early cushion
Detroit outscored Golden State 45-37 in the first quarter. The Pistons then added to their advantage in the second period.
This early production gave Detroit room to withstand Golden State’s late push. Although the Warriors won the fourth quarter, the early deficit remained decisive.
2. Cunningham combined scoring with playmaking
Cunningham recorded 29 points and 11 assists. His ability to contribute in both categories helped Detroit sustain its offense without relying exclusively on individual scoring.
His performance also complemented Duren’s 21 points, giving Detroit two major offensive contributors in different roles.
3. Duren supplied interior scoring and rebounding
Duren finished with 21 points and 13 rebounds. His performance supported Detroit’s advantage on the boards and provided scoring beyond the perimeter.
The Pistons’ 53 total rebounds reinforced this strength at the team level.
4. Detroit made better use of free throws
The Pistons converted 29 free throws, compared with 26 for Golden State. Their higher listed conversion rate added to their scoring advantage.
5. Golden State’s three-point volume was not enough
The Warriors made 18 three-pointers, but they also attempted 52. Their 35% listed success rate was lower than Detroit’s 38%.
Long-range shooting kept Golden State competitive, but it could not fully compensate for the team’s lower field-goal percentage and turnover disadvantage.
6. Detroit protected possessions more effectively
The Pistons committed 14 turnovers, while the Warriors committed 18. Combined with Detroit’s 11-rebound advantage, this suggests that possession management was one of the game’s defining differences.
These factors are interconnected. Early scoring created the lead, individual performances sustained Detroit’s offense, and possession control helped protect the advantage when Golden State tried to recover.
How to Read NBA Match Player Statistics Correctly
Understanding a box score requires more than identifying the player with the most points. Each statistic answers a different question about individual and team performance.
Points show scoring output
Points indicate how much a player contributes directly to the scoreboard. However, points alone do not explain how efficiently those points were scored or how much a player contributed in other areas.
Cunningham’s 29 points made him the game’s leading scorer in the supplied summary. Duren’s 21 points and Curry’s 23 points also show why multiple players must be considered when comparing the teams.
Rebounds show work on the glass
Rebounds measure how often players recover the ball after a missed field-goal or free-throw attempt, subject to the official scoring rules.
Offensive rebounds can extend an attack. Defensive rebounds can end an opponent’s possession. Looking at both categories provides more context than total rebounds alone.
Assists measure direct playmaking
Assists record passes that directly lead to made field goals under official scoring criteria. They offer insight into how players help teammates score.
Cunningham’s 11 assists and Podziemski’s eight assists identify the leading playmakers in the supplied summary. However, assists do not capture every valuable pass, screen, or off-ball movement.
Shooting percentages need context
Field-goal, three-point, and free-throw percentages measure different types of scoring efficiency.
For example, a player who makes several three-pointers can contribute substantial points without leading the team in total field goals. Similarly, free throws can make a meaningful difference even when the number of attempts is relatively small.
Turnovers reveal lost opportunities
Turnovers indicate possessions that end through errors or defensive plays. A high turnover count can limit scoring opportunities, especially when a team is attempting to overcome a deficit.
Golden State’s 18 turnovers compared with Detroit’s 14 are therefore an important part of this game’s statistical story.
The most useful analysis combines these measures rather than relying on a single number to determine which player or team performed better.
Data Accuracy and Important Statistical Limitations
A reliable game recap should distinguish between supplied figures and verified individual box-score details.
The data provided for this matchup includes team totals and selected player statistics. It does not include complete individual lines for every player, so a fully populated player-by-player table cannot be produced accurately from the summary alone.
There are also several points worth keeping in mind when interpreting the figures.
- Team totals: The supplied field-goal, three-point, free-throw, rebound, assist, turnover, steal, block, and foul totals are reproduced as provided.
- Player statistics: Cunningham’s 29 points and 11 assists, Duren’s 21 points and 13 rebounds, Curry’s 23 points, Melton’s 18 points, Podziemski’s eight assists and eight rebounds, and the two notable bench scoring totals are drawn from the supplied summary.
- Individual shooting lines: Complete field-goal attempts, three-point attempts, free throws, minutes, and plus-minus figures are not available for every listed player.
- Game chronology: The quarter-by-quarter totals add up to the supplied final score of 131-124.
- Season series: The supplied matchup information also lists a March 21 result of Detroit 115, Golden State 101. The available summary does not establish the complete circumstances of that later meeting.
There is a small rounding issue in the shooting figures as well. Detroit’s 46 made field goals from 95 attempts calculate to approximately 48.4%, while Golden State’s 40 from 90 calculate to approximately 44.4%. These values are consistent with the displayed whole-number percentages.
A further calculation illustrates the scoring pattern. Using the supplied team totals, Detroit scored 131 points from 46 field goals and 29 free throws. Golden State scored 124 points from 40 field goals and 26 free throws. The totals are internally consistent with the standard scoring formula of two points for a regular field goal, three for a three-pointer, and one for a free throw, provided the three-point baskets are included in total field goals.
For publication, the official box score remains the best place to verify detailed player-level figures. Avoid filling missing statistics with estimates, because even plausible numbers can make a sports recap inaccurate.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Who won the Golden State Warriors vs Detroit Pistons game on January 31, 2026?
The Detroit Pistons defeated the Golden State Warriors 131-124 at Chase Center in San Francisco, California. Detroit established an early lead and maintained enough of an advantage to withstand Golden State’s fourth-quarter push.
2. Who was the top scorer in the matchup?
Cade Cunningham was Detroit’s leading scorer with 29 points. Stephen Curry led Golden State with 23 points, according to the supplied game summary.
3. How many points and rebounds did Jalen Duren record?
Jalen Duren recorded 21 points and 13 rebounds. He was Detroit’s leading rebounder in the supplied statistics and provided an important scoring contribution.
4. How many three-pointers did the Warriors make?
Golden State made 18 three-pointers from 52 attempts, with a listed success rate of 35%. Detroit made 10 three-pointers from 26 attempts and had a listed success rate of 38%.
5. Which team had more rebounds and fewer turnovers?
Detroit recorded 53 rebounds and 14 turnovers. Golden State finished with 42 rebounds and 18 turnovers. These differences favored Detroit in possession control.
6. Where can readers check the complete player box score?
Readers can consult ESPN’s official NBA box score for the detailed player statistics and game information. The supplied summary does not contain complete individual lines for every player.
Conclusion
The January 31, 2026, meeting between Detroit and Golden State ended with a 131-124 victory for the Pistons. Detroit’s early scoring advantage, led by Cade Cunningham’s 29 points and 11 assists, established the foundation for the win. Jalen Duren added 21 points and 13 rebounds, while Isaiah Stewart contributed 14 points from the bench.
Stephen Curry led the Warriors with 23 points, supported by De’Anthony Melton’s 18 points and Gui Santos’s 16. Golden State also made 18 three-pointers and recorded 31 assists, demonstrating its ability to generate offense. However, the Warriors’ 18 turnovers and 42 rebounds compared with Detroit’s 14 turnovers and 53 rebounds highlighted important differences in possession control.
The golden state warriors vs detroit pistons match player stats show why basketball results require a balanced analysis of individual scoring, team shooting, rebounding, playmaking, and turnovers. Detroit did not need to dominate every category to win. Instead, it combined efficient overall shooting with stronger rebounding and enough early scoring to withstand Golden State’s late comeback attempt.
