Chicago Sky vs Indiana Fever Match Player Stats

The chicago sky vs indiana fever match player stats from June 12, 2026, tell the story of one of the most competitive games between the two teams during the season. The Indiana Fever defeated the Chicago Sky 114-106 in overtime at Gainbridge Fieldhouse in Indianapolis, with 15,578 fans in attendance. The game featured major individual performances from Aliyah Boston and Caitlin Clark, while Skylar Diggins led Chicago’s scoring effort.

Although Indiana entered the game with a stronger 7-5 record and a 5-2 home mark, Chicago pushed the Fever into overtime after an explosive fourth quarter. The Sky scored 19 points in the fourth period while Indiana managed 25, but the Fever ultimately took control in the extra period, outscoring Chicago 16-8.

The final score does not fully explain how the game developed. Indiana shot 45 percent from the field, controlled the rebounding battle 46-34, and converted 29 of 31 free throws. Chicago, meanwhile, shot 44 percent overall and made 31 of 38 free throws. The Sky also produced seven blocks and committed 16 turnovers.

The individual numbers make the contest even more interesting. Boston finished with 34 points and 12 rebounds, while Clark recorded 32 points, seven rebounds, and 10 assists. Together, the two Fever stars accounted for 66 points and helped Indiana survive Chicago’s late push.

Table of Contents

Chicago Sky vs Indiana Fever match player stats at a glance

The June 12 contest was statistically balanced in several areas, but Indiana had important advantages in scoring efficiency, rebounding, and free throw shooting.

Category	Chicago Sky	Indiana Fever
Final Score	106	114
Field Goals	34-77	39-87
Field Goal Percentage	44%	45%
Three-Pointers	7-24	7-28
Three-Point Percentage	29%	25%
Free Throws	31-38	29-31
Free Throw Percentage	82%	94%
Rebounds	34	46
Assists	22	22
Turnovers	16	15
Steals	6	8
Blocks	7	6

The most important difference was not three-point shooting. Both teams made seven three-pointers. Instead, Indiana gained ground through its 46-34 rebounding advantage and its remarkable 94 percent free throw shooting.

That combination gave the Fever a stronger foundation for winning a game that required overtime.

Game summary: Indiana Fever 114, Chicago Sky 106

The game started with Indiana establishing an early advantage. The Fever scored 27 points in the opening quarter while Chicago scored only 14. That 13-point gap immediately put the Sky in a difficult position.

Chicago responded in the second quarter, scoring 26 points compared with 19 for Indiana. The Sky therefore reduced the deficit before halftime and entered the second half with renewed momentum.

The third quarter was the highest-scoring period of the game for Chicago. The Sky exploded for 39 points, while Indiana scored 27. That 12-point swing completely changed the shape of the contest.

Indiana then answered with 25 points in the fourth quarter, but Chicago continued to fight and scored 19. The teams eventually reached overtime, where Indiana produced the decisive 16-8 advantage.

Points by quarter

Quarter	Chicago Sky	Indiana Fever
First	14	27
Second	26	19
Third	39	27
Fourth	19	25
Overtime	8	16
Total	106	114

The quarter-by-quarter numbers reveal an important feature of the game: Chicago did not simply lose because it played poorly throughout the night.

Instead, the Sky recovered from a slow opening, dominated the third quarter, and remained competitive late. Indiana’s ability to produce a strong overtime period ultimately separated the teams.

Aliyah Boston leads Indiana with 34 points

Aliyah Boston was the leading scorer in the contest, finishing with 34 points on 13-of-26 shooting from the field.

Her complete stat line was:

34 points
13-of-26 field goals
2-of-5 three-pointers
6-of-6 free throws
12 rebounds
3 assists
3 turnovers
1 steal
2 blocks

Boston’s performance was significant because it was not limited to scoring. She also controlled the glass with 12 rebounds and contributed two blocks.

Her 13 made field goals were the most among the players listed in the game data. She also converted every free throw she attempted.

The combination of scoring efficiency, rebounding, and interior defensive production made Boston one of the central reasons Indiana was able to withstand Chicago’s comeback.

A particularly notable element was her three-point shooting. Boston made two of five attempts from outside, giving the Fever another source of spacing while still maintaining her interior impact.

Caitlin Clark produces 32 points and 10 assists

Caitlin Clark delivered another outstanding all-around statistical performance.

Clark finished with:

32 points
8-of-18 field goals
1-of-6 three-pointers
15-of-15 free throws
7 rebounds
10 assists
5 turnovers

Her 32 points ranked second among Indiana players, but her influence went well beyond scoring.

The 10 assists are especially important. Clark reached double figures in assists while also scoring more than 30 points, giving Indiana a combination of scoring and playmaking that forced Chicago to defend multiple dimensions of the Fever attack.

Her free throw performance was perfect. Clark went 15-for-15 from the line, which was particularly valuable in a game decided in overtime.

Her three-point shooting was less effective, with only one make in six attempts. That detail matters because it demonstrates that Clark did not need a highly productive night from three-point range to have a major offensive impact.

She scored through other areas of the offense and created opportunities for teammates with her passing.

Clark’s most important numbers

The standout numbers from Clark’s line are arguably:

32 points + 10 assists + 7 rebounds + 15-for-15 free throws

That statistical combination illustrates why evaluating her performance solely through three-point shooting would provide an incomplete picture.

Her five turnovers were also notable. High-usage playmakers naturally have more opportunities to create both positive and negative possessions, and Clark’s turnover total was the highest among the listed Indiana players.

Even so, the overall production remained highly influential in Indiana’s overtime victory.

Skylar Diggins leads Chicago’s scoring

Skylar Diggins was Chicago’s leading scorer with 21 points.

Her numbers were:

21 points
7-of-15 field goals
2-of-4 three-pointers
5-of-7 free throws
3 rebounds
1 assist
1 turnover
1 steal

Diggins provided Chicago with an efficient scoring contribution. She shot 46.7 percent from the field and made half of her three-point attempts.

Her two three-pointers were especially useful for a Chicago team that finished with seven total three-point makes.

Diggins also protected the ball well, committing only one turnover. That stands out when compared with Chicago’s team total of 16 turnovers.

However, Chicago needed more scoring production from elsewhere to match Indiana’s two major offensive performances.

Boston and Clark combined for 66 points, while Diggins led the Sky with 21. That difference illustrates the challenge Chicago faced in trying to keep pace with Indiana’s top-end scoring.

Kamilla Cardoso’s efficient shooting

Kamilla Cardoso finished with 10 points on four-of-six shooting.

Her line included:

10 points
4-of-6 field goals
2-of-2 free throws
4 rebounds
1 assist
4 turnovers
1 block

Cardoso’s 66.7 percent field goal shooting was one of the more efficient individual marks among Chicago’s listed players.

The main concern was ball security. She committed four turnovers despite taking only six field goal attempts.

That contrast is useful when evaluating her overall performance. Cardoso was efficient as a scorer, but her turnovers reduced some of the value created by that shooting efficiency.

She also provided one block, adding defensive value on a night when Chicago recorded seven blocks as a team.

Jacy Sheldon adds 10 points and four assists

Jacy Sheldon scored 10 points and contributed four assists.

Her statistical line was:

10 points
3-of-6 field goals
1-of-3 three-pointers
3-of-3 free throws
1 rebound
4 assists
1 turnover

Sheldon shot 50 percent from the field and was perfect from the free throw line.

Her four assists also helped Chicago maintain offensive movement. She did not simply contribute as a scorer, but also created opportunities for teammates.

The low rebound total limited her contribution in that area, but her shooting efficiency and four assists made her an important supporting performer.

Azura Stevens provides an all-around contribution

Azura Stevens finished with 10 points, nine rebounds, and six assists.

Her numbers included:

10 points
3-of-11 field goals
0-of-4 three-pointers
4-of-4 free throws
9 rebounds
6 assists
1 turnover
1 steal
1 block

Stevens had a difficult shooting night from the field, making just three of 11 attempts and missing all four three-point attempts.

However, looking only at her shooting would underestimate her overall contribution.

She was one rebound away from a double-double and produced six assists. She also recorded a steal and a block while committing just one turnover.

This is an excellent example of why complete box-score analysis should consider multiple categories rather than focusing only on points.

Indiana’s supporting cast

Indiana received useful contributions from several players beyond Boston and Clark.

Kelsey Mitchell

Kelsey Mitchell scored 19 points on seven-of-17 shooting.

She also recorded:

2-of-6 three-point shooting
3-of-4 free throws
1 rebound
3 assists
2 turnovers
3 steals

Her three steals were particularly notable. Mitchell combined perimeter scoring with defensive activity and helped Indiana generate additional possessions.

Lexie Hull

Lexie Hull finished with 11 points, eight rebounds, one assist, one turnover, and two steals.

Her shooting numbers were:

3-of-13 from the field
1-of-7 from three
4-of-4 from the free throw line

Hull struggled with overall shooting efficiency, but her eight rebounds and two steals gave her other ways to affect the game.

Myisha Hines-Allen

Hines-Allen produced five points, nine rebounds, three assists, one turnover, and one block.

She shot two-of-three from the field and added a free throw.

Her nine rebounds were valuable for a Fever team that ultimately won the overall rebounding battle by 12.

Makayla Timpson

Timpson recorded four points, six rebounds, and two blocks.

Her two blocks were an important defensive contribution and helped Indiana finish with six team blocks.

Tyasha Harris

Harris scored four points on two-of-three shooting and added one assist and one block.

Her efficient shooting and defensive contribution provided useful support despite a limited scoring total.

Raven Johnson

Johnson recorded three points, making her only field goal attempt and her only three-point attempt.

She also recorded two steals.

Her perfect shooting efficiency and defensive activity gave Indiana additional value from the supporting group.

Chicago’s team performance

Chicago finished with 106 points while shooting 44 percent from the field.

The Sky converted:

34 of 77 field goals
7 of 24 three-pointers
31 of 38 free throws

The overall field goal percentage was close to Indiana’s 45 percent, showing that the shooting difference was relatively small.

Chicago actually had the better three-point percentage at 29 percent compared with Indiana’s 25 percent.

The Sky also converted 82 percent of their free throws, which is a strong team mark.

So why did Indiana win?

The biggest answer is rebounding.

Indiana collected 46 rebounds compared with Chicago’s 34. A 12-rebound advantage is substantial in a game that went into overtime.

Chicago also committed 16 turnovers, one more than Indiana.

The Sky had six steals and seven blocks, showing significant defensive activity, but those defensive positives were not enough to offset Indiana’s rebounding and free throw advantages.

Indiana’s team performance

Indiana shot 39-of-87 from the field for 45 percent.

The Fever’s other numbers were:

7-of-28 from three
29-of-31 free throws
46 rebounds
22 assists
15 turnovers
8 steals
6 blocks

The 94 percent free throw percentage is one of the clearest statistical advantages of the game.

Indiana attempted fewer free throws than Chicago, 31 compared with 38, but the Fever converted 29. Chicago made 31.

That means Chicago actually made two more free throws overall, but Indiana’s near-perfect accuracy ensured that its opportunities were converted at an exceptional rate.

Indiana also matched Chicago with 22 assists despite taking 10 more field goal attempts.

That combination of ball movement and extra rebounding opportunities helped Indiana generate enough offense to reach 114 points.

Rebounding was the key statistical battle

The 46-34 rebounding margin deserves special attention.

Indiana grabbed 12 more rebounds than Chicago, which means the Fever repeatedly won possessions on the glass.

Rebounding has a direct effect on both ends of the court.

Offensively, additional rebounds can create second-chance opportunities. Defensively, securing the rebound prevents opponents from extending possessions after missed shots.

In a game where both teams shot around 44 to 45 percent, rebounding becomes even more important because missed shots were common enough to create many opportunities on the glass.

Indiana’s advantage was therefore not simply a peripheral statistic. It was one of the most meaningful differences in the game.

Free throw shooting helped Indiana in overtime

Indiana’s 29-for-31 free throw performance was another major advantage.

A 94 percent team free throw percentage is extremely efficient. Clark was perfect at 15-for-15, Boston was six-for-six, and the team as a whole missed only two attempts.

Chicago went 31-for-38, or 82 percent.

Chicago’s percentage was solid, but Indiana was significantly more accurate.

The contrast was particularly meaningful because the game was decided in overtime.

In close games, free throws can become increasingly important as possessions become more valuable. Indiana’s ability to convert at such a high rate helped its offense remain reliable even when three-point shooting was not at its best.

Three-point shooting did not decide the game

One of the most interesting aspects of the chicago sky vs indiana fever match player stats is that neither team was especially effective from three-point range.

Both teams made seven three-pointers.

Chicago:

7-of-24, 29 percent

Indiana:

7-of-28, 25 percent

Chicago therefore had the better three-point percentage, but Indiana still won comfortably in overtime.

This is important because it challenges the assumption that perimeter shooting must be the primary explanation for a high-scoring basketball game.

Indiana reached 114 points despite shooting only 25 percent from three.

The Fever accomplished that through a combination of two-point scoring, free throw efficiency, offensive creation, and rebounding.

Turnovers tell a different story

Turnovers were relatively close.

Chicago committed 16, while Indiana committed 15.

That one-possession difference was not large enough by itself to explain the final result.

However, individual turnover totals are still worth examining.

Clark had five turnovers, Cardoso had four, and Boston had three. Those three players accounted for 12 of the 31 turnovers recorded by the two teams.

Diggins had only one turnover, Stevens had one, and Sheldon had one.

The numbers show that Chicago’s primary creators generally protected the ball well, but the team still reached 16 turnovers.

Indiana also committed mistakes, but its stronger rebounding and shooting efficiency helped compensate.

The overtime difference

The fourth quarter ended without separating the teams decisively enough, setting up an additional five-minute period.

The overtime numbers were:

Chicago: 8 points
Indiana: 16 points

Indiana therefore doubled Chicago’s overtime output.

That eight-point margin was exactly the difference between the teams in the final score.

This makes overtime the clearest direct explanation for the 114-106 final result.

Chicago had already demonstrated its ability to score heavily during regulation, including a 39-point third quarter. The challenge was maintaining that offensive level after four quarters of play.

Indiana, by contrast, found another level in the extra period.

Boston and Clark were particularly important in a game that required sustained offensive production from Indiana’s leading players.

Comparing the leading scorers

The leading scorers provide a useful snapshot of the game.

Player	Team	Points	FG	3PT	FT	Rebounds	Assists
Aliyah Boston	Indiana	34	13-26	2-5	6-6	12	3
Caitlin Clark	Indiana	32	8-18	1-6	15-15	7	10
Skylar Diggins	Chicago	21	7-15	2-4	5-7	3	1

Boston and Clark combined for 66 points.

Diggins alone scored 21.

That difference does not mean Chicago lacked offensive quality. It shows that Indiana had two elite scoring performances operating together.

Boston’s scoring came with 12 rebounds, while Clark added seven rebounds and 10 assists.

Their combined statistical influence extended across multiple categories.

What the box score says about Chicago

The numbers suggest that Chicago had several reasons to feel encouraged despite the loss.

First, the Sky shot 44 percent from the field, only one percentage point below Indiana.

Second, Chicago shot better from three.

Third, the Sky converted 31 free throws.

Fourth, Chicago produced seven blocks.

Fifth, the team showed major offensive resilience after falling behind by 13 points in the first quarter.

The third-quarter performance was particularly impressive. Chicago scored 39 points, 12 more than Indiana during that period.

The problem was consistency across the entire game.

The opening quarter created a significant deficit, and Indiana’s overtime performance ultimately prevented Chicago from completing the comeback.

What the box score says about Indiana

Indiana’s numbers show a team that won without relying on elite three-point shooting.

The Fever’s biggest strengths were:

46 rebounds
45 percent field goal shooting
94 percent free throw shooting
22 assists
8 steals
34 points from Boston
32 points from Clark
19 points from Mitchell

The scoring was also relatively well distributed beyond the two leading stars.

Mitchell added 19, Hull scored 11, and several other players contributed four or five points.

This balance meant Chicago could not focus entirely on Boston and Clark.

Season-series context

The June 12 game was the first of three meetings between the teams in the season series provided.

Indiana won all three contests.

Game 1

June 12, 2026

Indiana Fever 114, Chicago Sky 106

The game went to overtime, with Boston scoring 34 and Clark adding 32.

Game 2

August 9, 2026

Indiana Fever 90, Chicago Sky 86

The Fever again came away with a close victory, this time by four points.

Game 3

August 24, 2026

Indiana Fever 113, Chicago Sky 90

Indiana completed the season sweep with a 23-point victory.

The three-game series therefore developed from a competitive overtime battle into increasingly decisive Indiana victories.

The first meeting was especially important because Chicago demonstrated that it could challenge Indiana for four quarters and force an extra period.

Chicago Sky vs Indiana Fever match player stats and what they reveal

When analyzing the chicago sky vs indiana fever match player stats, the most useful approach is to look beyond the final score.

The data points toward several conclusions.

1. Indiana’s stars carried enormous offensive responsibility

Boston and Clark scored 66 combined points.

That is more than half of Indiana’s regulation-plus-overtime total.

Their production was the foundation of the offense.

2. Rebounding created a major advantage

Indiana won the rebounding battle 46-34.

That 12-rebound margin was one of the strongest team-level differences.

3. Three-point shooting was not Indiana’s strength

The Fever made seven threes on 28 attempts.

Chicago also made seven, but on 24 attempts.

Indiana therefore won despite shooting worse from long range.

4. Free throw accuracy favored Indiana

Indiana shot 94 percent from the line.

Clark and Boston combined to go 21-for-21.

That is a remarkable level of accuracy from the team’s two leading scorers.

5. Chicago’s depth had meaningful contributions

Diggins led the Sky with 21, while Cardoso, Sheldon, and Stevens each scored 10.

Stevens also added nine rebounds and six assists.

The supporting production was present, but Indiana’s top-end scoring was greater.

A closer look at efficiency

Efficiency is more useful than raw scoring when comparing individual performances.

Boston made 13 of 26 field goal attempts, exactly 50 percent.

Clark made eight of 18, or approximately 44.4 percent.

Diggins made seven of 15, or approximately 46.7 percent.

Cardoso was the most efficient among these four from the field at 66.7 percent, but she had four turnovers.

Stevens had the toughest shooting night, making three of 11 attempts and missing all four three-point attempts.

Yet Stevens contributed nine rebounds and six assists, showing why shooting percentage alone cannot determine a player’s total impact.

Why the game was closer than the final score suggests

A final score of 114-106 might appear to indicate a comfortable Indiana victory.

The game itself was much tighter.

Chicago recovered from a 13-point first-quarter deficit and produced a 39-point third quarter.

The teams were close enough after regulation to require overtime.

Only in the extra period did Indiana establish a decisive margin.

Therefore, the final eight-point difference should not be interpreted as an eight-point advantage throughout the game.

Indiana’s overtime execution was the decisive factor.

Practical lessons from the statistics

For readers trying to understand basketball box scores, this game offers several useful lessons.

Do not judge a game by three-point percentage alone

Indiana shot only 25 percent from three but still scored 114 points.

Look at rebounding in close games

A 12-rebound advantage can create additional possessions and prevent second chances.

Separate scoring from playmaking

Clark’s 32 points are impressive, but her 10 assists show another dimension of her performance.

Consider turnovers alongside shooting efficiency

Cardoso shot 66.7 percent but committed four turnovers.

That does not erase her efficient scoring, but it provides important context.

Examine quarter-by-quarter performance

Chicago’s 39-point third quarter demonstrates that momentum can change dramatically within a game.

Complete player statistics from the provided data

The available player data gives a detailed picture of the performances.

Player	Team	PTS	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST	TO	STL	BLK
Skylar Diggins	Chicago	21	7-15	2-4	5-7	3	1	1	1	0
Kamilla Cardoso	Chicago	10	4-6	0-0	2-2	4	1	4	0	1
Jacy Sheldon	Chicago	10	3-6	1-3	3-3	1	4	1	0	0
Azura Stevens	Chicago	10	3-11	0-4	4-4	9	6	1	1	1
Monique Billings	Chicago	0	Not provided	Not provided	Not provided	2	1	Not provided	Not provided	Not provided
Aliyah Boston	Indiana	34	13-26	2-5	6-6	12	3	3	1	2
Caitlin Clark	Indiana	32	8-18	1-6	15-15	7	10	5	Not provided	Not provided
Kelsey Mitchell	Indiana	19	7-17	2-6	3-4	1	3	2	3	0
Lexie Hull	Indiana	11	3-13	1-7	4-4	8	1	1	2	0
Myisha Hines-Allen	Indiana	5	2-3	Not provided	1-2	9	3	1	0	1
Makayla Timpson	Indiana	4	2-3	Not provided	Not provided	6	Not provided	Not provided	Not provided	2
Tyasha Harris	Indiana	4	2-3	Not provided	Not provided	0	1	0	0	1
Raven Johnson	Indiana	3	1-1	1-1	Not provided	0	Not provided	0	2	0

Where the supplied data did not provide a category, it is intentionally marked as not provided rather than estimated.

Attendance and game setting

The matchup took place at Gainbridge Fieldhouse in Indianapolis, Indiana.

Attendance was listed at 15,578.

The setting was significant because Indiana entered the game with a 5-2 home record.

The Fever’s overall record was 7-5, while Chicago entered at 4-9 with a 3-4 away record.

Those records provide useful context, but the actual game statistics remain more informative when assessing what happened on the court.

Where the game could be watched

The provided game information lists Prime Video and WTHR Channel 13 as viewing options.

Broadcast information can change depending on the market and replay availability, so readers should verify current listings when searching for archived or future coverage.

Officiating crew

The officiating crew listed for the game was:

Roy Gulbeyan
Blanca Burns
Sarah Williams

The officials are part of the official game context, although the player and team statistics provide the clearest explanation of the result.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who won the Chicago Sky vs Indiana Fever game on June 12, 2026?

The Indiana Fever defeated the Chicago Sky 114-106 in overtime at Gainbridge Fieldhouse in Indianapolis.

Who was the leading scorer?

Aliyah Boston was the game’s leading scorer with 34 points. Caitlin Clark followed with 32 points for Indiana, while Skylar Diggins led Chicago with 21.

What were Caitlin Clark’s stats?

Caitlin Clark finished with 32 points, seven rebounds, 10 assists, and five turnovers. She shot 8-of-18 from the field, 1-of-6 from three, and a perfect 15-of-15 from the free throw line.

What were Aliyah Boston’s stats?

Aliyah Boston recorded 34 points, 12 rebounds, three assists, three turnovers, one steal, and two blocks. She shot 13-of-26 from the field, 2-of-5 from three, and 6-of-6 from the free throw line.

Which team had more rebounds?

Indiana had 46 rebounds compared with 34 for Chicago, giving the Fever a 12-rebound advantage.

Did Indiana win the season series?

Yes. Based on the provided results, Indiana won all three meetings against Chicago during the season. The Fever won 114-106 on June 12, 90-86 on August 9, and 113-90 on August 24.

Conclusion

The June 12, 2026 matchup between Chicago and Indiana was defined by resilience, star power, and a decisive overtime performance.

Chicago overcame a poor first quarter and produced 39 points in the third quarter. The Sky shot 44 percent from the field, made seven three-pointers, and converted 31 free throws. Skylar Diggins led the team with 21 points, while Kamilla Cardoso, Jacy Sheldon, and Azura Stevens each added 10.

Indiana had the more productive top end. Aliyah Boston scored 34 points and grabbed 12 rebounds, while Caitlin Clark delivered 32 points, seven rebounds, and 10 assists. Kelsey Mitchell added 19 points, giving the Fever another reliable scoring option.

The team statistics point to two especially important advantages for Indiana: rebounding and free throw accuracy. The Fever won the rebounding battle 46-34 and shot 94 percent from the free throw line.

Most importantly, Indiana outscored Chicago 16-8 in overtime. That eight-point overtime margin became the exact difference in the final score.

The broader season-series results make the June matchup even more meaningful. Indiana ultimately won all three meetings, but the opening contest showed how competitive Chicago could be when its offense found rhythm and its supporting players contributed across several statistical categories.