Las Vegas Aces vs Connecticut Sun Match Player Stats
The Las Vegas Aces vs Connecticut Sun match player stats from August 21, 2026, tell the story of a game that was controlled by Las Vegas through superior rebounding, more efficient shooting, better ball security, and a balanced scoring attack. The Aces defeated the Sun 101-78 at Michelob ULTRA Arena in Las Vegas, extending their season-series advantage to 3-0 and producing their third victory over Connecticut in 2026.
The final score alone shows a 23-point difference, but the underlying numbers explain why the margin became so large. Las Vegas shot 49% from the field compared with Connecticut’s 45%, won the rebounding battle 40-23, committed seven fewer turnovers, and generated five more assists. The Aces also converted 36% of their three-point attempts and 82% of their free throws.
Jackie Young led Las Vegas with 24 points and added five assists, while A’ja Wilson contributed 20 points. Cheyenne Parker-Tyus provided an important two-way contribution with 18 points and a team-high nine rebounds. For Connecticut, Olivia Nelson-Ododa led all Sun scorers with 14 points, while Kennedy Burke and Leila Lacan finished with 11 each. Rayah Marshall added seven rebounds and five assists.
This breakdown looks beyond the final score to explain what the player and team numbers reveal about the game.
Las Vegas Aces vs Connecticut Sun Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The game was played on August 21, 2026, at Michelob ULTRA Arena in Las Vegas, Nevada, in front of 10,207 spectators.
Las Vegas entered the contest with a 25-13 record and a 12-7 home mark. Connecticut came into the game at 9-26 overall and 3-14 on the road.
The Aces eventually won 101-78, but the contest was not decided in the opening half. Connecticut scored 24 points in the first quarter and 23 in the second, while Las Vegas scored 25 and 23 respectively.
That meant the Aces led by only one point at halftime.
The decisive separation came after the break.
Las Vegas scored 27 points in the third quarter while Connecticut managed 16. The Aces then added another 26 points in the fourth quarter while the Sun scored only 15.
The second-half scoring was therefore:
- Las Vegas: 53 points
- Connecticut: 31 points
- Second-half margin: 22 points
That is the central story of the game. Connecticut was competitive during the first half, but Las Vegas substantially improved its control after halftime.
Final Score
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Final |
| Connecticut Sun | 24 | 23 | 16 | 15 | 78 |
| Las Vegas Aces | 25 | 23 | 27 | 26 | 101 |
The quarter-by-quarter progression also shows that the Aces did not rely on one explosive opening period. They gradually separated from Connecticut, with their strongest basketball coming in the final two quarters.
Aces Shooting Efficiency Created the Difference
One of the most useful ways to understand the matchup is to compare how often each team converted its opportunities.
Las Vegas finished 37-of-75 from the field, good for 49%. Connecticut went 29-of-64, shooting 45%.
The four-percentage-point difference may not look enormous, but it becomes more meaningful when combined with the Aces taking 11 more field-goal attempts.
Las Vegas therefore had both a higher shooting percentage and a larger shot volume.
That combination is difficult for an opponent to overcome.
The Aces also made nine of 25 three-point attempts, producing a 36% three-point rate. Connecticut made six of 22 from outside, or 27%.
The difference from three-point range was three made baskets.
Field Goal Comparison
- Las Vegas: 37-of-75, 49%
- Connecticut: 29-of-64, 45%
- Aces field goals made: 8 more
- Aces field-goal attempts: 11 more
The Aces were not simply taking difficult perimeter shots and hoping they fell. Their overall efficiency and extra possessions helped produce the 101-point total.
Free throws were also slightly more efficient for Las Vegas.
The Aces converted 18 of 22 free throws for 82%, while Connecticut made 14 of 18 for 78%.
That gave Las Vegas four more made free throws.
When combined, the shooting categories favored the Aces in every major percentage area:
| Category | Las Vegas | Connecticut |
| Field goals | 37-75 | 29-64 |
| FG percentage | 49% | 45% |
| 3-pointers | 9-25 | 6-22 |
| 3PT percentage | 36% | 27% |
| Free throws | 18-22 | 14-18 |
| FT percentage | 82% | 78% |
The important takeaway is that Connecticut did not shoot disastrously. A 45% field-goal percentage is respectable. The bigger issue was that the Sun did not generate enough total opportunities to keep pace with Las Vegas.
Rebounding Was One of the Biggest Statistical Gaps
The 40-23 rebounding advantage for Las Vegas was arguably the clearest statistical separator.
The Aces collected 17 more rebounds than Connecticut.
That matters because rebounding influences more than the box score. Defensive rebounds end possessions, while offensive rebounds can create additional scoring chances. Even without a detailed offensive-rebound breakdown, a 17-rebound overall advantage strongly indicates that Las Vegas controlled the glass throughout the contest.
Cheyenne Parker-Tyus was particularly important.
She led the Aces with nine rebounds while also scoring 18 points. That combination made her one of the most impactful players outside the team’s two primary scoring leaders.
For Connecticut, Rayah Marshall led the team with seven rebounds and also contributed five assists.
The contrast between the teams was significant:
- Aces total rebounds: 40
- Sun total rebounds: 23
- Difference: 17
- Aces leading rebounder: Cheyenne Parker-Tyus, 9
- Sun leading rebounder: Rayah Marshall, 7
A team can survive an inefficient shooting night if it creates enough second chances and limits the opponent’s extra possessions. Las Vegas did the opposite of what Connecticut needed. The Aces generated more possession control while also shooting more efficiently.
Jackie Young Led the Aces With a Complete Offensive Performance
Jackie Young was the leading scorer for Las Vegas with 24 points.
Her five assists also gave her the team’s highest assist total.
That combination is important because it shows that her influence was not limited to scoring. She was involved in creating offense for teammates as well.
A 24-point performance naturally stands out, but the five assists provide another layer to the performance. The Aces finished with 23 assists as a team, meaning Young accounted for a meaningful portion of their recorded playmaking production.
The Aces also received 20 points from A’ja Wilson.
Having two major scoring contributors reach 20 or more points is especially valuable because it reduces dependence on one offensive option.
Las Vegas then received 18 points from Cheyenne Parker-Tyus.
That gave the Aces three players with at least 18 points.
The scoring hierarchy was therefore:
- Jackie Young: 24 points
- A’ja Wilson: 20 points
- Cheyenne Parker-Tyus: 18 points
This balance helps explain how Las Vegas reached 101 points.
A’ja Wilson’s 20 Points Added Stability
A’ja Wilson finished with 20 points, giving Las Vegas another dependable scoring source.
While Young led the team, Wilson’s contribution prevented Connecticut from focusing its entire defensive attention on one player.
This is an important tactical consideration when reviewing player statistics. A box score should not always be interpreted by asking only who scored the most.
The more useful question is how the scoring was distributed.
Las Vegas had a 24-point leader, a 20-point second option, and an 18-point contributor. That distribution creates multiple defensive problems.
If a defense gives additional attention to Young, another scorer can take advantage. If the defense collapses around Wilson, Las Vegas has other scoring options.
That balance became increasingly visible in the second half when the Aces scored 53 points.
Cheyenne Parker-Tyus Delivered a Major Bench Contribution
Cheyenne Parker-Tyus was the Aces’ leading bench scorer with 18 points and also led the team in rebounds with nine.
That combination is one of the most notable details in the game data.
Bench scoring can change the rhythm of a game because it allows a team to maintain offensive pressure when its primary starters are not carrying the entire workload.
An 18-point bench performance is particularly valuable in a game where the opponent remained close through two quarters.
Parker-Tyus did more than provide scoring. Her nine rebounds also helped address one of the most important areas of the game: possession control.
Her statistical profile therefore connects directly to the larger team story.
Las Vegas won the game through a combination of:
- Efficient shooting
- Strong rebounding
- Lower turnover volume
- Balanced scoring
- Productive bench offense
Parker-Tyus contributed to several of those categories simultaneously.
Connecticut’s Olivia Nelson-Ododa Led the Sun
Olivia Nelson-Ododa finished as Connecticut’s leading scorer with 14 points.
That was the highest individual scoring total for the Sun, followed by Kennedy Burke and Leila Lacan with 11 points each.
The problem for Connecticut was not simply that its leading scorer had 14 points. The larger issue was the absence of a high-volume scoring performance capable of matching Las Vegas’ top offensive contributors.
The Aces had three players between 18 and 24 points.
Connecticut had one player at 14 and two at 11.
That scoring distribution created a substantial gap at the top end of the offensive production.
The Sun still shot 45% from the field, so their offensive efficiency was not completely overwhelmed. But they needed either greater scoring volume from their leading players or additional offensive production elsewhere to stay with a Las Vegas team that scored 101 points.
Rayah Marshall Provided a Versatile Contribution
Rayah Marshall was one of the more interesting statistical contributors for Connecticut.
She led the Sun with seven rebounds and five assists.
Her five assists were also the team’s highest total.
That means Marshall contributed in two areas that directly address team offense and possession control.
The issue was that Connecticut needed more overall production around those contributions.
A player can have a useful individual statistical line while the team still struggles. Marshall’s numbers illustrate that distinction well.
The Sun finished with:
- 23 rebounds
- 18 assists
- 18 turnovers
- 7 steals
- 3 blocks
Marshall’s seven rebounds and five assists therefore represented meaningful portions of Connecticut’s overall production.
Turnovers Became a Hidden Separator
One of the easiest statistics to overlook in a final-score recap is turnovers.
Las Vegas committed 11 turnovers.
Connecticut committed 18.
That seven-turnover difference is significant.
It means Connecticut lost seven more possessions through turnovers than Las Vegas did.
The Sun actually recorded seven steals, matching the Aces’ seven steals. However, creating steals is not enough if a team also gives the ball away frequently.
This is where the possession battle becomes important.
Connecticut’s 18 turnovers effectively reduced the number of possessions available for its 45% shooting attack. Las Vegas, by contrast, maintained a more efficient possession profile with only 11 turnovers.
The Aces therefore combined:
- More rebounds
- Fewer turnovers
- More field-goal attempts
- Better shooting percentages
That is a powerful statistical recipe for winning.
Assists Showed Better Offensive Flow From Las Vegas
Las Vegas recorded 23 assists compared with 18 for Connecticut.
The five-assist difference supports the broader conclusion that the Aces generated more coordinated offensive production.
Jackie Young led Las Vegas with five assists, while Rayah Marshall led Connecticut with five.
That creates an interesting individual comparison.
Both teams had a player with five assists, but Las Vegas produced 23 assists overall while Connecticut finished with 18.
In other words, Young’s playmaking was part of a broader passing performance from the Aces.
The team was not dependent on one player to create every scoring opportunity.
The Second Half Changed the Game
The halftime score deserves special attention because it prevents an overly simplistic reading of the final result.
After two quarters:
- Las Vegas: 48
- Connecticut: 47
The game was essentially even.
Then Las Vegas outscored Connecticut 27-16 in the third quarter.
That 11-point third-quarter swing changed the competitive shape of the game.
The Aces then won the fourth quarter 26-15.
The second half therefore ended:
- Las Vegas: 53
- Connecticut: 31
A 22-point second-half advantage transformed a one-point halftime lead into a 23-point final victory.
This is perhaps the strongest evidence that Las Vegas adjusted successfully after halftime or executed its existing approach more effectively as the game progressed.
The statistics do not establish the precise coaching adjustment, so it would be inappropriate to claim a specific tactical change without additional play-by-play or coach comments. What the numbers do establish is that the Aces dramatically improved their scoring margin after halftime.
Why the 101-Point Total Matters
Las Vegas reached triple digits with 101 points.
That was not achieved through one statistical category alone.
The Aces made 37 field goals, nine three-pointers, and 18 free throws.
They also benefited from 40 rebounds and only 11 turnovers.
The combination produced sustained offensive opportunities.
The final offensive profile was:
- 101 points
- 37 made field goals
- 49% shooting
- 9 made three-pointers
- 36% three-point shooting
- 18 made free throws
- 82% free-throw shooting
- 23 assists
- 11 turnovers
This is a balanced offensive performance rather than a one-dimensional scoring display.
Why Connecticut Finished With 78 Points
Connecticut scored 78 points despite shooting 45% from the field.
That apparent contradiction is worth examining.
A 45% shooting percentage normally provides a reasonable offensive foundation. However, the Sun took only 64 field-goal attempts compared with 75 for Las Vegas.
The Sun also made only six three-pointers and committed 18 turnovers.
Those factors limited their total scoring opportunities.
Connecticut’s free-throw shooting was solid at 78%, but 18 attempts produced only 14 makes.
The team therefore needed more possessions, more three-point success, or greater scoring production from its leading players to compensate for the Aces’ advantages.
The Season Series Was Completely Controlled by Las Vegas
The August 21 game completed a 3-0 season sweep for Las Vegas.
The three results supplied for the 2026 season were:
- May 14: Las Vegas 98, Connecticut 69
- May 16: Las Vegas 94, Connecticut 78
- August 21: Las Vegas 101, Connecticut 78
The season-series scoring margins were:
- Game 1: Las Vegas by 29
- Game 2: Las Vegas by 16
- Game 3: Las Vegas by 23
Across those three games, Las Vegas outscored Connecticut by 68 points in total.
The combined scores were:
- Las Vegas: 293
- Connecticut: 225
That works out to an average winning margin of approximately 22.7 points across the three meetings.
The consistency is notable.
This was not a single-game anomaly in which Las Vegas barely survived a difficult matchup. The supplied results show that the Aces won all three meetings and did so by double-digit margins every time.
What the Matchup Reveals About Team Strength
The three-game series provides a useful example of why team statistics need to be considered together.
Las Vegas repeatedly demonstrated the ability to create separation.
In the August 21 meeting, that separation came from several connected advantages:
1. Better shooting
The Aces shot 49% compared with 45% for Connecticut.
2. Better three-point efficiency
Las Vegas shot 36% from three compared with 27% for the Sun.
3. Better rebounding
The Aces won the rebounding battle 40-23.
4. Better ball security
Las Vegas committed 11 turnovers while Connecticut committed 18.
5. More assists
The Aces recorded 23 assists compared with 18 for Connecticut.
6. Balanced scoring
Young, Wilson, and Parker-Tyus all reached at least 18 points.
Taken together, these numbers provide a much clearer explanation than the 101-78 final score alone.
A Practical Way to Read Player Stats From This Game
For readers who use WNBA box scores to understand games, this matchup provides a useful framework.
Start with scoring, but do not stop there.
First, identify the leading scorers.
Then compare shooting efficiency.
Next, look at rebounds because they can explain differences in possession volume.
After that, examine turnovers and assists.
Finally, compare how the game developed quarter by quarter.
Using that method here produces a consistent conclusion.
Las Vegas had the better scoring distribution, stronger rebounding, fewer turnovers, better overall shooting, and a much stronger second half.
That is why the final margin became so large despite Connecticut holding a one-point lead at the end of the first quarter and trailing by only one at halftime.
For official league information, schedules, standings, scores and broader WNBA resources, readers can refer to the WNBA official website.
A Closer Look at the Four Quarters
First Quarter
Las Vegas opened with 25 points while Connecticut scored 24.
The one-point difference immediately showed that the Sun were capable of matching the Aces early.
Second Quarter
Both teams scored 23 points.
The game therefore remained extremely close at halftime, with Las Vegas holding a 48-47 advantage.
Third Quarter
This was the turning point.
Las Vegas scored 27 points while Connecticut scored 16.
The Aces created an 11-point advantage in one quarter and entered the fourth with a much more comfortable lead.
Fourth Quarter
Las Vegas continued to pull away, scoring 26 points compared with Connecticut’s 15.
Rather than allowing the Sun to recover, the Aces added another double-digit scoring advantage.
Player Impact Summary
The individual performances can be summarized clearly from the supplied data.
Las Vegas Aces
Jackie Young
- 24 points
- 5 assists
- Team scoring leader
- Team assist leader
A’ja Wilson
- 20 points
- Second-leading Aces scorer
Cheyenne Parker-Tyus
- 18 points
- 9 rebounds
- Leading Aces rebounder
- Leading Aces bench scorer
Connecticut Sun
Olivia Nelson-Ododa
- 14 points
- Team scoring leader
Kennedy Burke
- 11 points
- Tied for second among Sun scorers
Leila Lacan
- 11 points
- Tied for second among Sun scorers
Rayah Marshall
- 7 rebounds
- 5 assists
- Leading Sun rebounder
- Leading Sun assist provider
This distribution highlights the different ways players affected the contest.
Young controlled scoring and playmaking for Las Vegas. Parker-Tyus supplied an important combination of scoring and rebounding. Marshall provided Connecticut with valuable rebounding and passing production even though the team struggled to keep pace.
Team Statistical Comparison
| Statistic | Las Vegas Aces | Connecticut Sun |
| Final score | 101 | 78 |
| Field goals | 37-75 | 29-64 |
| FG percentage | 49% | 45% |
| 3-pointers | 9-25 | 6-22 |
| 3PT percentage | 36% | 27% |
| Free throws | 18-22 | 14-18 |
| FT percentage | 82% | 78% |
| Rebounds | 40 | 23 |
| Assists | 23 | 18 |
| Turnovers | 11 | 18 |
| Steals | 7 | 7 |
| Blocks | 2 | 3 |
The table makes the overall story easy to see.
Connecticut’s three steals and three blocks were useful defensive contributions, but they were not enough to offset the Aces’ advantages in shooting, rebounding, passing, and turnover control.
What Was the Biggest Statistical Difference?
The 17-rebound advantage stands out as the largest raw team-stat gap.
The seven-turnover difference is another major factor.
These two areas work together.
A team that rebounds well can gain extra opportunities while limiting the opponent’s second chances. A team that also protects the ball can maximize the possessions it receives.
Las Vegas did both.
The Aces also had an eight-made-field-goal advantage and three more made three-pointers.
The result was a game where multiple small advantages reinforced each other until the margin became 23 points.
What Connecticut Could Have Done Differently
The available statistics allow us to identify areas that needed improvement without inventing tactical details.
The first priority would have been reducing turnovers.
Eighteen turnovers against a team that committed only 11 created a seven-possession disadvantage before considering other possession differences.
The second priority would have been improving three-point efficiency.
Connecticut made six of 22 from outside, compared with nine of 25 for Las Vegas.
The third priority would have been winning more rebounds.
The 23-40 rebounding difference gave Las Vegas a major possession advantage.
Finally, Connecticut needed more scoring from its leading offensive players.
The Sun’s top scorer had 14 points, while Las Vegas had three players with at least 18.
These are not isolated issues. They are connected. Better rebounding and ball security can create more possessions, while better perimeter shooting can make those possessions more valuable.
What Las Vegas Did Particularly Well
Las Vegas performed well in almost every category that usually shapes a decisive win.
The Aces shot better.
They rebounded better.
They turned the ball over less.
They passed more effectively.
They made more three-pointers.
They made more free throws.
Most importantly, they maintained their offensive production after halftime.
The 27-point third quarter and 26-point fourth quarter demonstrate that the Aces did not simply survive Connecticut’s early resistance. They imposed a much stronger offensive rhythm during the final 20 minutes.
Why the Game Was Closer Than the Final Score Suggests
The 23-point final margin can make the contest look one-sided from start to finish.
It was not.
At halftime, Las Vegas led only 48-47.
That means the first 20 minutes produced a one-point difference.
The final 20 minutes produced a 22-point difference.
This distinction is important when evaluating the game.
A final score is an endpoint. The quarter-by-quarter data explain how the endpoint was reached.
The August 21 meeting was competitive early, then became increasingly controlled by Las Vegas after halftime.
That pattern also makes the game more useful for analysis because it highlights where the contest changed rather than simply identifying the winner.
Key Takeaways From the Match
The most important lessons from the statistical record are straightforward.
Las Vegas won the possession battle.
The Aces had 40 rebounds and only 11 turnovers.
Las Vegas had greater scoring balance.
Young scored 24, Wilson scored 20, and Parker-Tyus scored 18.
The Aces shot more efficiently.
They finished at 49% overall and 36% from three.
Connecticut remained competitive for a half.
The Sun trailed by only one point after 20 minutes.
The third quarter changed the game.
Las Vegas won that period 27-16.
The season series belonged entirely to Las Vegas.
The Aces won all three meetings in 2026.
Rebounding and turnovers were major separators.
Las Vegas held a 40-23 rebounding edge and a 11-18 turnover advantage.
FAQs
Who led the Las Vegas Aces in scoring against the Connecticut Sun?
Jackie Young led Las Vegas with 24 points. A’ja Wilson scored 20, while Cheyenne Parker-Tyus added 18.
Who led the Connecticut Sun in scoring?
Olivia Nelson-Ododa led Connecticut with 14 points. Kennedy Burke and Leila Lacan each scored 11.
What was the final score between the Aces and Sun?
The Las Vegas Aces defeated the Connecticut Sun 101-78 on August 21, 2026.
How many rebounds did the Aces have?
Las Vegas recorded 40 rebounds, compared with 23 for Connecticut.
How many turnovers did each team commit?
The Aces committed 11 turnovers, while the Sun committed 18.
Did Las Vegas sweep Connecticut in the 2026 season series?
Yes. Based on the supplied game results, Las Vegas won all three 2026 meetings, 98-69 on May 14, 94-78 on May 16, and 101-78 on August 21.
Conclusion
The Las Vegas Aces vs Connecticut Sun match player stats from August 21, 2026, show that the 101-78 result was built on several connected advantages rather than one isolated performance.
Jackie Young led all Aces scorers with 24 points and added five assists. A’ja Wilson supplied 20 points, while Cheyenne Parker-Tyus delivered 18 points and nine rebounds. That balance gave Las Vegas three reliable contributors at the top of its scoring chart.
Connecticut received 14 points from Olivia Nelson-Ododa, with Kennedy Burke and Leila Lacan adding 11 apiece. Rayah Marshall also contributed seven rebounds and five assists, but the Sun could not match Las Vegas’ overall production.
The team numbers provide the clearest explanation. Las Vegas shot 49% from the field, made nine three-pointers, grabbed 40 rebounds, recorded 23 assists, and committed only 11 turnovers. Connecticut shot 45%, made six threes, collected 23 rebounds, recorded 18 assists, and committed 18 turnovers.
Most importantly, the game was transformed after halftime. Las Vegas held only a 48-47 lead at the break, then outscored Connecticut 53-31 during the second half. That second-half performance turned a close contest into a decisive victory.
The result also completed a 3-0 season sweep for Las Vegas, with the Aces winning each meeting by double digits. Taken together, the player production, possession numbers, shooting efficiency, and quarter-by-quarter scoring provide a much fuller picture of why Las Vegas controlled the matchup.
