Houston rockets vs golden state warriors match player stats
The Houston rockets vs golden state warriors match player stats from Game 5 of the 2025 NBA Western Conference First Round show how Houston turned a critical playoff game into a convincing 131-116 victory. Played on May 1, 2025, at Toyota Center, the Rockets produced one of their most efficient offensive performances of the series, shooting 55% from the field, 43% from three-point range, and 84% from the free-throw line. Golden State remained competitive offensively, but its 42% field-goal shooting and 68% free-throw shooting were not enough to overcome Houston’s efficiency and balanced scoring.
The result was especially important because the Warriors entered Game 5 with a 3-1 series advantage. Houston’s 15-point victory reduced the deficit to 3-2 and kept the series alive. The Rockets eventually won Game 6, but Golden State responded by taking Game 7, 103-89, to advance.
This article breaks down the player statistics, team numbers, scoring patterns, and most important performances from Game 5. The goal is not simply to repeat the box score. Instead, the numbers help explain why Houston won, which players influenced the game most, and what the statistical details say about the matchup.
Houston rockets vs golden state warriors match player stats
The most important individual scoring numbers immediately show the difference between the two teams.
| Team | Player | Points | Key Statistical Contribution |
| Houston Rockets | Fred VanVleet | 26 | Houston’s leading scorer |
| Houston Rockets | Amen Thompson | 25 | 5 steals, 3 blocks, +32 |
| Houston Rockets | Dillon Brooks | 24 | Third major scorer |
| Houston Rockets | Alperen Sengun | 15 | 9 rebounds, 9 assists |
| Houston Rockets | Jalen Green | 11 | Added secondary scoring |
| Golden State Warriors | Moses Moody | 25 | Warriors’ leading scorer |
| Golden State Warriors | Gui Santos | 14 | +14, second-highest scorer |
| Golden State Warriors | Stephen Curry | 13 | 7 assists |
| Golden State Warriors | Jimmy Butler III | 8 | Limited scoring output |
| Golden State Warriors | Brandin Podziemski | 8 | Limited scoring output |
The striking feature is that Houston had three players within two points of each other at the top of its scoring chart. VanVleet scored 26, Thompson scored 25, and Brooks scored 24.
Golden State, by contrast, received 25 points from Moody but had considerably less scoring from several of its primary contributors. Curry finished with 13 points, while Jimmy Butler III and Brandin Podziemski each scored eight.
That distribution matters when analyzing playoff basketball. A team does not necessarily need one superstar to score 35 or 40 points if several players can consistently produce efficient offense.
Houston demonstrated exactly that balance.
Fred VanVleet led Houston with 26 points
Fred VanVleet was Houston’s leading scorer with 26 points.
His scoring gave the Rockets an important offensive foundation in a game where the team shot extremely efficiently overall. Houston finished with 43 made field goals on 78 attempts, a 55% field-goal percentage.
VanVleet’s contribution becomes even more meaningful when viewed alongside Thompson and Brooks. Houston was not dependent on one offensive creator. Instead, three major scoring options combined for 75 points.
That created a difficult defensive problem for Golden State.
If the Warriors concentrated too heavily on VanVleet, Houston could turn to Thompson or Brooks. If defenders attempted to limit those wings, VanVleet remained capable of generating offense.
This type of scoring balance is particularly valuable in a playoff setting because defensive adjustments become more aggressive as a series progresses.
Amen Thompson delivered an all-around performance
Amen Thompson had one of the most influential statistical performances of the game.
He scored 25 points, collected five steals, blocked three shots, and finished with a remarkable +32 plus/minus.
The scoring figure alone would make Thompson one of Houston’s leading performers, but the defensive statistics show why his overall impact was even greater.
Five steals indicate that Thompson consistently disrupted Golden State’s offensive possessions. Three blocks added another layer of defensive activity.
His +32 plus/minus was also the best mark on either team according to the supplied box-score data.
Plus/minus should never be treated as a standalone measurement of individual quality because it reflects what happens while a player is on the floor. However, when a player combines a strong scoring total with five steals, three blocks, and the best plus/minus of the game, the statistic becomes useful supporting evidence for the overall impact of his performance.
Thompson’s Game 5 showing therefore stands out as more than a scoring performance. He influenced the game on both ends of the floor.
Dillon Brooks added 24 points
Dillon Brooks scored 24 points for Houston, giving the Rockets a third major scoring option.
His 24 points were only two fewer than VanVleet’s team-leading total and one fewer than Thompson’s.
That balance is one of the clearest themes in the box score.
Houston’s top three scorers combined for 75 points:
- Fred VanVleet: 26
- Amen Thompson: 25
- Dillon Brooks: 24
The progression is unusually balanced. No single player accounted for an overwhelming share of Houston’s scoring output.
This made Houston’s offense difficult to neutralize because Golden State had to account for multiple scoring threats rather than focusing entirely on one player.
Alperen Sengun nearly produced a triple-double
Alperen Sengun finished with 15 points, nine rebounds, and nine assists.
The nine rebounds led the Rockets, while his nine assists also led the team.
That combination is particularly important because it shows Sengun’s influence extended beyond scoring.
A center producing nine assists can change how an offense functions. Instead of simply finishing possessions near the basket, Sengun could help create opportunities for teammates.
His nine rebounds also helped Houston control the interior and finish possessions defensively.
Although Sengun did not lead Houston in scoring, his 15-point, nine-rebound, nine-assist line was one of the most complete individual statistical performances in the game.
Jalen Green supplied additional scoring
Jalen Green scored 11 points.
That total was lower than Houston’s leading scorers, but it also illustrates how much scoring Houston received from other players.
VanVleet, Thompson, and Brooks already accounted for 75 points. Sengun added 15 and Green added 11.
The Rockets therefore received meaningful contributions across several positions instead of depending on one player to carry the offense.
In a playoff game, this kind of distribution can be particularly useful because opponents can make defensive adjustments against individual players.
Moses Moody led the Warriors with 25 points
Moses Moody was Golden State’s leading scorer with 25 points.
His scoring total matched Thompson’s 25 points and was only one point behind VanVleet’s 26.
Moody’s individual scoring performance was therefore strong despite Golden State losing by 15 points.
This is an important distinction when reading player statistics.
The highest scorer on the losing team can still have an excellent offensive game. Team success depends on the combined performance of the entire lineup, efficiency, turnovers, rebounding, defense, and shot distribution.
Moody’s 25 points were clearly valuable, but Golden State did not receive the same level of production from several other important players.
Stephen Curry finished with 13 points and 7 assists
Stephen Curry recorded 13 points and seven assists.
His seven assists were the most for Golden State.
The contrast between his scoring and playmaking is important. Curry was not the Warriors’ leading scorer in this game, but he still contributed as a facilitator.
Golden State’s overall shooting performance helps explain why the Warriors needed more efficient offensive production. The team made 43 of 103 field-goal attempts, shooting 42%.
That meant Golden State took 25 more field-goal attempts than Houston but made exactly the same number of shots: 43.
This is one of the clearest statistical explanations for the final result.
Houston did more with its possessions and shot attempts.
Gui Santos provided an important positive contribution
Gui Santos scored 14 points and finished with a team-best plus/minus of +14 for Golden State.
His plus/minus is notable because the Warriors lost by 15 points overall, yet Santos finished with a positive number.
That indicates Golden State performed better during his minutes than during the portions of the game when other lineups were on the floor.
Again, plus/minus should be interpreted carefully. It does not mean Santos was automatically Golden State’s best player. But it does provide useful context when paired with his 14 points.
His performance was one of the brighter individual statistical results for the Warriors in Game 5.
Jimmy Butler III and Brandin Podziemski struggled to provide scoring
Jimmy Butler III scored eight points, while Brandin Podziemski also scored eight.
Those totals stand out because Golden State needed more offensive balance behind Moody and Curry.
The Warriors scored 116 points, which is normally a substantial offensive total. However, Houston scored 131, meaning Golden State needed either more defensive resistance or greater offensive efficiency to keep pace.
The eight-point outputs from Butler and Podziemski placed additional pressure on the Warriors’ other players.
Team shooting explains much of the final score
One of the most useful ways to understand this game is to compare shooting efficiency rather than simply looking at total points.
| Statistic | Rockets | Warriors |
| Field Goals | 43-78 | 43-103 |
| Field-Goal % | 55% | 42% |
| Three-Pointers | 13-30 | 15-44 |
| Three-Point % | 43% | 34% |
| Free Throws | 32-38 | 15-22 |
| Free-Throw % | 84% | 68% |
| Rebounds | 39 | 49 |
| Assists | 23 | 25 |
| Turnovers | 12 | 14 |
| Steals | 9 | 10 |
| Blocks | 7 | 5 |
The most striking number is field-goal attempts.
Golden State attempted 103 field goals.
Houston attempted only 78.
Yet both teams made 43 field goals.
That means Houston reached the same number of made shots while requiring 25 fewer attempts.
This is a major efficiency advantage.
Houston’s 55% shooting compared with Golden State’s 42% represents a substantial gap. Over a full playoff game, a difference of that size can produce a large scoring advantage.
Houston’s free-throw shooting created another advantage
Houston also had a major advantage at the free-throw line.
The Rockets went 32-for-38, shooting 84%.
Golden State went 15-for-22, shooting 68%.
That created a 17-point difference in made free throws.
This is one of the biggest reasons the final margin reached 15 points.
Houston’s combination of efficient field-goal shooting and strong free-throw conversion made the offense considerably more productive.
The Rockets scored 131 points despite taking 25 fewer field-goal attempts.
That is an excellent illustration of why shot volume and shot efficiency must be analyzed together.
Three-point shooting favored Houston in percentage
Golden State made more three-pointers overall.
The Warriors made 15 of 44 attempts.
Houston made 13 of 30.
At first glance, Golden State’s two additional three-pointers might appear to be an advantage. However, Houston’s efficiency was significantly better.
The Rockets shot 43% from three-point range.
The Warriors shot 34%.
Houston therefore generated more value from each three-point attempt even though Golden State attempted 14 more threes.
This is another example of why raw totals can sometimes hide the more important story.
Golden State won the rebounding battle
Not every category favored Houston.
The Warriors collected 49 rebounds compared with 39 for the Rockets.
That gave Golden State a 10-rebound advantage.
Stephen Curry’s seven assists led the Warriors, while Kevon Looney’s seven rebounds were the team’s top individual rebounding figure.
The rebounding advantage did not translate into victory because Houston was substantially more efficient with its shooting opportunities.
This is a useful lesson from the game: controlling one statistical category does not guarantee success if the opponent dominates efficiency.
Houston also protected the ball better
The Rockets committed 12 turnovers.
Golden State committed 14.
The difference was only two turnovers, so this was not the defining factor in the game.
However, Houston combined the lower turnover total with superior shooting percentages.
The Rockets also recorded nine steals and seven blocks.
Golden State had 10 steals and five blocks.
The defensive activity was therefore relatively balanced in some categories, but Houston’s ability to convert its offensive opportunities separated the teams.
Quarter-by-quarter breakdown
The scoring progression tells another important story.
| Quarter | Rockets | Warriors |
| 1st | 40 | 24 |
| 2nd | 36 | 25 |
| 3rd | 31 | 31 |
| 4th | 24 | 36 |
| Total | 131 | 116 |
Houston effectively won the game during the first half.
The Rockets scored 40 points in the opening quarter while holding Golden State to 24.
That created a 16-point lead after 12 minutes.
Houston then added another 36 points in the second quarter, while Golden State scored 25.
At halftime, the Rockets had built a 27-point advantage.
The third quarter was completely even at 31-31.
Golden State then responded strongly in the fourth quarter, outscoring Houston 36-24.
That fourth-quarter comeback effort was not enough because the Warriors had already fallen too far behind.
This pattern is important when evaluating the game. Houston did not win because it narrowly edged Golden State in the final minutes. It won by creating a huge early advantage and then surviving Golden State’s late push.
The first quarter was the turning point
Houston’s 40-point first quarter deserves special attention.
A 16-point lead after one quarter immediately placed pressure on Golden State.
The Warriors could not afford to spend the rest of the game simply trading baskets. They needed to erase the deficit.
Houston made that difficult by scoring another 36 points in the second quarter.
The Rockets therefore scored 76 points during the opening two quarters.
Golden State scored 49.
That 27-point halftime difference explains much of the final result.
Golden State’s fourth-quarter response
The Warriors did show resilience.
Golden State scored 36 points in the fourth quarter compared with Houston’s 24.
That was a 12-point advantage for the Warriors.
The problem was the size of the earlier deficit.
Even an excellent fourth quarter could not completely erase a 27-point halftime gap.
This is a good example of why quarter-level statistics are useful. Looking only at the final score can make the game appear relatively straightforward. The quarter breakdown shows that Golden State actually finished strongly, but Houston’s early dominance was too significant.
Houston’s offensive efficiency was the central story
When all the statistics are considered together, Houston’s offensive efficiency stands out above everything else.
The Rockets:
- Shot 55% from the field.
- Shot 43% from three-point range.
- Shot 84% from the free-throw line.
- Made 43 field goals on only 78 attempts.
- Scored 131 points.
- Had three players score at least 24 points.
- Received 15 points, nine rebounds, and nine assists from Sengun.
Golden State:
- Shot 42% from the field.
- Shot 34% from three-point range.
- Shot 68% from the free-throw line.
- Made 43 field goals on 103 attempts.
- Scored 116 points.
- Had Moody as the leading scorer with 25.
- Received seven assists from Curry.
The contrast is straightforward.
Golden State had more attempts.
Houston had better efficiency.
What the player statistics reveal about Houston
The Rockets’ player numbers suggest a balanced offensive structure.
VanVleet, Thompson, and Brooks were separated by only two points.
That balance reduces the risk of an offense becoming predictable.
Sengun added playmaking from the frontcourt, finishing with nine assists. Thompson contributed defensive disruption through five steals and three blocks.
The result was a performance where several players had different ways of influencing the game.
VanVleet provided scoring.
Thompson provided scoring and defense.
Brooks provided scoring.
Sengun provided rebounding and playmaking.
That variety is one of the strongest takeaways from the box score.
What the numbers reveal about Golden State
Golden State’s statistics present a different picture.
Moody was highly productive with 25 points.
Curry remained an important facilitator with seven assists.
Santos produced 14 points and a +14 plus/minus.
The Warriors also won the rebounding battle 49-39 and had one more steal than Houston.
Yet their shooting efficiency was the major problem.
Taking 103 field-goal attempts while making 43 meant the Warriors needed many more attempts to generate the same number of made field goals Houston produced on 78 attempts.
The free-throw difference made the problem even larger.
Comparing the leading players
The most direct scoring comparison is VanVleet versus Moody.
VanVleet scored 26.
Moody scored 25.
Their scoring totals were almost identical.
But the game was not decided by those two players individually.
Houston’s next two major scorers, Thompson and Brooks, combined for another 49 points.
Golden State’s next listed key scorers had much lower totals, with Santos at 14, Curry at 13, Butler at eight, and Podziemski at eight.
This illustrates why a player-versus-player comparison can sometimes be misleading.
The better question is not simply who scored the most.
It is how each team’s scoring was distributed across its lineup.
The importance of Sengun’s nine assists
Sengun’s nine assists deserve another look because they help explain Houston’s 55% shooting.
Assists are not a complete measure of offensive creation, but they show that Houston’s offense was not exclusively dependent on perimeter isolation.
A center capable of generating nine assists gives teammates additional opportunities.
That becomes especially useful against a defense that tries to close down primary scorers.
Sengun’s combination of nine rebounds and nine assists also meant he was contributing in multiple phases of the game without needing to lead the team in scoring.
Amen Thompson’s defensive numbers changed the game
Thompson’s five steals and three blocks were among the most distinctive numbers in the box score.
Eight combined steals and blocks represent significant defensive activity.
His +32 plus/minus further reinforces how strongly Houston performed during his minutes.
It would be incorrect to attribute the entire 15-point win to one player. Basketball is a five-player sport with significant lineup and matchup effects.
Still, Thompson’s statistical profile makes him one of the clearest candidates for Houston’s most impactful all-around performer.
The series context matters
Game 5 was not an isolated regular-season matchup.
It was the fifth game of the Western Conference First Round, with Golden State leading the series 3-1 before the game.
The previous results were:
- Game 1: Warriors 95, Rockets 85
- Game 2: Warriors 94, Rockets 109
- Game 3: Warriors 104, Rockets 93
- Game 4: Warriors 109, Rockets 106
- Game 5: Warriors 116, Rockets 131
- Game 6: Warriors 107, Rockets 115
- Game 7: Warriors 103, Rockets 89
Game 5 therefore represented a major change in momentum.
Houston had to win to extend the series, and the 15-point victory gave the Rockets another opportunity.
They followed it with another victory in Game 6.
Golden State ultimately closed out the series in Game 7.
Game 5 compared with the series outcome
The eventual series result provides useful context for interpreting the box score.
Houston’s Game 5 victory did not mean the Rockets had completely taken control of the series.
Golden State had already built a 3-1 lead.
After Houston won Game 6, the series reached a decisive seventh game.
The Warriors won that game 103-89.
Therefore, Game 5 should be viewed as a critical survival performance for Houston rather than evidence that the Rockets ultimately controlled the series.
The statistical lesson is that one dominant game can change a playoff series without necessarily determining its final outcome.
Why the final score was 131-116
The final margin can be traced to several interconnected factors.
First, Houston shot 55% from the field while Golden State shot 42%.
Second, Houston shot 84% from the free-throw line compared with Golden State’s 68%.
Third, Houston received 75 points from VanVleet, Thompson, and Brooks.
Fourth, Sengun added nine assists and nine rebounds.
Fifth, Thompson provided major defensive activity with five steals and three blocks.
Golden State’s 49 rebounds and 15 made three-pointers were meaningful positives, but they were outweighed by the shooting efficiency gap.
The most important statistical takeaway
The single most useful number from this game may be the field-goal comparison:
Houston: 43 makes on 78 attempts.
Golden State: 43 makes on 103 attempts.
Both teams made exactly 43 field goals.
Houston needed 25 fewer attempts to reach that total.
That is the clearest statistical representation of the game.
The Rockets were simply more efficient with their opportunities.
The difference was then amplified by Houston’s advantage at the free-throw line.
How to read playoff player statistics correctly
When evaluating a playoff box score, it is tempting to focus only on the highest scorer.
That approach misses much of the story.
A better method is to examine several layers:
- Scoring: Who produced points?
- Efficiency: How many attempts were required?
- Playmaking: Who created opportunities for teammates?
- Rebounding: Which team controlled extra possessions?
- Defense: Who generated steals and blocks?
- Turnovers: Which team protected possessions?
- Plus/minus: How did the team perform during each player’s minutes?
- Quarter scoring: When did the game actually change?
Using this approach produces a much clearer understanding of Game 5.
Key player takeaways
Houston Rockets
Fred VanVleet: The leading scorer with 26 points.
Amen Thompson: 25 points, five steals, three blocks, and +32. His combination of offense and defense made him one of Houston’s most influential players.
Dillon Brooks: 24 points, giving Houston a third major scoring option.
Alperen Sengun: 15 points, nine rebounds, and nine assists. His all-around contribution was critical to Houston’s offensive balance.
Jalen Green: 11 points as an additional scoring contributor.
Golden State Warriors
Moses Moody: 25 points and the Warriors’ leading scorer.
Gui Santos: 14 points and a team-best +14 plus/minus.
Stephen Curry: 13 points and seven assists, leading Golden State in assists.
Jimmy Butler III: Eight points.
Brandin Podziemski: Eight points.
What fans can learn from the box score
The game is a useful example of why basketball analysis should move beyond points per game.
Houston did not win because every statistical category favored the Rockets.
Golden State actually had more rebounds and slightly more assists and steals.
The difference came from efficiency and scoring distribution.
Houston made the same number of field goals as Golden State despite taking dramatically fewer attempts. The Rockets also converted free throws at a much higher rate.
At the individual level, Houston had three players score at least 24 points, while Sengun added an all-around near triple-double.
That combination produced a sustainable offensive performance.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who led the Rockets in scoring in Game 5?
Fred VanVleet led Houston with 26 points. Amen Thompson scored 25 and Dillon Brooks scored 24.
Who led the Warriors in scoring?
Moses Moody led Golden State with 25 points. Gui Santos followed with 14 points, while Stephen Curry scored 13.
What was the final score of Rockets vs Warriors Game 5?
The Houston Rockets defeated the Golden State Warriors 131-116 on May 1, 2025, at Toyota Center.
How many points did Stephen Curry score?
Stephen Curry scored 13 points and recorded seven assists.
Who had the best plus/minus in the game?
Amen Thompson had the best plus/minus at +32. Gui Santos led Golden State with +14.
Who had the most rebounds and assists for Houston?
Alperen Sengun led Houston in both categories with nine rebounds and nine assists.
Conclusion
The Houston rockets vs golden state warriors match player stats from Game 5 reveal a matchup defined by efficiency, balanced scoring, and Houston’s early control.
Fred VanVleet led all Houston scorers with 26 points, while Amen Thompson added 25 points alongside five steals and three blocks. Dillon Brooks contributed 24 points, giving the Rockets three players with at least 24 points. Alperen Sengun added 15 points, nine rebounds, and nine assists.
For Golden State, Moses Moody led the team with 25 points. Stephen Curry contributed 13 points and seven assists, while Gui Santos scored 14 points and finished with the Warriors’ best plus/minus.
The team statistics provide the clearest explanation for the result. Both teams made 43 field goals, but Houston needed only 78 attempts compared with Golden State’s 103. The Rockets also shot 55% from the field, 43% from three, and 84% from the free-throw line.
Houston’s 40-24 opening quarter and 36-25 second quarter created a 27-point halftime advantage. Golden State responded by winning the fourth quarter 36-24, but the early deficit was too large to overcome.
Ultimately, Game 5 was a strong example of how shooting efficiency and balanced contributions can outweigh advantages in rebounds or total shot attempts. The box score shows not only who scored, but also why Houston was able to keep its playoff hopes alive.
