Washington Wizards vs Milwaukee Bucks Match Player Stats
The washington wizards vs milwaukee bucks match player stats tell the story of one of the most entertaining NBA contests of the 2025 regular season. Although Milwaukee entered the game with the better record, Washington produced an impressive comeback to secure a thrilling 129 to 126 victory at Capital One Arena on December 2, 2025. The matchup featured outstanding individual performances, efficient shooting, momentum swings in every quarter, and several players stepping up during crucial moments.
From Kevin Porter Jr.’s 30 point performance for Milwaukee to CJ McCollum’s game leading impact for Washington, the contest showcased high level offensive basketball. Beyond the final score, the statistics reveal how Washington overcame an early deficit by controlling rebounds, protecting the basketball, and executing efficiently during the final quarter.
This detailed breakdown examines every important aspect of the game, including team performance, player statistics, quarter analysis, and the tactical decisions that shaped the outcome.
Match Overview
| Match Detail | Result |
| Date | December 2, 2025 |
| Venue | Capital One Arena |
| City | Washington, DC |
| Attendance | 13,709 |
| Final Score | Washington Wizards 129, Milwaukee Bucks 126 |
| Season Series | Tied 1 to 1 |
The Bucks entered this matchup with a 9 and 13 record while the Wizards were looking to improve after a difficult start to the season with a 3 and 16 record. Despite the difference in standings, Washington played with greater energy during the second half and earned an important home victory.
Washington Wizards vs Milwaukee Bucks Match Player Stats Breakdown
The washington wizards vs milwaukee bucks match player stats highlight two teams that approached offense differently. Milwaukee relied on outstanding perimeter shooting while Washington generated more scoring opportunities through higher shot volume, stronger rebounding, and fewer turnovers.
Team Statistics Comparison
| Category | Milwaukee Bucks | Washington Wizards |
| Points | 126 | 129 |
| Field Goals | 46 of 84 (55%) | 53 of 102 (52%) |
| Three Point Shooting | 21 of 38 (55%) | 13 of 36 (36%) |
| Free Throws | 13 of 21 (62%) | 10 of 15 (67%) |
| Rebounds | 35 | 41 |
| Assists | 29 | 29 |
| Turnovers | 16 | 10 |
| Steals | 5 | 9 |
| Blocks | 4 | 4 |
Although Milwaukee shot more efficiently from both the field and beyond the three point line, Washington compensated by attempting 18 more field goals, grabbing six additional rebounds, and committing six fewer turnovers. Those extra possessions ultimately proved decisive in a three point game.
Quarter by Quarter Analysis
First Quarter
| Team | Points |
| Milwaukee | 34 |
| Washington | 28 |
Milwaukee opened the game aggressively. Their ball movement created quality perimeter opportunities, and they converted at an impressive rate. Kevin Porter Jr. attacked confidently while Giannis Antetokounmpo established an early presence inside.
Washington remained competitive through CJ McCollum’s scoring, but defensive lapses allowed Milwaukee to take a six point advantage after the opening quarter.
Second Quarter
| Team | Points |
| Milwaukee | 32 |
| Washington | 30 |
The second period followed a similar pattern. Milwaukee continued shooting efficiently and maintained control of the pace. Washington responded with improved offensive execution but struggled to reduce the deficit before halftime.
At the break, Milwaukee held a comfortable eight point lead.
Halftime Score
| Team | Points |
| Milwaukee | 66 |
| Washington | 58 |
Despite trailing, Washington had already shown positive signs. Their offense continued generating open looks, and their rebounding gradually improved as the game progressed.
Third Quarter Momentum Shift
The third quarter completely changed the direction of the contest.
| Team | Points |
| Milwaukee | 28 |
| Washington | 33 |
Washington increased its defensive intensity and forced several costly Milwaukee turnovers. Better transition offense created easier scoring opportunities, while Marvin Bagley III became increasingly effective around the basket.
CJ McCollum also continued to control the offense, helping reduce Milwaukee’s lead entering the final quarter.
Instead of relying only on perimeter shooting, Washington consistently attacked inside, forcing Milwaukee to defend more possessions in the paint.
Fourth Quarter Performance
The final quarter produced the highest drama of the evening.
| Team | Points |
| Milwaukee | 32 |
| Washington | 38 |
Washington scored 38 points during the final twelve minutes, their highest scoring quarter of the game.
Several factors contributed to this finish.
- Better ball security
- More second chance opportunities
- Consistent scoring from multiple players
- Improved rebounding
- Timely defensive stops
Milwaukee continued shooting efficiently but could not overcome its turnover problems late in the game.
Milwaukee Bucks Player Statistics
Kevin Porter Jr.
| Statistic | Total |
| Points | 30 |
Kevin Porter Jr. finished as Milwaukee’s leading scorer with an outstanding 30 points. Throughout the game, he consistently attacked the defense, created his own scoring opportunities, and provided much of Milwaukee’s offensive production.
His scoring efficiency kept the Bucks ahead for much of the contest, especially during the first half.
Performance Evaluation
Strengths included
- Aggressive shot creation
- Consistent perimeter scoring
- Offensive confidence throughout the game
Despite his excellent performance, basketball remains a team sport, and Milwaukee’s overall defensive struggles prevented his scoring from translating into a victory.
Giannis Antetokounmpo
| Statistic | Total |
| Points | 26 |
| Rebounds | 7 |
| Assists | 4 |
Giannis once again demonstrated why he remains one of the league’s elite players. His combination of scoring, rebounding, and playmaking created constant pressure on Washington’s defense.
Even though he finished with 26 points, Washington gradually limited his influence during critical possessions in the fourth quarter.
His ability to score near the basket forced multiple defenders to collapse, opening opportunities for Milwaukee’s shooters throughout the game.
Myles Turner
| Statistic | Total |
| Points | 9 |
Turner contributed solid interior defense while adding nine points offensively. Although not the primary scoring option, his spacing allowed Milwaukee’s guards more room to attack.
AJ Green
| Statistic | Total |
| Points | 13 |
AJ Green played an efficient supporting role by knocking down perimeter shots and helping Milwaukee maintain offensive balance.
His movement without the basketball created valuable spacing that complemented Giannis and Kevin Porter Jr.
Ryan Rollins
| Statistic | Total |
| Points | 14 |
Rollins quietly produced one of his stronger offensive outings, finishing with 14 points.
His willingness to attack the basket provided Milwaukee with another reliable scoring option.
Gary Trent Jr.
| Statistic | Total |
| Points | 14 |
Coming off the bench, Gary Trent Jr. delivered important offensive production.
His shooting helped Milwaukee maintain momentum during several stretches, giving the second unit valuable scoring support.
Washington Wizards Player Statistics
CJ McCollum
| Statistic | Total |
| Points | 28 |
CJ McCollum led Washington with 28 points and served as the offensive leader throughout the game.
His experience became increasingly valuable during the second half, where he made smart decisions with the basketball while consistently finding quality scoring opportunities.
Rather than forcing difficult shots, McCollum balanced scoring with efficient playmaking, helping Washington maintain offensive rhythm.
His leadership was particularly noticeable during the fourth quarter when every possession carried added importance.
Marvin Bagley III
| Statistic | Total |
| Points | 22 |
| Rebounds | 8 |
Marvin Bagley III produced one of his best all around performances of the season.
His work inside the paint created consistent scoring opportunities while his eight rebounds helped Washington control second chance possessions.
Bagley’s physical presence became increasingly important after halftime, especially as Milwaukee attempted to protect its lead.
His ability to finish near the basket complemented McCollum’s perimeter scoring and gave Washington a balanced offensive attack.
Khris Middleton
| Statistic | Total |
| Points | 15 |
| Assists | 6 |
Facing his former team made this an interesting matchup for Khris Middleton. He contributed 15 points and shared the team lead with six assists, helping Washington move the ball effectively throughout the contest.
Middleton did not need to dominate the scoring because he influenced the game in several different ways. His passing created open shots for teammates, while his veteran decision making helped Washington stay composed during important possessions. His ability to read the defense and make the correct play was especially valuable during the closing minutes.
Kyshawn George
| Statistic | Total |
| Points | 9 |
Kyshawn George finished with nine points as part of the starting lineup. Although his scoring total was modest compared with some teammates, he contributed by spacing the floor and making smart decisions without forcing difficult shots.
His defensive effort also helped Washington limit Milwaukee’s rhythm during the second half.
Bilal Coulibaly
| Statistic | Total |
| Points | 7 |
Bilal Coulibaly recorded seven points while providing athletic defense and energy on both ends of the floor.
His impact extended beyond the scoring column. Active perimeter defense and hustle plays helped Washington create transition opportunities, contributing to the team’s nine steals.
Cam Whitmore
| Statistic | Total |
| Points | 17 |
Cam Whitmore was Washington’s highest scoring reserve with 17 points.
His production off the bench gave the Wizards an important offensive boost when the starters rested. Rather than allowing Milwaukee to extend its lead, Washington’s second unit maintained offensive pressure thanks to Whitmore’s efficient scoring.
Bench production often determines close NBA games, and Whitmore’s contribution was one of the hidden factors behind Washington’s victory.
Starting Lineup Comparison
Milwaukee Bucks Starters
| Player | Points |
| Kevin Porter Jr. | 30 |
| Giannis Antetokounmpo | 26 |
| Ryan Rollins | 14 |
| AJ Green | 13 |
| Myles Turner | 9 |
Total Starter Points: 92
Milwaukee received outstanding offensive production from its starting lineup. Kevin Porter Jr. and Giannis Antetokounmpo combined for 56 points, while the remaining starters all made meaningful scoring contributions.
Despite that balance, the starters could not completely overcome Washington’s superior rebounding and lower turnover total.
Washington Wizards Starters
| Player | Points |
| CJ McCollum | 28 |
| Marvin Bagley III | 22 |
| Khris Middleton | 15 |
| Kyshawn George | 9 |
| Bilal Coulibaly | 7 |
Total Starter Points: 81
Although Washington’s starters scored fewer combined points than Milwaukee’s starters, they received valuable support from the bench, particularly from Cam Whitmore. More importantly, the starters protected the basketball and executed efficiently during the final quarter.
Statistical Comparison That Decided the Game
Looking only at shooting percentages might suggest Milwaukee should have won comfortably. The Bucks connected on 55 percent of their field goal attempts and also shot 55 percent from three point range.
However, basketball games are often decided by total possessions rather than shooting percentage alone.
Washington Won the Rebounding Battle
Washington collected 41 rebounds compared with Milwaukee’s 35.
Those additional rebounds created second chance opportunities and prevented Milwaukee from generating easy transition offense.
Turnovers Favored Washington
One of the biggest statistical differences appeared in turnovers.
| Team | Turnovers |
| Milwaukee | 16 |
| Washington | 10 |
Those six extra turnovers represented several lost scoring opportunities for Milwaukee while allowing Washington to push the pace.
Defensive Activity
Washington also finished with nine steals compared with Milwaukee’s five.
That aggressive defensive effort helped fuel the comeback after halftime.
Team Shooting Analysis
Milwaukee Bucks
Milwaukee’s offensive efficiency was outstanding.
- Field goals: 46 of 84
- Field goal percentage: 55 percent
- Three point shooting: 21 of 38
- Three point percentage: 55 percent
- Free throws: 13 of 21
Normally, those shooting numbers are enough to win most NBA games.
The challenge was maintaining possession. Sixteen turnovers reduced the value of Milwaukee’s efficient shooting because Washington simply generated more scoring chances.
Washington Wizards
Washington took a different path to victory.
- Field goals: 53 of 102
- Field goal percentage: 52 percent
- Three pointers: 13 of 36
- Three point percentage: 36 percent
- Free throws: 10 of 15
Although their percentages were lower, Washington attempted 102 field goals compared with Milwaukee’s 84.
That difference reflected stronger rebounding, fewer turnovers, and greater offensive activity throughout the game.
Key Moments That Changed the Contest
Several moments shifted momentum toward Washington.
Improved Second Half Defense
Washington increased defensive pressure after halftime, forcing Milwaukee into mistakes that had not occurred during the opening two quarters.
Marvin Bagley III’s Interior Presence
Bagley’s rebounding and scoring inside helped Washington establish better balance between perimeter and paint scoring.
CJ McCollum’s Leadership
McCollum consistently delivered during important possessions, helping organize the offense while maintaining scoring efficiency.
Fourth Quarter Execution
Scoring 38 points in the final period demonstrated Washington’s confidence under pressure.
The Wizards remained patient offensively while limiting costly mistakes.
What These Statistics Mean Going Forward
The washington wizards vs milwaukee bucks match player stats reveal lessons for both franchises.
For Milwaukee, the game demonstrated that elite shooting alone cannot guarantee victory. Protecting the basketball and finishing defensive possessions with rebounds remain areas requiring improvement.
For Washington, the performance showed the value of balanced team basketball. Multiple players contributed meaningful production, while strong rebounding and disciplined ball handling compensated for less efficient perimeter shooting.
The result also evened the season series at one victory each, adding extra significance to future meetings between the two teams.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who won the Washington Wizards vs Milwaukee Bucks game on December 2, 2025?
The Washington Wizards defeated the Milwaukee Bucks 129 to 126 at Capital One Arena.
Who scored the most points in the game?
Kevin Porter Jr. led all Milwaukee scorers with 30 points, while CJ McCollum led Washington with 28 points.
Why did Washington win despite shooting a lower percentage?
Washington secured more rebounds, committed fewer turnovers, generated more field goal attempts, and finished stronger during the fourth quarter.
How did Giannis Antetokounmpo perform?
Giannis Antetokounmpo recorded 26 points, seven rebounds, and four assists while serving as one of Milwaukee’s primary offensive threats.
Which bench player made the biggest impact?
Cam Whitmore scored 17 points for Washington, providing valuable offense from the second unit. Gary Trent Jr. added 14 points off Milwaukee’s bench.
What was the season series after this game?
Following this matchup, the season series between the two teams was tied at one win each.
Conclusion
This game highlighted how basketball is influenced by much more than shooting percentages. Milwaukee delivered one of its better offensive performances of the season, converting more than half of its field goals and three point attempts. Even so, Washington controlled several of the game’s most important statistical categories, including rebounds, turnovers, and steals.
The Wizards also showed resilience after trailing at halftime. Their improved defensive intensity, balanced scoring, and disciplined execution during the final quarter allowed them to complete an impressive comeback. Performances from CJ McCollum, Marvin Bagley III, Khris Middleton, and the supporting cast demonstrated the value of collective team play, while Milwaukee received outstanding individual efforts from Kevin Porter Jr. and Giannis Antetokounmpo that unfortunately were not enough to secure the win.
Overall, the washington wizards vs milwaukee bucks match player stats provide an excellent example of how efficiency, possession control, and late game execution combine to determine the outcome of a closely contested NBA matchup.
