Knicks vs Atlanta Hawks Match Player Stats
The knicks vs atlanta hawks match player stats from Game 4 of the 2026 NBA Eastern Conference First Round tell a much clearer story than the final score alone. On April 26, 2026, the New York Knicks defeated the Atlanta Hawks 114-98 at State Farm Arena in Atlanta, turning a tightly contested playoff series into a 2-2 battle. The Knicks controlled the first three quarters, shot 49% from the field and 45% from three-point range, while Atlanta struggled to generate consistent offense, especially from beyond the arc.
The most notable individual performance came from Karl-Anthony Towns, who recorded 20 points, 10 rebounds and 10 assists. OG Anunoby led New York in scoring with 22 points and also collected 10 rebounds. Mikal Bridges added 19 points, giving the Knicks another important scoring option. For Atlanta, CJ McCollum finished as the team’s leading scorer with 17 points, while Nickeil Alexander-Walker contributed 15. Dyson Daniels produced an all-around performance with 9 rebounds and 6 assists.
The result was important because this was not simply another regular-season meeting. It was Game 4 of a playoff series that entered the night tied 2-2. Every possession carried greater importance, and the statistical differences reveal how New York created separation.
Knicks vs Atlanta Hawks Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The Knicks entered Game 4 with a 53-29 regular-season record, including a 22-19 mark on the road. Atlanta entered the contest at 46-36 overall and had been particularly strong at home, with a 24-17 record.
Despite Atlanta’s home-court advantage, New York established control early.
| Category | New York Knicks | Atlanta Hawks |
| Final Score | 114 | 98 |
| Field Goals | 41-83 | 34-83 |
| Field Goal Percentage | 49% | 41% |
| Three-Pointers | 14-31 | 10-41 |
| Three-Point Percentage | 45% | 24% |
| Free Throws | 18-23 | 20-25 |
| Free Throw Percentage | 78% | 80% |
| Rebounds | 43 | 38 |
| Assists | 23 | 20 |
| Turnovers | 14 | 18 |
| Steals | 9 | 8 |
| Blocks | 3 | 5 |
The biggest difference was shooting efficiency.
Both teams attempted exactly 83 field goals, meaning Atlanta did not suffer because it simply took fewer shots. Instead, New York converted seven more field goals from the same number of attempts.
The three-point disparity was even more revealing. The Knicks made 14 of 31 attempts, while the Hawks made only 10 of 41. That gave New York a major efficiency advantage from long range.
Atlanta actually made 20 free throws compared with New York’s 18, and its 80% free-throw percentage was slightly better. However, free throws could not compensate for the team’s lower field-goal and three-point efficiency.
How New York Built Its 114-98 Win
The Knicks did not rely on one statistical category alone. Their victory came from a combination of efficient shooting, stronger ball security, rebounding, and balanced scoring.
New York scored 27 points in the first quarter while limiting Atlanta to 20. The Knicks then extended the advantage in the second quarter by scoring 31 points against 24 from the Hawks.
At halftime, New York had created a seven-point advantage in the first quarter and another seven-point advantage in the second. That gave the Knicks a 14-point halftime lead.
The third quarter continued in the same direction. New York scored 28 points while Atlanta managed only 21. By the end of the third period, the Knicks had effectively built a cushion that Atlanta could not erase.
The Hawks did respond in the fourth quarter.
Atlanta scored 33 points in the final period, compared with 28 from New York. That was the only quarter in which the Hawks outscored the Knicks.
However, the fourth-quarter rally started too late. The Knicks had already established enough separation during the first three periods to protect the win.
Quarter-by-Quarter Breakdown
| Quarter | Knicks | Hawks | Knicks Margin |
| First | 27 | 20 | +7 |
| Second | 31 | 24 | +7 |
| Third | 28 | 21 | +7 |
| Fourth | 28 | 33 | -5 |
| Total | 114 | 98 | +16 |
One of the most striking details is that New York won each of the first three quarters by exactly seven points.
That consistency matters.
Instead of producing one explosive period and relying on it, the Knicks gradually increased their advantage. Atlanta’s fourth-quarter response demonstrated that the Hawks still had offensive energy, but the earlier damage was too substantial.
Knicks Player Performance
The individual statistics show why New York was able to maintain control.
OG Anunoby
OG Anunoby was New York’s leading scorer with 22 points and also grabbed 10 rebounds.
That combination made his performance especially valuable. Scoring 22 points gave the Knicks an important offensive contribution, while double-digit rebounding helped them control possessions against an Atlanta team that needed additional opportunities.
Anunoby’s 10 rebounds also tied him for the Knicks’ team lead in that category.
For a playoff wing, contributing on both ends of the floor can be more meaningful than scoring alone. His Game 4 production reflected that broader impact.
Karl-Anthony Towns
Karl-Anthony Towns delivered arguably the most complete statistical performance of the game.
He finished with:
- 20 points
- 10 rebounds
- 10 assists
That is a triple-double, and it came in a playoff game where New York needed efficient decision-making and reliable production.
The 10 assists are particularly significant because they show that Towns was not simply operating as a scorer or rebounder. He was also creating opportunities for teammates.
New York finished with 23 assists as a team. Towns therefore accounted for a substantial portion of the team’s total assists.
His 10 rebounds also tied Anunoby for the Knicks’ team lead.
The combination of 20 points, 10 rebounds and 10 assists made Towns one of the central reasons the Knicks were able to control the game without needing a single player to dominate the scoring column.
Mikal Bridges
Mikal Bridges added 19 points for New York.
His scoring gave the Knicks another dependable contributor alongside Anunoby and Towns. The importance of Bridges’ 19 points becomes clearer when looking at the overall scoring distribution.
New York did not need one player to score 35 or 40 points. Instead, the Knicks received meaningful contributions from several players while maintaining efficient team shooting.
That type of balance can be especially useful during a playoff series because opponents have fewer opportunities to focus their entire defensive plan on one scorer.
Atlanta Hawks Player Performance
Atlanta’s individual numbers were more modest, reflecting the team’s overall offensive difficulties.
CJ McCollum
CJ McCollum led Atlanta with 17 points.
Although he finished as the Hawks’ leading scorer, 17 points was not enough to keep pace with New York’s balanced offensive attack.
Atlanta scored 98 points, meaning McCollum supplied a meaningful share of the team’s total, but the Hawks needed more production from multiple players to overcome New York’s shooting advantage.
Nickeil Alexander-Walker
Nickeil Alexander-Walker scored 15 points.
His contribution was one of Atlanta’s stronger offensive performances. Along with McCollum’s 17 points, his 15 gave the Hawks two players who reached at least 15 points.
Still, New York had more scoring depth at the top of its statistical profile.
Dyson Daniels
Dyson Daniels recorded 9 rebounds and 6 assists.
While he was not Atlanta’s leading scorer, his contributions in other areas were important.
The combination of 9 rebounds and 6 assists indicates that Daniels influenced the game beyond shooting. His rebounding helped Atlanta compete on the glass, while his passing contributed to the team’s 20 total assists.
The Hawks ultimately finished with 38 rebounds, five more than their opponent’s total would have suggested if Daniels had not contributed strongly in that area.
Jalen Johnson
Jalen Johnson finished with 14 points and 5 assists.
His 14 points gave Atlanta another useful scoring contribution, while his five assists showed his role as a facilitator.
However, the Hawks needed these contributions to be more efficient collectively. Individual production alone could not overcome a 24% three-point shooting performance.
The Three-Point Shooting Gap Was Critical
If there is one statistic that deserves special attention when studying this game, it is three-point efficiency.
The Knicks made 14 of 31 attempts from three-point range.
The Hawks made 10 of 41.
That difference represents a major contrast in both accuracy and shot selection.
New York converted approximately 45% of its three-point attempts. Atlanta converted approximately 24%.
The Knicks therefore made four more three-pointers despite attempting 10 fewer shots.
That is a powerful efficiency advantage.
It also explains why Atlanta’s larger number of attempts did not translate into a higher score.
A team can attempt more three-pointers and still lose the mathematical battle if the shots are not falling. Atlanta’s 41 attempts show a willingness to rely on perimeter scoring, but the 10 makes were not enough to match New York’s 14 makes on substantially fewer attempts.
This is one of the clearest lessons from the statistical record: volume and efficiency are not the same thing.
Field-Goal Efficiency Also Favored New York
The teams attempted the same number of field goals.
That makes the field-goal percentage difference particularly useful.
New York went 41-for-83, while Atlanta went 34-for-83.
The Knicks therefore made seven more field goals on identical volume.
At a basic level, this means New York created more points from the same number of shot attempts.
The 49% shooting figure for the Knicks also provided a strong foundation for their offensive performance. Atlanta’s 41% mark was considerably lower.
When two playoff teams attempt the same number of field goals, a difference of eight percentage points in overall shooting efficiency can have a major effect on the final result.
That is exactly what happened here.
Rebounding: A Smaller but Important Advantage
New York finished with 43 rebounds, while Atlanta had 38.
The five-rebound advantage was not as dramatic as the three-point shooting gap, but it still mattered.
Extra rebounds can create additional possessions and prevent opponents from getting second opportunities.
Anunoby and Towns each recorded 10 rebounds for New York, giving the Knicks two players who reached double figures on the glass.
Daniels led Atlanta with 9 rebounds, coming just one short of double digits.
The rebounding numbers also demonstrate that Atlanta was not completely overwhelmed physically. The Hawks remained competitive in this category, but New York still held the overall advantage.
Ball Security Gave New York Another Edge
Turnovers were another important difference.
The Knicks committed 14 turnovers.
The Hawks committed 18.
That four-turnover difference may appear modest when viewed by itself, but playoff games often turn on small possession advantages.
Every unnecessary turnover can remove an offensive opportunity while potentially creating a transition opportunity for the opponent.
New York also recorded 9 steals, compared with 8 for Atlanta.
The combination of fewer turnovers and slightly more steals points toward better possession management from the Knicks.
Atlanta’s 18 turnovers were especially costly because the team was already struggling to shoot efficiently. When a team is making only 24% of its three-point attempts, giving away additional possessions makes it even harder to produce enough points.
Assists Show Different Forms of Offense
The Knicks recorded 23 assists.
The Hawks recorded 20.
The three-assist difference was not enormous, but the context matters.
Towns alone produced 10 assists for New York, which means his passing was a major component of the team’s offensive organization.
That makes his triple-double particularly meaningful.
Rather than simply accumulating points through individual scoring, Towns helped generate opportunities for other players.
For Atlanta, Daniels recorded 6 assists and Johnson had 5. Those numbers show that the Hawks also had multiple playmakers contributing.
However, the final scoring difference indicates that Atlanta’s passing did not translate into the same level of shooting efficiency.
Why the Final Score Was More About Efficiency Than Volume
The 114-98 score can initially look like a straightforward offensive victory for New York.
The deeper statistical picture is more interesting.
Both teams attempted 83 field goals.
Atlanta attempted more three-pointers.
Atlanta made more free throws.
Yet New York still won by 16 points.
That tells us that efficiency was the defining factor.
The Knicks converted 41 field goals compared with 34 for Atlanta. They also made 14 three-pointers compared with 10.
New York’s 49% field-goal shooting and 45% three-point shooting provided the foundation for its 114 points.
Atlanta’s 41% field-goal shooting and 24% three-point shooting made it difficult to keep up, even though the Hawks attempted 41 shots from beyond the arc.
This is why looking only at points scored by individual players can sometimes miss the most important part of a basketball game.
The distribution of shots, the percentage of successful attempts, turnovers and rebounding all help explain how the points were produced.
A Closer Look at the Hawks’ Fourth-Quarter Push
Atlanta’s strongest period came in the fourth quarter.
The Hawks scored 33 points, their highest output of any quarter.
New York scored 28.
That five-point advantage for Atlanta demonstrated that the game was not simply a 48-minute defensive shutdown.
The Hawks found more offensive rhythm late in the game.
However, the problem was the size of the deficit entering the final period.
After three quarters, New York had consistently outscored Atlanta by seven points in every period.
That produced a substantial cushion.
Atlanta’s fourth-quarter improvement was therefore useful but insufficient.
This pattern is worth remembering when evaluating playoff games. A strong final quarter can improve the box score without changing the outcome if the team spends too much of the earlier game playing from behind.
What the Game Says About New York’s Playoff Approach
New York’s Game 4 performance reflected a balanced approach.
The Knicks did several things well at the same time:
- They shot efficiently from the field.
- They shot extremely well from three-point range.
- They won the rebounding battle.
- They committed fewer turnovers.
- They received balanced scoring.
- They received exceptional playmaking from Towns.
- They built their lead consistently across three quarters.
The combination is more significant than any single number.
A playoff opponent can sometimes survive poor shooting if it dominates the offensive glass. Another team may survive turnovers by creating a huge three-point advantage.
New York did not need to rely on one rescue mechanism.
The Knicks were solid across several statistical areas, which made Atlanta’s fourth-quarter comeback attempt difficult.
What the Game Says About Atlanta
Atlanta’s statistics reveal a team that competed but could not match New York’s efficiency.
The Hawks had some positive elements.
They shot 80% from the free-throw line, slightly above New York’s 78%.
They also produced 20 assists and 38 rebounds.
Daniels supplied 9 rebounds and 6 assists, while Johnson contributed 14 points and 5 assists.
The issue was the overall shooting profile.
A 41% field-goal percentage is difficult to overcome against an opponent shooting 49%.
A 24% three-point percentage is even more challenging when the opposing team is making 45% of its threes.
Atlanta also turned the ball over 18 times.
These factors combined to create too large a statistical gap.
Knicks vs Atlanta Hawks Match Player Stats and Key Individual Takeaways
The knicks vs atlanta hawks match player stats provide several useful individual takeaways.
New York’s standout performers
OG Anunoby: 22 points and 10 rebounds.
Anunoby was New York’s leading scorer and tied for the team’s top rebounding total.
Karl-Anthony Towns: 20 points, 10 rebounds and 10 assists.
Towns produced the game’s most complete individual statistical line and recorded a triple-double.
Mikal Bridges: 19 points.
Bridges supplied important secondary scoring and helped New York maintain a balanced offensive attack.
Atlanta’s standout performers
CJ McCollum: 17 points.
McCollum led Atlanta in scoring.
Nickeil Alexander-Walker: 15 points.
Alexander-Walker was the Hawks’ second player to reach 15 points.
Dyson Daniels: 9 rebounds and 6 assists.
Daniels made his impact primarily through rebounding and playmaking.
Jalen Johnson: 14 points and 5 assists.
Johnson contributed in both scoring and creation.
Comparing the Leading Performers
| Player | Team | Key Statistics |
| OG Anunoby | Knicks | 22 PTS, 10 REB |
| Karl-Anthony Towns | Knicks | 20 PTS, 10 REB, 10 AST |
| Mikal Bridges | Knicks | 19 PTS |
| CJ McCollum | Hawks | 17 PTS |
| Nickeil Alexander-Walker | Hawks | 15 PTS |
| Dyson Daniels | Hawks | 9 REB, 6 AST |
| Jalen Johnson | Hawks | 14 PTS, 5 AST |
The comparison highlights a major difference in the way the teams received production.
New York had three highly notable contributors at the top of its statistical profile, including a triple-double from Towns.
Atlanta’s leaders produced useful numbers, but the Hawks did not receive the same combination of scoring, rebounding and playmaking.
Previous Matchup: Game 3
Game 4 came immediately after a dramatic Game 3.
On April 24, 2026, the Knicks defeated the Hawks 109-108.
That one-point result made the 114-98 Game 4 victory even more significant in the context of the series.
The previous contest had been decided by only one point, while Game 4 was decided by 16.
The contrast shows how quickly the statistical balance of a playoff matchup can change.
A one-point game can be followed by a double-digit victory when shooting efficiency, turnovers and early-quarter performance shift significantly.
Series Context After Game 4
The Knicks’ victory moved the series into a 2-2 tie.
That meant neither team had gained a decisive series advantage after four games.
For New York, winning on Atlanta’s home floor was particularly valuable because the Hawks had entered the game with a 24-17 home record.
The Knicks had also entered with a 22-19 road record, making their ability to win away from home an important part of the context.
Game 4 therefore mattered both statistically and strategically.
The series was level, but New York had demonstrated that it could control the game in Atlanta.
Next Matchup: Game 5
The next listed matchup was Game 5 on April 29, 2026.
The provided data records that game as another Knicks victory, with New York winning 126-97.
That result adds another layer to the Game 4 analysis because it shows that the Knicks’ strong performance was followed by another substantial victory.
However, Game 4 should still be evaluated on its own statistical terms.
The most useful lesson from this contest is how New York’s efficiency created the 16-point margin.
Important Numbers at a Glance
For readers looking for the fastest statistical summary, these are the numbers that matter most:
- Final score: Knicks 114, Hawks 98
- Series: tied 2-2 after Game 4
- Knicks field goals: 41-for-83
- Hawks field goals: 34-for-83
- Knicks three-pointers: 14-for-31
- Hawks three-pointers: 10-for-41
- Knicks rebounds: 43
- Hawks rebounds: 38
- Knicks assists: 23
- Hawks assists: 20
- Knicks turnovers: 14
- Hawks turnovers: 18
- Knicks steals: 9
- Hawks steals: 8
- Knicks blocks: 3
- Hawks blocks: 5
- Knicks leading scorer: OG Anunoby, 22 points
- Knicks leading rebounders: OG Anunoby and Karl-Anthony Towns, 10 each
- Knicks leading assist producer: Karl-Anthony Towns, 10
- Hawks leading scorer: CJ McCollum, 17 points
- Hawks leading rebounder: Dyson Daniels, 9
- Hawks leading assist producer: Dyson Daniels, 6
Frequently Asked Questions
Who was the Knicks’ leading scorer against the Hawks in Game 4?
OG Anunoby led the Knicks with 22 points. He also collected 10 rebounds, giving him a strong all-around contribution.
Did Karl-Anthony Towns record a triple-double?
Yes. Karl-Anthony Towns finished with 20 points, 10 rebounds and 10 assists, producing a triple-double in Game 4.
Who led the Atlanta Hawks in scoring?
CJ McCollum was Atlanta’s leading scorer with 17 points.
Which team shot better from three-point range?
The Knicks shot significantly better. New York made 14 of 31 three-point attempts for 45%, while Atlanta made 10 of 41 for 24%.
How many rebounds did each team have?
The Knicks recorded 43 rebounds, while the Hawks recorded 38. New York therefore held a five-rebound advantage.
What was the final score of Knicks vs Hawks Game 4?
The New York Knicks defeated the Atlanta Hawks 114-98 on April 26, 2026, at State Farm Arena.
Conclusion
The knicks vs atlanta hawks match player stats from April 26, 2026, show that New York’s 114-98 victory was built on efficiency and balance rather than one-dimensional scoring.
OG Anunoby led the Knicks with 22 points and 10 rebounds, while Karl-Anthony Towns delivered the game’s most complete individual performance with 20 points, 10 rebounds and 10 assists. Mikal Bridges added 19 points to strengthen New York’s scoring depth.
Atlanta received 17 points from CJ McCollum, 15 from Nickeil Alexander-Walker, 14 from Jalen Johnson and a strong all-around effort from Dyson Daniels, who recorded 9 rebounds and 6 assists. Those performances were useful, but they were not enough to offset the Hawks’ shooting problems.
The defining statistical difference was efficiency. Both teams attempted 83 field goals, yet New York made seven more. From three-point range, the Knicks made 14 of 31 attempts while Atlanta made only 10 of 41. New York also won the rebounding battle 43-38 and committed four fewer turnovers.
Perhaps the most telling feature of the game was the quarter-by-quarter consistency. New York outscored Atlanta 27-20 in the first quarter, 31-24 in the second and 28-21 in the third. Atlanta finally won a quarter in the fourth, 33-28, but by then the Knicks had already established a lead that was too large to overcome.
The result left the playoff series tied at 2-2 and demonstrated why complete box-score analysis is more useful than looking at the final score alone. The individual numbers, shooting efficiency, possession statistics and quarter-by-quarter results together provide a much clearer explanation of how the Knicks controlled Game 4.
