San Antonio Spurs vs Timberwolves Match Player Stats

San Antonio Spurs vs Timberwolves match player stats from Game 6 tell the story of a dominant San Antonio performance that closed the 2026 Western Conference semifinal series. The Spurs defeated the Minnesota Timberwolves 139-109 at Target Center, taking the series 4-2 and advancing to the Western Conference Finals. Stephon Castle led San Antonio with 32 points and 11 rebounds, while De’Aaron Fox added 21 points and nine assists. Victor Wembanyama finished with 19 points, six rebounds, three blocks, and two assists in 27 minutes. (NBA)

The final score alone does not explain how San Antonio created such a large separation. The Spurs shot 55.7% from the field, made 18 of 38 three-point attempts, controlled the glass 60-29, and recorded 13 blocks. Minnesota shot only 37.7% overall and was held without a lead at any point. (NBA.com)

This article breaks down the complete player numbers, team statistics, shooting efficiency, individual performances, quarter-by-quarter development, and the main statistical reasons the Spurs finished the series with such a convincing Game 6 victory.

San Antonio Spurs vs Timberwolves Match Player Stats: Game Overview

The deciding game was played Friday, May 15, 2026, at Target Center in Minneapolis. The official NBA scorer’s report lists an attendance of 18,978 and a game duration of 2 hours and 27 minutes. San Antonio entered the game as the No. 2 seed and Minnesota as the No. 6 seed in the Western Conference semifinal. (NBA.com)

San Antonio won every quarter:

Quarter	Spurs	Timberwolves
1st	36	27
2nd	38	34
3rd	36	23
4th	29	25
Final	139	109

The 30-point margin was not the result of one isolated scoring burst. San Antonio built an advantage early, extended it before halftime, and then delivered its biggest separation in the third quarter.

The Spurs led 36-27 after the first quarter and 74-61 at halftime. Their 36-23 third-quarter advantage then pushed the game beyond realistic reach. The official game report records San Antonio’s largest lead as 37 points, with Minnesota never leading and the game never being tied. (NBA.com)

That progression is important because it shows that the result was not simply a fourth-quarter blowout. San Antonio controlled the game from the opening period.

Complete Spurs Player Statistics

Stephon Castle was the standout individual performer for San Antonio. He scored 32 points on 11-of-16 shooting, including 5-of-7 from three-point range. He also collected 11 rebounds and six assists in 29:47. His shooting efficiency was one of the clearest individual advantages in the game. (NBA)

Here is the complete Spurs box score:

Player	MIN	PTS	REB	AST	FG	3PT	FT	STL	BLK	TO	+/-
Stephon Castle	29:47	32	11	6	11-16	5-7	5-6	0	0	2	+28
De’Aaron Fox	24:21	21	4	9	8-10	3-3	2-2	0	2	1	+26
Victor Wembanyama	27:22	19	6	2	6-11	0-2	7-9	0	3	4	+25
Julian Champagnie	25:43	18	5	2	5-10	4-9	4-4	2	0	0	+35
Dylan Harper	25:42	15	5	2	6-8	1-3	2-2	0	1	3	+16
Devin Vassell	27:21	11	5	4	4-10	3-7	0-0	0	1	1	+14
Luke Kornet	14:10	6	6	1	2-3	0-0	2-2	0	4	1	+8
Carter Bryant	13:02	3	6	1	1-3	0-1	1-2	0	0	0	+16
Harrison Barnes	6:58	3	4	2	1-3	1-3	0-0	0	0	0	+7
Kelly Olynyk	8:01	3	4	1	1-4	1-2	0-0	0	0	1	-3
Jordan McLaughlin	8:01	2	1	1	1-1	0-0	0-0	0	0	0	-3
Lindy Waters III	8:01	2	1	1	1-3	0-1	0-0	0	0	0	-3
Bismack Biyombo	6:30	2	0	0	1-2	0-0	0-0	0	2	1	-5
Mason Plumlee	5:02	2	2	0	1-2	0-0	0-0	0	0	1	-3

The Spurs’ starters were Julian Champagnie, Victor Wembanyama, De’Aaron Fox, Devin Vassell, and Stephon Castle. The five starters combined for 101 points, while the bench supplied another 38.

That balance mattered. San Antonio did not need Castle to carry the entire offensive workload. Fox, Wembanyama, Champagnie, Harper, and Vassell all contributed meaningful scoring.

Stephon Castle’s 32-Point Performance

Castle’s performance was the statistical centerpiece of the game.

He finished with:

• 32 points
• 11 rebounds
• 6 assists
• 11-of-16 field goals
• 5-of-7 three-pointers
• 5-of-6 free throws
• 29:47 minutes
• +28 plus/minus

His 68.8% field-goal shooting was particularly notable because he combined volume with efficiency. He did not need a large number of attempts to reach 32 points.

His three-point shooting was even more significant. Castle made five of his seven attempts from outside, accounting for 15 points before considering his other scoring.

He also contributed 11 rebounds, giving San Antonio an unexpected advantage from its backcourt. That production helped the Spurs finish with 60 total rebounds compared with Minnesota’s 29. (NBA)

Castle’s game therefore affected more than the scoring column. His rebounding helped San Antonio create additional possessions, while his six assists helped maintain offensive movement.

De’Aaron Fox Controls the Offense

De’Aaron Fox finished with 21 points and nine assists while shooting 8-of-10 from the field and a perfect 3-of-3 from three-point range.

His complete line was:

21 points, 4 rebounds, 9 assists, 8-of-10 shooting, 3-of-3 from three, 2-of-2 free throws, 2 blocks, and one turnover.

The nine assists were a team-high for San Antonio.

Fox’s efficiency stands out because he produced 21 points from only 10 field-goal attempts. His three-point shooting also forced Minnesota’s defense to respect him beyond the arc.

The combination of Fox’s scoring and playmaking gave San Antonio another primary offensive creator alongside Castle.

The Spurs did not have to rely on a single ball handler. Castle could attack, Fox could organize possessions, and Wembanyama could operate as both a scoring option and defensive anchor.

Victor Wembanyama’s Quiet but Important 19 Points

Victor Wembanyama scored 19 points in 27:22, shooting 6-of-11 from the field and 7-of-9 at the free-throw line.

His numbers were:

• 19 points
• 6 rebounds
• 2 assists
• 3 blocks
• 6-of-11 field goals
• 0-of-2 three-pointers
• 7-of-9 free throws
• 4 turnovers
• +25 plus/minus

At first glance, 19 points may look modest compared with Castle’s 32. But Wembanyama’s importance cannot be measured only through scoring.

He recorded three blocks and affected Minnesota’s attempts around the basket. The Spurs finished with 13 blocks as a team, while Minnesota had only two. (NBA.com)

Wembanyama also shot 7-of-9 from the free-throw line, allowing him to contribute efficiently even though his outside shooting was not a major part of the game.

The official NBA game recap also noted that Minnesota defended him closely and that he remained a defensive presence despite his relatively quiet scoring night. (NBA)

Julian Champagnie Adds Efficient Perimeter Scoring

Julian Champagnie scored 18 points in 25:43.

He shot:

• 5-of-10 overall
• 4-of-9 from three
• 4-of-4 from the free-throw line

He also grabbed five rebounds and recorded two steals.

His four made three-pointers were important because San Antonio consistently punished Minnesota from the perimeter.

Champagnie’s +35 plus/minus was the highest among all players in the game. Plus/minus should not be treated as an individual performance rating by itself, but in this particular game it reflects how effective San Antonio’s lineups were while he was on the court. (NBA.com)

Dylan Harper Provides a Major Bench Contribution

Dylan Harper scored 15 points off the bench in 25:42.

He shot 6-of-8 from the field, including 1-of-3 from three-point range, and made both of his free-throw attempts.

He also collected five rebounds and two assists.

Harper’s 75% field-goal shooting was the highest among Spurs players with more than a small number of attempts. His scoring meant Minnesota could not simply focus its defensive attention on San Antonio’s starting group.

The Spurs’ ability to receive 15 points from Harper was especially useful in a playoff game where rotation depth can become critical.

Complete Timberwolves Player Statistics

Anthony Edwards led Minnesota with 24 points, but the Timberwolves struggled to find consistent offensive efficiency throughout the game.

Here is the complete Minnesota box score:

Player	MIN	PTS	REB	AST	FG	3PT	FT	STL	BLK	TO	+/-
Anthony Edwards	35:49	24	2	2	9-26	2-7	4-7	3	0	3	-31
Terrence Shannon Jr.	21:59	21	2	1	8-15	1-3	4-4	1	0	1	-21
Naz Reid	31:33	18	7	1	7-13	3-7	1-1	0	0	0	-15
Jaden McDaniels	23:25	13	1	3	4-13	2-4	3-3	0	1	0	-21
Ayo Dosunmu	23:22	10	1	9	4-8	0-1	2-2	0	0	0	-28
Mike Conley	18:30	6	0	4	2-3	2-3	0-0	0	0	0	-5
Joan Beringer	8:01	4	2	0	2-3	0-0	0-0	1	1	0	+3
Julius Randle	23:42	3	7	1	1-8	0-2	1-2	0	0	0	-34
Julian Phillips	8:01	3	0	1	1-2	1-2	0-0	1	0	1	+3
Bones Hyland	8:01	3	1	0	1-6	1-4	0-0	0	0	0	+3
Kyle Anderson	8:01	2	0	3	1-3	0-0	0-0	0	0	0	+3
Jaylen Clark	8:01	2	3	0	0-2	0-1	2-2	0	0	0	+3
Rudy Gobert	21:35	0	3	0	0-4	0-0	0-0	0	0	0	-10

The Minnesota starters were Julius Randle, Jaden McDaniels, Rudy Gobert, Ayo Dosunmu, and Anthony Edwards. (NBA.com)

Anthony Edwards Leads Minnesota in Scoring

Anthony Edwards finished with 24 points, making him Minnesota’s leading scorer.

However, his shooting efficiency was a major issue.

Edwards attempted 26 field goals and made nine. That resulted in a field-goal percentage of 34.6%. He also went 2-of-7 from three and 4-of-7 from the free-throw line.

His final line included:

• 24 points
• 2 rebounds
• 2 assists
• 3 steals
• 9-of-26 shooting
• 2-of-7 from three
• 4-of-7 free throws
• 3 turnovers

Edwards played 35:49, the most minutes of any player in the game.

The challenge for Minnesota was that Edwards had to take a large offensive load while facing a Spurs defense that could use its length and multiple defenders to make scoring difficult.

His 24 points were useful in isolation, but the 26 attempts required to reach that total illustrate the efficiency gap between the two teams. (NBA.com)

Terrence Shannon Jr. Gives Minnesota a Spark

Terrence Shannon Jr. provided one of Minnesota’s best offensive performances away from Edwards.

He scored 21 points in 21:59, shooting 8-of-15 from the field and 4-of-4 from the free-throw line.

His three-point shooting was less effective at 1-of-3, but he still provided needed scoring when Minnesota’s primary options were struggling.

Shannon’s 21 points were particularly notable because he produced them in fewer than 22 minutes.

Naz Reid Provides Efficient Interior and Perimeter Scoring

Naz Reid scored 18 points and grabbed seven rebounds.

He shot 7-of-13 overall and 3-of-7 from three, while making his only free-throw attempt.

Reid was one of Minnesota’s more efficient offensive contributors and provided spacing because San Antonio had to account for his three-point range.

He also tied Julius Randle for the team lead in rebounds with seven.

Julius Randle’s Difficult Offensive Night

Julius Randle finished with only three points on 1-of-8 shooting.

He missed both of his three-point attempts and made only one of his two free throws.

Randle did contribute seven rebounds, but the lack of scoring placed additional pressure on Edwards, Reid, Shannon, and the rest of Minnesota’s offense.

His final plus/minus was -34, the lowest figure among players in the game. That number reflects the team’s performance during his minutes, rather than serving as a complete individual evaluation.

Spurs vs Timberwolves Team Statistics

The team numbers show why the final margin reached 30 points.

Statistic	Spurs	Timberwolves
Points	139	109
Field Goals	49-88	40-106
FG%	55.7%	37.7%
3-Pointers	18-38	12-34
3PT%	47.4%	35.3%
Free Throws	23-27	17-21
FT%	85.2%	81.0%
Rebounds	60	29
Assists	34	25
Steals	2	9
Blocks	13	2
Turnovers	15	5

These numbers reveal an interesting contrast.

Minnesota actually committed far fewer turnovers, with only five compared with San Antonio’s 15. Yet the Timberwolves still lost by 30.

That means turnovers were not the main explanation for the result.

The larger difference came from shooting, rebounding, shot creation, and rim protection.

The Rebounding Difference Was Massive

San Antonio won the rebounding battle 60-29.

That is a 31-rebound advantage.

The Spurs collected 12 offensive rebounds and 48 defensive rebounds. Minnesota had nine offensive rebounds and 20 defensive rebounds. The official scorer’s report also records 21 second-chance points for San Antonio compared with 12 for Minnesota. (NBA.com)

Castle alone grabbed 11 rebounds.

For a guard, that was a significant contribution, especially in a game where Minnesota needed defensive rebounds to stop San Antonio from generating additional possessions.

The rebounding difference also helped explain why the Spurs could maintain pressure even when they occasionally missed shots.

San Antonio’s Three-Point Shooting

San Antonio made 18 of 38 three-point attempts.

That equates to 47.4%.

Minnesota made 12 of 34, or 35.3%.

The Spurs therefore made six more three-pointers while attempting only four more.

That created an 18-point advantage from made three-point shots alone.

Castle made five, Champagnie made four, Fox made three, and Vassell made three. The production was spread across multiple players rather than coming from one shooter.

That distribution made it harder for Minnesota to eliminate the Spurs’ perimeter threat.

Field-Goal Efficiency Created Another Major Gap

San Antonio shot 49-of-88 from the field.

Minnesota shot 40-of-106.

The 9 additional made field goals do not fully explain the difference because the Spurs also attempted 18 fewer shots.

San Antonio’s 55.7% field-goal percentage was almost 18 percentage points higher than Minnesota’s 37.7%.

That is a substantial efficiency gap.

The Spurs were able to convert more of their possessions into points without needing excessive shot volume.

The Spurs Controlled the Paint

San Antonio scored 58 points in the paint.

Minnesota scored 52.

This is notable because Minnesota had Rudy Gobert, one of the league’s best interior defenders, protecting the rim.

San Antonio still found ways to score around the basket and generated 21 second-chance points.

The Spurs also recorded 17 fast-break points compared with five for Minnesota. (NBA.com)

The combination of interior scoring, offensive rebounding, and transition opportunities gave San Antonio several ways to generate points.

San Antonio’s Defense Beyond the Box Score

The 13 blocks are the obvious defensive statistic.

Wembanyama recorded three blocks, while Luke Kornet had four and Fox added two. Vassell and Harper also recorded one each.

The Spurs’ length affected Minnesota’s shot selection even when a shot was not officially blocked.

Minnesota attempted 106 field goals but converted only 40.

That means the Timberwolves produced a high number of missed attempts while San Antonio consistently turned defensive stops into opportunities on the other end.

The official game report records San Antonio’s largest lead at 37 points and no Minnesota lead throughout the contest. (NBA.com)

Quarter-by-Quarter Statistical Breakdown

First Quarter

San Antonio started with a 36-27 advantage.

Castle immediately established himself as a scoring threat. He finished the opening quarter with 14 points and shot 5-of-6 from the field, including 3-of-3 from three.

Fox also scored nine points in the period while shooting 4-of-4.

Minnesota received 10 points from Naz Reid and seven from Edwards.

Despite those contributions, San Antonio shot 14-of-23 in the quarter, compared with Minnesota’s 10-of-22. (NBA.com)

Second Quarter

The Spurs extended their lead by outscoring Minnesota 38-34.

At halftime, San Antonio had 74 points.

Castle added five points during the quarter, while Wembanyama scored nine and Champagnie added seven.

Minnesota’s Edwards responded with 12 points in the second quarter, while Shannon scored 11 and Reid added eight.

But the Timberwolves could not close the gap because San Antonio continued to shoot efficiently.

The Spurs led by 13 at halftime.

Third Quarter

The third quarter was the decisive stretch.

San Antonio scored 36 points while Minnesota managed only 23.

That 13-point quarter margin transformed a competitive halftime deficit into a commanding lead.

San Antonio’s overall offensive efficiency remained strong, while Minnesota struggled to maintain consistent scoring.

By the end of the third quarter, the Spurs had effectively removed most of the competitive uncertainty from the game.

Fourth Quarter

San Antonio entered the final period with a substantial advantage and finished with 29 points.

Minnesota scored 25.

The fourth-quarter margin was smaller than the previous period, but the game was already under control.

San Antonio ultimately won 139-109.

What the Player Stats Reveal About San Antonio’s Offense

The most important offensive characteristic was balance.

Castle led the team with 32 points, but four other Spurs players scored at least 15.

Fox scored 21.

Wembanyama scored 19.

Champagnie scored 18.

Harper scored 15.

That meant Minnesota could not concentrate its defensive attention on one scorer.

The Spurs also had 34 assists, showing that their scoring was supported by ball movement.

Fox led with nine assists, while Castle added six and Vassell contributed four.

San Antonio therefore combined individual shot-making with team-oriented creation.

What the Numbers Reveal About Minnesota’s Offense

Minnesota’s offense was more concentrated.

Edwards scored 24.

Shannon scored 21.

Reid scored 18.

McDaniels scored 13.

Dosunmu scored 10.

After those five players, no Timberwolves player reached double figures.

Randle scored only three, while Gobert finished scoreless.

That scoring distribution created a difficult situation for Minnesota.

When Edwards was forced into difficult attempts, the Timberwolves needed other starters to compensate. Instead, two of their starters combined for only three points.

Turnovers Were Not the Reason for the Loss

A common mistake when analyzing a blowout is to assume the losing team simply gave the ball away too often.

That was not the case here.

Minnesota committed only five turnovers.

San Antonio committed 15.

The Timberwolves therefore had a nine-turnover advantage.

Yet San Antonio still won by 30.

This makes the shooting and rebounding statistics even more important.

The Spurs were more efficient despite having more turnovers.

San Antonio’s 55.7% field-goal percentage and 47.4% three-point percentage offset its turnover disadvantage.

The Importance of Free Throws

San Antonio made 23 of 27 free throws.

Minnesota made 17 of 21.

The Spurs therefore held a six-point advantage in free-throw makes.

The percentage difference was smaller than the shooting gap elsewhere, with San Antonio at 85.2% and Minnesota at 81%.

Still, San Antonio’s ability to convert its opportunities added another layer to its offensive efficiency.

Wembanyama went 7-of-9 from the line, while Castle went 5-of-6 and Champagnie went 4-of-4.

Plus/Minus Leaders

Plus/minus provides context for how a team performed while each player was on the court.

For San Antonio, the highest figures were:

• Julian Champagnie: +35
• Stephon Castle: +28
• De’Aaron Fox: +26
• Victor Wembanyama: +25
• Dylan Harper: +16

For Minnesota, the starting group generally posted negative figures:

• Julius Randle: -34
• Anthony Edwards: -31
• Ayo Dosunmu: -28
• Jaden McDaniels: -21
• Terrence Shannon Jr.: -21

The numbers reflect the overall game environment. San Antonio’s main rotation players were on the floor during a dominant performance, while Minnesota’s primary players were exposed to the Spurs’ extended runs.

The Biggest Statistical Takeaways

Several numbers stand out when reviewing the complete box score.

1. Castle was the leading individual scorer

Castle’s 32 points were a game high.

His 11 rebounds also gave San Antonio a major contribution from the guard position.

2. San Antonio shot far more efficiently

The Spurs shot 55.7%.

Minnesota shot 37.7%.

That difference was one of the biggest reasons for the 30-point final margin.

3. San Antonio won the glass by 31 rebounds

The 60-29 rebounding advantage was enormous.

It gave the Spurs additional possessions and limited Minnesota’s opportunities to generate second chances.

4. San Antonio made six more three-pointers

The Spurs made 18 threes compared with Minnesota’s 12.

They also converted those attempts at a much higher percentage.

5. Wembanyama remained influential defensively

His 19 points were not his biggest contribution.

Three blocks and his presence around the basket helped San Antonio limit Minnesota’s interior opportunities.

6. Minnesota’s turnovers were not the problem

The Timberwolves committed only five turnovers.

They still lost by 30 because their shooting and rebounding numbers were far worse.

Series Context

The Game 6 result gave San Antonio a 4-2 series victory.

The official NBA series page lists San Antonio at 120.7 points per game across the series compared with Minnesota’s 104.5. The Spurs also averaged 50.2 rebounds and 25.8 assists per game in the series, compared with Minnesota’s 43.8 rebounds and 20.5 assists. (NBA)

Victor Wembanyama led San Antonio in series scoring at 19.8 points per game and averaged 12.0 rebounds and 2.7 assists.

Anthony Edwards led Minnesota with 23.7 points, 5.0 rebounds, and 2.5 assists per game across the series. (NBA)

Game 6 therefore fit a broader statistical pattern from the series rather than appearing completely disconnected from the previous games.

San Antonio’s 139 points also represented another strong offensive performance during the closeout.

Why the Final Score Was So Large

The 30-point margin came from several advantages working together.

San Antonio shot better.

San Antonio rebounded better.

San Antonio protected the rim better.

San Antonio made more three-pointers.

San Antonio produced more assists.

Minnesota’s five turnovers prevented the game from becoming even more one-sided through transition mistakes, but that advantage was not enough to compensate for the shooting and rebounding differences.

The Spurs also never had to chase the game.

They led after every quarter and never trailed.

That allowed their rotation to remain in control rather than relying on late-game execution.

A Practical Way to Read These Player Stats

When analyzing a basketball box score, looking only at points can hide important information.

A better approach is to consider five areas together:

1. Scoring volume: Who scored the most?
2. Efficiency: How many attempts were needed to produce those points?
3. Possession control: Which team won rebounds and turnovers?
4. Creation: Which players generated assists and helped teammates score?
5. Defensive impact: Which players contributed blocks, steals, and defensive possessions?

Using that framework, Castle’s 32-point performance becomes even more impressive because he also had 11 rebounds and six assists.

Fox’s 21 points become more valuable when combined with nine assists and 8-of-10 shooting.

Wembanyama’s 19 points make more sense when viewed alongside three blocks and his defensive influence.

Likewise, Edwards’ 24 points need to be considered alongside his 9-of-26 shooting.

This approach gives readers a more complete understanding of what happened rather than simply identifying the highest scorer.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who led the Spurs in scoring against the Timberwolves?

Stephon Castle led San Antonio with 32 points. He also had 11 rebounds and six assists while shooting 11-of-16 from the field. (NBA)

Who led the Timberwolves in scoring?

Anthony Edwards led Minnesota with 24 points. He shot 9-of-26 from the field, 2-of-7 from three-point range, and added three steals. (NBA.com)

What was the final score of Spurs vs Timberwolves Game 6?

The San Antonio Spurs defeated the Minnesota Timberwolves 139-109 in Game 6 of the Western Conference semifinals. San Antonio won the series 4-2. (NBA)

How many points did Victor Wembanyama score?

Victor Wembanyama scored 19 points in 27:22. He also recorded six rebounds, two assists, and three blocks. (NBA.com)

How many rebounds did Stephon Castle have?

Stephon Castle recorded 11 rebounds, which was the highest total for either team in the game. (NBA.com)

Which team shot better from three-point range?

San Antonio shot 47.4% from three-point range, making 18 of 38 attempts. Minnesota shot 35.3%, making 12 of 34. (NBA.com)

Conclusion

The San Antonio Spurs vs Timberwolves match player stats from Game 6 show a complete team performance rather than a result driven by one individual statistic.

Stephon Castle produced the headline performance with 32 points and 11 rebounds. De’Aaron Fox added 21 points and nine assists while shooting 80% from the field. Victor Wembanyama contributed 19 points and three blocks, while Julian Champagnie added 18 points with four made three-pointers. Dylan Harper provided 15 points from the bench.

For Minnesota, Anthony Edwards led the team with 24 points, followed by Terrence Shannon Jr. with 21 and Naz Reid with 18. However, the Timberwolves struggled to match San Antonio’s efficiency, especially from the field and from three-point range.

The team comparison is even more revealing. San Antonio shot 55.7% compared with Minnesota’s 37.7%, made 18 three-pointers compared with 12, and won the rebounding battle 60-29. The Spurs also recorded 13 blocks and 34 assists.

Interestingly, Minnesota committed only five turnovers compared with San Antonio’s 15, showing that turnovers were not the primary factor behind the result. The decisive differences were shooting efficiency, rebounding, interior defense, and San Antonio’s ability to generate scoring from several players.

The 139-109 result completed a 4-2 series victory for San Antonio and sent the Spurs into the Western Conference Finals. The individual numbers from Game 6 provide a clear statistical record of how that closeout performance unfolded. (NBA)