Knicks vs San Antonio Spurs Match Player Stats
The knicks vs san antonio spurs match player stats from Game 2 of the 2026 NBA Finals tell a much deeper story than the 105-104 final score suggests. New York survived a dramatic fourth-quarter comeback at Frost Bank Center, while San Antonio showed why its regular-season home record made this matchup so difficult. Karl-Anthony Towns produced 21 points and 13 rebounds, Mikal Bridges and Jalen Brunson each scored 20, while Victor Wembanyama led all players with 29 points and added 9 rebounds.
Game 2 was played on June 5, 2026, with the official game information also listed into June 6 depending on broadcast and local reporting timestamps. The Knicks entered the contest after winning Game 1, and their second straight road victory gave them a 2-0 advantage in the NBA Finals. The official NBA game record confirms the 105-104 result, the quarter-by-quarter scoring, and the individual production from the key players. (NBA.com)
This article breaks down the box score beyond simple points. It examines shooting efficiency, rebounding, playmaking, turnovers, defensive activity, fourth-quarter momentum, and the individual performances that shaped the final possession.
Knicks vs San Antonio Spurs Match Player Stats
The headline numbers immediately show how closely matched these teams were.
| Category | New York Knicks | San Antonio Spurs |
| Final Score | 105 | 104 |
| Field Goals | 37-89 | 37-78 |
| Field Goal % | 42% | 47% |
| 3-Point FG | 15-38 | 11-29 |
| 3-Point % | 39% | 38% |
| Free Throws | 16-21 | 19-27 |
| Free Throw % | 76% | 70% |
| Rebounds | 44 | 42 |
| Assists | 29 | 22 |
| Turnovers | 12 | 16 |
| Steals | 11 | 7 |
| Blocks | 6 | 7 |
| Offensive Rebounds | 10 | 5 |
| Defensive Rebounds | 34 | 37 |
| Personal Fouls | 23 | 20 |
The most important takeaway is that San Antonio actually shot better from the field. The Spurs converted 47% of their attempts compared with 42% for New York.
Yet shooting percentage alone did not decide the game.
The Knicks attempted 11 more field goals, made four more three-pointers, collected five more assists, and committed four fewer turnovers. Those additional possessions and perimeter makes helped compensate for the Spurs’ superior overall field-goal percentage.
The official NBA box score also records New York’s 15-of-38 three-point shooting, San Antonio’s 11-of-29 performance from deep, and the 12-to-16 turnover difference. (NBA.com)
That is an important lesson when interpreting knicks vs san antonio spurs match player stats: a team can have the better shooting percentage and still lose because possession volume, three-point production, and turnovers create a different statistical equation.
How the Game Changed Quarter by Quarter
The final score hides the dramatic swings throughout the game.
| Quarter | Knicks | Spurs |
| 1st | 25 | 34 |
| 2nd | 31 | 18 |
| 3rd | 28 | 23 |
| 4th | 21 | 29 |
| Total | 105 | 104 |
First quarter: San Antonio establishes control
San Antonio opened the game with a 34-25 advantage.
That nine-point margin was built on efficient offense and pressure around the basket. The Spurs ultimately finished with 48 points in the paint, six more than New York.
Victor Wembanyama was particularly important because his size created problems for the Knicks on both ends of the floor. His scoring eventually reached 29 points, but his impact was not limited to scoring.
San Antonio also started with a 12-point lead at its largest point in the game.
Second quarter: New York changes the rhythm
The second quarter belonged to New York.
The Knicks scored 31 points while holding San Antonio to 18. That 13-point swing transformed a nine-point deficit into a four-point halftime lead.
This was where New York’s depth of ball movement became important.
The Knicks finished with 29 assists, seven more than San Antonio. Mikal Bridges and Jalen Brunson each finished with six assists, while the team continued generating opportunities through movement rather than relying entirely on isolation possessions.
Third quarter: Knicks maintain separation
New York added another five points to its advantage in the third quarter, winning the period 28-23.
At that stage, the Knicks had created enough cushion to enter the final period with an 84-75 lead.
The game appeared to be moving toward a controlled road victory.
It was not.
Fourth quarter: San Antonio nearly completes the comeback
The Spurs scored 29 points in the fourth quarter while New York managed only 21.
That eight-point difference nearly erased the entire Knicks advantage.
San Antonio eventually produced a 14-point run that brought the game level and then moved ahead 104-102 late in the period.
NBA.com described the game as being decided by several late turning points, including Wembanyama’s turnover, Brunson’s response, and the final missed jumper. (NBA.com)
That sequence is one of the most important pieces of context when studying the knicks vs san antonio spurs match player stats.
The statistics show who scored.
The final possessions explain why the score ended the way it did.
Karl-Anthony Towns Leads the Knicks
Karl-Anthony Towns delivered one of the most complete performances for New York.
Karl-Anthony Towns
- 21 points
- 13 rebounds
- 4 assists
- 2 blocks
- 2 steals
- 21 points on the night as New York’s leading scorer
His 13 rebounds were especially valuable against a Spurs frontcourt led by Wembanyama.
Towns did not simply contribute as a scoring big man. His rebounding helped New York finish with a 44-42 advantage on the glass.
The Knicks also generated 10 offensive rebounds compared with five for San Antonio.
That difference matters because offensive rebounds can compensate for missed shots and create additional possessions.
Towns’ contribution therefore fits into the larger possession battle. New York did not shoot as efficiently overall, but it created more opportunities through offensive rebounding, ball movement, and lower turnover volume.
His two blocks also added another layer to his defensive contribution.
The official NBA game recap confirms Towns’ 21-point, 13-rebound performance. (NBA.com)
Jalen Brunson’s Statistical Impact
Jalen Brunson scored 20 points, but his overall statistical line tells more of the story.
He recorded:
- 20 points
- 6 assists
- 5 steals
- 4? rebounds according to the detailed game recap
The most notable number outside his scoring total was five steals.
Brunson’s defensive activity helped New York generate transition opportunities while putting pressure on San Antonio’s ball handlers.
His six assists also placed him among the Knicks’ leading playmakers.
But the defining sequence came late.
With the game tied at 104, Brunson scored to even the contest after San Antonio had taken control. Following a late Spurs turnover, he went to the free-throw line and converted the decisive free throw that gave New York its final one-point margin.
The NBA’s official recap records Brunson’s 20 points, six assists and five steals and describes his late-game role in the final possessions. (NBA.com)
This is why box-score analysis should separate total production from late-game influence.
Brunson did not need to score 30 points to have a major effect on the result.
Mikal Bridges Provides Two-Way Value
Mikal Bridges finished with 20 points, matching Brunson’s scoring total.
His value was also visible through his six assists.
That combination matters because it shows Bridges was not simply a spot-up scorer.
The Knicks needed multiple players capable of moving the ball when San Antonio concentrated defensive attention on Brunson.
Bridges helped fill that role.
New York’s offense ultimately produced 29 assists on 37 made field goals. That is a strong indicator of shared offensive responsibility.
The Spurs had 22 assists on the same number of made field goals.
The seven-assist difference is one of the clearest statistical separators between the teams.
OG Anunoby’s Defensive Contribution
OG Anunoby did not lead New York in scoring, but his defensive work was important in a game where the margins were extremely small.
He recorded two blocks, matching Towns for the Knicks’ team lead.
Anunoby also played a role in the final defensive sequence. After Wembanyama missed a jumper late, New York secured the rebound and preserved the opportunity to control the final moments.
In a one-point Finals game, defensive possessions cannot be evaluated only through steals and blocks.
Positioning, contests, defensive rotations, and defensive rebounding can prevent an opponent from getting the exact shot it wants.
That broader context is important when interpreting individual player statistics.
Victor Wembanyama Dominates the Spurs Box Score
Victor Wembanyama was the statistical leader for San Antonio.
Victor Wembanyama
- 29 points
- 9 rebounds
- 2 assists
- 2 steals
- 4 blocks
- 11-of-21 shooting
- 2-of-6 from three-point range
- 5-of-8 from the free-throw line
His 29 points came on 11 made field goals, making him one of the most efficient high-volume scorers in the contest.
He also led all players with four blocks.
His nine rebounds tied Devin Vassell for the Spurs’ team lead.
The unusual part of his performance was the contrast between his relatively quiet first half and much stronger second half. NBA.com’s game coverage noted that Wembanyama scored 21 of his 29 points in the second half. (NBA.com)
That second-half scoring burst helped San Antonio turn a significant deficit into a one-point lead late in the fourth.
Yet the final possession ultimately went against the Spurs.
Wembanyama had an opportunity to win the game with a jumper at the buzzer, but the shot missed.
De’Aaron Fox Controls the Spurs Backcourt
De’Aaron Fox finished with 20 points and five assists.
His shooting was one of the more efficient elements of San Antonio’s offense.
Fox converted 8 of 12 field-goal attempts and finished 2 of 2 from the three-point line.
That is an extremely efficient scoring performance for a player handling substantial offensive responsibility.
His five assists also led the Spurs.
Fox’s role became particularly important because San Antonio needed someone who could create advantages against New York’s perimeter defense.
He helped keep the Spurs offense functioning while Wembanyama became more aggressive after halftime.
Devin Vassell Provides Efficient Supporting Production
Devin Vassell scored 14 points and added nine rebounds and five assists.
His five assists were especially useful because San Antonio needed secondary creation alongside Fox and Wembanyama.
Vassell also tied Wembanyama for the team lead in rebounds with nine.
His 4-of-9 shooting included three made three-pointers from seven attempts.
That gave San Antonio another perimeter scoring option without requiring every possession to run through its two biggest stars.
Stephon Castle’s All-Around Numbers
Stephon Castle contributed:
- 14 points
- 4 rebounds
- 4 assists
- 4 steals
The four steals were particularly notable.
Castle provided defensive activity while also helping move the ball.
His four assists were tied for a significant secondary playmaking role, although Fox remained the team’s assist leader with five.
Castle’s performance illustrates why the Spurs were able to mount such a strong fourth-quarter comeback despite ultimately losing.
Knicks vs San Antonio Spurs Match Player Stats: Shooting Comparison
One of the biggest statistical surprises was that San Antonio shot better overall.
Field goal efficiency
The Spurs:
37-for-78, 47.4%
The Knicks:
37-for-89, 41.6%
Both teams made exactly 37 field goals.
The difference was volume.
New York attempted 11 more shots.
That is a major distinction.
The Knicks did not win because they converted a higher percentage of their field goals. They won despite the lower overall field-goal percentage.
Three-point shooting
New York:
15-for-38, 39.5%
San Antonio:
11-for-29, 37.9%
The Knicks made four more three-pointers.
That created a meaningful scoring advantage.
In a game decided by one point, four additional three-point makes represent a major part of the statistical explanation.
Free throws
New York:
16-for-21, 76.2%
San Antonio:
19-for-27, 70.4%
San Antonio attempted six more free throws and made three more.
So the Spurs had an advantage at the free-throw line.
But New York’s three-point production and additional field-goal attempts offset that advantage.
Rebounding Battle
New York won the overall rebounding battle 44-42.
The more interesting split is offensive rebounding.
| Rebounding Category | Knicks | Spurs |
| Total Rebounds | 44 | 42 |
| Offensive Rebounds | 10 | 5 |
| Defensive Rebounds | 34 | 37 |
San Antonio actually collected more defensive rebounds.
New York’s advantage came from offensive rebounding.
The Knicks grabbed twice as many offensive rebounds as the Spurs.
That gave them additional possessions after missed shots.
This is a key reason the overall field-goal percentage should not be examined in isolation.
Assists and Ball Movement
The Knicks had 29 assists.
The Spurs had 22.
That seven-assist difference is substantial.
New York also had fewer turnovers:
Knicks: 12
Spurs: 16
This creates a useful combined indicator.
New York produced more assists while turning the ball over less often.
That combination generally points toward more controlled offensive possession.
San Antonio’s offense was more efficient when it got shots up, but New York was better at creating and protecting possessions.
Turnovers Became Crucial at the End
The Spurs committed 16 turnovers.
The Knicks committed 12.
The four-turnover difference was meaningful throughout the game, but it became especially important late.
Wembanyama’s late turnover was the most visible example.
With the Spurs leading 104-102 and the Knicks needing a defensive stop, San Antonio lost possession. That allowed Brunson to attack and eventually put New York back in front from the free-throw line.
The official NBA account specifically identifies Wembanyama’s turnover with 9.5 seconds remaining as one of the major turning points. (NBA.com)
This is a useful reminder that not every turnover has equal value.
A turnover in the first quarter costs one possession.
A turnover in the final seconds of a one-point Finals game can directly determine the result.
Points in the Paint and Transition
San Antonio had a clear advantage in points in the paint.
| Category | Knicks | Spurs |
| Points in Paint | 38 | 48 |
| Fast-Break Points | 19 | 11 |
| Second-Chance Points | 14 | 9 |
The Spurs scored 10 more points in the paint.
That reflects their ability to attack the interior and utilize Wembanyama’s presence.
The Knicks, however, countered with a major transition advantage.
New York scored 19 fast-break points compared with 11 for San Antonio.
The Knicks also scored 14 second-chance points compared with nine.
So the statistical profile was very different.
San Antonio generated more interior scoring.
New York generated more transition and second-chance opportunities.
Why the Knicks Won Despite Shooting Worse
This is probably the most useful analytical lesson from the game.
The Knicks shot 42%.
The Spurs shot 47%.
Yet New York won.
Why?
Several factors worked together.
1. More field-goal attempts
New York attempted 89 shots.
San Antonio attempted 78.
That 11-attempt difference created more opportunities to score.
2. More three-pointers
The Knicks made 15 three-pointers.
The Spurs made 11.
Those four extra makes were worth 12 additional points from beyond the arc.
3. Fewer turnovers
New York gave the ball away four fewer times.
That reduced wasted possessions.
4. More assists
The Knicks generated 29 assists.
The Spurs produced 22.
5. More offensive rebounds
New York collected 10 offensive rebounds.
San Antonio had five.
That helped the Knicks recover some of their missed shots.
6. Better fast-break scoring
New York scored 19 fast-break points.
San Antonio scored 11.
The result was an offensive profile that was less efficient per shot but stronger in total possession generation.
The Fourth-Quarter Statistical Story
The fourth quarter deserves its own analysis because the final score does not adequately describe how much the Spurs changed the game.
San Antonio entered the fourth quarter down nine.
Then it scored 29 points.
The Knicks scored only 21.
The Spurs eventually erased the deficit and moved ahead 104-102.
That comeback demonstrated San Antonio’s ability to increase offensive pressure when the game demanded it.
Wembanyama became increasingly aggressive.
Fox continued creating opportunities.
The Spurs pushed the pace and attacked the Knicks’ defense.
But New York produced the final response.
Brunson tied the game.
The Spurs turned the ball over.
Brunson converted the decisive free throw.
Then New York defended the final possession.
The final sequence was summarized by NBA.com as a combination of New York’s late-game execution and San Antonio’s missed opportunity at the buzzer. (NBA.com)
What the Stats Say About Both Teams
The box score creates two very different statistical profiles.
New York Knicks profile
The Knicks were:
- More active on the offensive glass
- Better from three-point range
- Better at moving the ball
- Better at avoiding turnovers
- More productive in transition
- More active in steals
But they were less efficient overall from the field.
San Antonio Spurs profile
The Spurs were:
- More efficient from the field
- Stronger in points in the paint
- Better on defensive rebounding
- More productive at the free-throw line in attempts and makes
- Led by an outstanding Wembanyama scoring performance
But they committed more turnovers, produced fewer assists, and made fewer three-pointers.
That contrast explains why this was such a narrow game.
A Closer Look at the Knicks’ Offensive Formula
New York’s offense was not built around one overwhelming individual scoring performance.
Its top three scorers were:
- Karl-Anthony Towns: 21
- Mikal Bridges: 20
- Jalen Brunson: 20
Together, they produced 61 points.
That balance mattered.
If one player struggles, the offense can still function through another creator or scorer.
Brunson also contributed six assists.
Bridges contributed six.
Towns contributed four.
That means the same three players who produced 61 points also created significant passing value.
The Knicks therefore received scoring and playmaking from the same core group.
A Closer Look at the Spurs’ Offensive Formula
San Antonio relied more heavily on Wembanyama and Fox.
Wembanyama scored 29.
Fox scored 20.
Together they accounted for 49 points.
Vassell and Castle added 14 apiece.
Dylan Harper contributed 15 points off the starting group.
The Spurs therefore had several meaningful scoring contributors, but Wembanyama remained the central offensive force.
His ability to score inside, shoot from distance, rebound and protect the rim created a unique matchup problem.
Defensive Statistics That Matter
The Knicks finished with:
- 11 steals
- 6 blocks
The Spurs finished with:
- 7 steals
- 7 blocks
San Antonio therefore had a slight advantage in rim protection.
Wembanyama’s four blocks accounted for more than half of the Spurs’ seven blocks.
New York’s defensive advantage appeared more strongly through steals.
Brunson led the Knicks with five steals.
That was a significant contribution from a guard who was also responsible for much of the team’s offensive creation.
Game 2 Starting Lineups
New York Knicks
- OG Anunoby
- Karl-Anthony Towns
- Josh Hart
- Mikal Bridges
- Jalen Brunson
San Antonio Spurs
- Julian Champagnie
- Victor Wembanyama
- De’Aaron Fox
- Devin Vassell
- Stephon Castle
The matchup created a fascinating contrast.
New York had a lineup combining size, perimeter defense, shooting and multiple creators.
San Antonio had an elite interior presence in Wembanyama surrounded by guards and wings capable of shooting and attacking closeouts.
The Importance of Home-Court Context
San Antonio entered the game with a 32-8 home record.
That made the Knicks’ victory more significant from a game-context perspective.
The Spurs had been extremely difficult to beat at home during the regular season, yet New York won both opening Finals games on San Antonio’s floor.
The NBA’s official Finals coverage confirms that the Knicks won Games 1 and 2 before the series moved to New York. (NBA.com)
This is useful context for readers examining the raw knicks vs san antonio spurs match player stats.
Statistics describe the performance.
Context explains the difficulty of achieving it.
What Fans Should Look for When Comparing Player Stats
When comparing players from this matchup, points should not be the only category considered.
A better process is to examine five areas.
Scoring
Who created the most points and how efficiently?
Wembanyama led with 29, but Towns, Brunson and Bridges all reached at least 20.
Rebounding
Who controlled missed-shot opportunities?
Towns led all Knicks with 13 rebounds, while Wembanyama and Vassell each had nine.
Playmaking
Who created quality opportunities for teammates?
Brunson and Bridges each recorded six assists for New York.
Fox led San Antonio with five.
Defensive activity
Steals and blocks help identify disruptive defensive plays.
Brunson led New York with five steals.
Wembanyama led San Antonio with four blocks.
Possession control
Turnovers are critical in close games.
The Knicks committed 12.
The Spurs committed 16.
This category becomes even more important when the final margin is only one point.
What Made the Matchup So Close?
The game was essentially a statistical tug-of-war.
San Antonio had:
- Better overall shooting
- More points in the paint
- More defensive rebounds
- More free-throw attempts
New York had:
- More three-pointers
- More offensive rebounds
- More assists
- More steals
- Fewer turnovers
- More fast-break points
Neither side dominated every statistical category.
That is exactly why the game remained undecided until the final possession.
Real-World Use of These Player Statistics
For fans, fantasy basketball analysis, sports writers, researchers and bettors reviewing historical games, the value of a box score comes from understanding relationships between statistics.
For example, looking only at Wembanyama’s 29 points could suggest that San Antonio’s star completely controlled the game.
Looking deeper shows something more nuanced.
He was extremely productive offensively and defensively, but San Antonio still lost because New York generated more possessions and converted more three-point opportunities.
Similarly, Brunson’s 20 points may appear modest compared with Wembanyama’s 29.
But Brunson also had six assists, five steals and the decisive late-game free throw.
That is why a complete player-stat analysis is more useful than a simple scoring leaderboard.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who was the leading scorer in Knicks vs Spurs Game 2?
Victor Wembanyama was the leading scorer with 29 points. Karl-Anthony Towns led the Knicks with 21 points.
How many points did Jalen Brunson score against the Spurs?
Jalen Brunson scored 20 points. He also recorded six assists and five steals.
How many rebounds did Karl-Anthony Towns have?
Karl-Anthony Towns collected 13 rebounds, making him the Knicks’ leading rebounder in Game 2.
What was the final score of Knicks vs Spurs Game 2?
The New York Knicks defeated the San Antonio Spurs 105-104 in Game 2 of the 2026 NBA Finals.
Which team shot better from the field?
The Spurs shot better overall, making 37 of 78 attempts for 47.4%. The Knicks made 37 of 89 attempts for 41.6%.
Why did the Knicks win despite shooting a lower percentage?
New York made more three-pointers, collected more offensive rebounds, had more assists, committed fewer turnovers and scored more fast-break points.
Conclusion
The knicks vs san antonio spurs match player stats from Game 2 show why basketball games cannot be explained by scoring totals alone.
Victor Wembanyama delivered the game’s highest scoring total with 29 points and added nine rebounds and four blocks. Karl-Anthony Towns answered with 21 points and 13 rebounds, while Jalen Brunson and Mikal Bridges each scored 20.
The Knicks also benefited from 29 assists, 10 offensive rebounds, 11 steals and only 12 turnovers.
San Antonio shot 47.4% from the field, scored 48 points in the paint and received 29 points from Wembanyama. The Spurs also erased a nine-point fourth-quarter deficit and briefly took a 104-102 lead.
New York’s response came through late-game execution.
Brunson tied the game, San Antonio committed a costly turnover, and the Knicks converted the resulting opportunity before defending the final possession. Wembanyama’s last-second jumper missed, leaving New York with a 105-104 victory.
The result illustrates an important principle in player-stat analysis: efficiency, volume, possession control and late-game execution must be evaluated together. A single statistic rarely explains a one-point NBA Finals game.
