Charlotte Hornets vs Celtics Match Player Stats
The charlotte hornets vs celtics match player stats from March 5, 2026, provide a detailed picture of one of Charlotte’s most convincing performances of the season. The Hornets defeated the Boston Celtics 118-89 at TD Garden, winning every quarter and controlling the game through efficient shooting, strong ball movement, defensive pressure, and exceptionally low turnover numbers.
Charlotte entered the game with a 32-31 record and an 18-15 road mark, while Boston was 41-21 overall and 20-10 at home. On paper, the Celtics had the stronger record, but the game itself moved in a completely different direction. Charlotte scored 35 points in the opening quarter and never allowed Boston to establish a sustained response.
The final margin of 29 points was supported by several statistical differences. Charlotte shot 46% from the field and 39% from three-point range, compared with Boston’s 38% and 28%, respectively. The Hornets also committed only four turnovers while Boston committed 15.
Those numbers help explain the final score, but the individual performances add another layer to the story. Kon Knueppel led Charlotte with 20 points, while Brandon Miller and LaMelo Ball each scored 18. Coby White added 17 points from the bench. For Boston, Derrick White scored a game-high 29 points and Jaylen Brown contributed 20 points, 11 rebounds, and seven assists.
This breakdown examines the complete charlotte hornets vs celtics match player stats, including starters, bench production, shooting efficiency, rebounding, playmaking, turnovers, plus-minus figures, and the statistical reasons Charlotte controlled the game.
Charlotte Hornets vs Celtics Match Player Stats
The most important numbers from the March 5, 2026 matchup are summarized below.
| Category | Charlotte Hornets | Boston Celtics |
| Final Score | 118 | 89 |
| Field Goals | 41-89 | 30-79 |
| Field Goal % | 46% | 38% |
| Three-Pointers | 19-49 | 10-36 |
| Three-Point % | 39% | 28% |
| Free Throws | 17-21 | 19-20 |
| Free Throw % | 81% | 95% |
| Rebounds | 43 | 45 |
| Assists | 26 | 18 |
| Turnovers | 4 | 15 |
| Steals | 10 | 1 |
| Blocks | 4 | 3 |
| Offensive Rebounds | 11 | 9 |
| Defensive Rebounds | 32 | 36 |
| Personal Fouls | 19 | 14 |
The table shows that Charlotte did not win because of rebounding. Boston actually finished with a slight 45-43 advantage on the glass.
Instead, Charlotte’s advantage came from a combination of shooting, ball security, assists, and defensive activity.
The four-turnover performance is particularly important. In a game decided by 29 points, giving the opponent only four extra possessions through turnovers is a major advantage. Boston, by comparison, turned the ball over 15 times.
Charlotte also recorded 10 steals compared with Boston’s one. That difference reflects how aggressively the Hornets disrupted Boston’s possessions.
How the Game Developed Quarter by Quarter
Charlotte’s control was visible from the opening minutes.
| Quarter | Charlotte | Boston |
| First | 35 | 23 |
| Second | 29 | 20 |
| Third | 27 | 25 |
| Fourth | 27 | 21 |
| Total | 118 | 89 |
First Quarter: Charlotte Sets the Tone
Charlotte scored 35 points in the opening period while holding Boston to 23.
That 12-point first-quarter advantage immediately changed the structure of the game. Boston was forced to play from behind, while Charlotte could operate with confidence.
A 35-point quarter also indicates that the Hornets were generating consistent offensive opportunities rather than relying on a single scoring burst.
Second Quarter: The Lead Expands
Charlotte added another 29 points in the second quarter and limited Boston to 20.
At halftime, the Hornets had established a 21-point advantage.
This was significant because Boston did not simply fall behind late. Charlotte had already created substantial separation before halftime.
Third Quarter: Boston Does Not Find the Needed Response
Boston improved slightly in the third quarter, scoring 25 points, but Charlotte still scored 27.
The Celtics therefore gained no meaningful ground.
For a team trailing by more than 20 points, the third quarter was an important opportunity to change the game’s direction. Instead, Charlotte continued to extend its lead.
Fourth Quarter: Charlotte Completes the Win
The Hornets scored 27 points in the final quarter and Boston managed 21.
Charlotte therefore won all four quarters.
That detail matters because the final score was not created by one unusual quarter followed by a collapse. The Hornets maintained an advantage throughout the entire game.
Charlotte’s Leading Scorers
Charlotte received balanced production from several players rather than depending on one dominant scorer.
The leading scorers were:
- Kon Knueppel: 20 points
- Brandon Miller: 18 points
- LaMelo Ball: 18 points
- Coby White: 17 points
That group accounted for 73 of Charlotte’s 118 points.
The distribution is notable because Knueppel led the team with only 14 field-goal attempts, while Brandon Miller was highly efficient from the field.
Kon Knueppel Leads Charlotte With 20 Points
Kon Knueppel produced the highest scoring total for Charlotte with 20 points.
He played 31 minutes and finished 7-of-14 from the field, 4-of-8 from three-point range, and 2-of-3 at the free-throw line.
He also recorded four rebounds and one block.
His four three-pointers were especially valuable because Charlotte made 19 three-pointers as a team.
Knueppel finished with a +22 plus-minus, one of the strongest figures among Charlotte players.
His statistical profile was efficient rather than volume-heavy. He scored 20 points while attempting only 14 field goals, which helped Charlotte maintain offensive balance.
Brandon Miller Provides Efficient Scoring
Brandon Miller scored 18 points in 27 minutes.
His shooting line was particularly strong:
- 8-of-13 field goals
- 2-of-5 three-pointers
- 5 rebounds
- 2 assists
- 3 steals
- +12 plus-minus
The 8-of-13 field-goal performance represents approximately 62% shooting from the field.
His three steals also contributed to Charlotte’s defensive pressure.
Miller therefore affected the game in more than one statistical category. His scoring efficiency was important, but the steals and rebounding added additional value.
LaMelo Ball Scores 18 Points
LaMelo Ball finished with 18 points, seven rebounds, and four assists.
He shot 7-of-17 from the field and 4-of-10 from three-point range.
His four three-pointers helped Charlotte maintain its perimeter efficiency. The Hornets finished 19-of-49 from three-point range as a team.
Ball also contributed seven rebounds, giving Charlotte additional production from the backcourt.
His +9 plus-minus was lower than several other Charlotte starters, but it remained comfortably positive.
Coby White Provides Major Bench Production
Coby White was one of Charlotte’s most effective reserves.
He played 20 minutes and scored 17 points while shooting:
- 6-of-9 from the field
- 2-of-3 from three-point range
- 3-of-4 from the free-throw line
He also recorded six assists and one steal.
The six assists stand out because they came alongside his 17 points. White therefore contributed both scoring and playmaking.
His +17 plus-minus was another indication of his impact during his minutes.
Charlotte’s bench scoring was an important part of the team’s overall performance, and White was at the center of that production.
Miles Bridges Delivers an Unusual Impact
Miles Bridges scored only nine points, but his overall impact was much greater than his scoring total suggests.
He played 31 minutes and finished with:
- 9 points
- 3-of-10 field goals
- 2-of-7 three-pointers
- 1-of-2 free throws
- 3 rebounds
- 2 assists
- +21 plus-minus
The +21 figure is striking considering his nine points.
This is a useful reminder that a player’s value in a single game cannot always be understood through points alone. Plus-minus reflects the team’s scoring margin while a player is on the floor, although it should not be treated as a complete individual performance measure.
Moussa Diabate’s All-Around Contribution
Moussa Diabate had one of the more unusual stat lines among Charlotte starters.
He scored nine points but added:
- 9 rebounds
- 6 assists
- 2 steals
- +11 plus-minus
His six assists were particularly notable for a player who also contributed heavily on the glass.
He shot 2-of-4 from the field and 5-of-6 from the free-throw line.
Diabate’s performance demonstrates how Charlotte distributed responsibilities across its lineup. He did not need to score 20 points to influence the game.
Charlotte’s Bench Performance
Charlotte’s reserves combined for useful contributions beyond Coby White.
Ryan Kalkbrenner scored six points in 14 minutes while shooting 3-of-4 from the field. He also had two rebounds, one assist, one steal, and two blocks.
Pat Connaughton scored six points and made two three-pointers.
Josh Green scored six points, grabbed three rebounds, and added one assist and one steal.
Sion James contributed six points, four rebounds, and three assists.
Antonio Reeves added three points while making his only field-goal attempt and three rebounds.
Xavier Tillman played five minutes and recorded one block.
Tre Mann had limited offensive success, going 0-of-3 from the field, but he recorded one steal.
The overall bench contribution helped Charlotte maintain its advantage as the game progressed.
Boston Celtics Player Stats
Boston’s individual statistics were led by Derrick White and Jaylen Brown.
Derrick White scored 29 points, while Brown scored 20.
However, the Celtics received considerably less offensive production from several other players.
That imbalance became important as the game progressed.
Derrick White Scores a Game-High 29 Points
Derrick White was Boston’s leading scorer with 29 points.
He played 29 minutes and shot 9-of-17 from the field, 3-of-9 from three-point range, and a perfect 8-of-8 from the free-throw line.
His complete line included:
- 29 points
- 9-of-17 field goals
- 3-of-9 three-pointers
- 8-of-8 free throws
- 2 rebounds
- 3 assists
- 1 turnover
- 1 steal
- -18 plus-minus
White was clearly one of Boston’s most productive offensive players.
However, his individual scoring could not overcome Charlotte’s overall team performance.
His -18 plus-minus also shows that Boston was outscored significantly during his minutes, although plus-minus alone does not explain why.
Jaylen Brown Fills the Box Score
Jaylen Brown finished with 20 points, 11 rebounds, and seven assists.
He played 34 minutes and shot 7-of-19 from the field, 1-of-4 from three-point range, and 5-of-6 from the free-throw line.
His 11 rebounds were the highest total among Boston’s players listed in the game.
His seven assists were also tied to his ability to create opportunities for teammates.
Despite the strong all-around numbers, Brown finished with a -20 plus-minus.
That contrast is important. A player can post impressive individual statistics while his team still loses decisively.
Baylor Scheierman Adds Playmaking
Baylor Scheierman scored nine points in 32 minutes.
He shot 3-of-4 from the field, 1-of-2 from three-point range, and 2-of-2 from the free-throw line.
He also recorded four rebounds and five assists.
His five assists were among Boston’s better playmaking numbers.
However, three turnovers reduced some of that positive contribution, and he finished with a -10 plus-minus.
Boston’s Other Starters
Sam Hauser struggled offensively, scoring only three points on 1-of-5 shooting.
He did contribute seven rebounds and one assist.
Neemias Queta scored two points on 1-of-3 shooting, with two rebounds, two turnovers, and one block.
The limited scoring from these positions made Boston’s offense more dependent on White and Brown.
Boston’s Bench Struggles
Boston’s reserves had difficulty generating efficient offense.
Nikola Vucevic scored seven points but shot only 2-of-10 from the field.
Luka Garza provided nine points on 3-of-5 shooting.
Payton Pritchard went scoreless, shooting 0-of-6 from the field and 0-of-5 from three-point range.
Ron Harper Jr. also finished scoreless.
Jordan Walsh scored two points and collected five rebounds.
Hugo Gonzalez contributed eight points, six rebounds, one assist, four offensive rebounds, and one turnover.
The bench numbers help explain why Boston struggled to close the scoring gap.
Shooting Efficiency Was a Major Difference
One of the clearest differences in the charlotte hornets vs celtics match player stats was shooting efficiency.
Charlotte made 41 of 89 field-goal attempts.
Boston made 30 of 79.
That produced a 46% shooting rate for Charlotte compared with 38% for Boston.
The difference was even more noticeable from three-point range.
Charlotte:
- 19-of-49
- 39%
Boston:
- 10-of-36
- 28%
Charlotte therefore made nine more three-pointers.
At three points each, those nine additional makes represented 27 points of difference before considering any other scoring source.
This does not mean every point of the 29-point margin came directly from those extra three-pointers, but it shows how strongly perimeter shooting contributed to the final result.
Charlotte Won the Turnover Battle by a Huge Margin
Charlotte committed only four turnovers.
Boston committed 15.
That means Boston had 11 more turnovers than Charlotte.
The difference was paired with Charlotte’s 10 steals compared with Boston’s one.
This combination suggests a major advantage in possession security and defensive disruption.
Charlotte did not simply shoot better. The Hornets also protected their possessions.
For a team attempting 89 field goals, finishing with only four turnovers is particularly efficient from a possession-management perspective.
Assists Show Charlotte’s Ball Movement
Charlotte recorded 26 assists.
Boston recorded 18.
The eight-assist advantage indicates that Charlotte generated more assisted offense across the game.
Coby White led Charlotte’s individual playmaking with six assists.
Moussa Diabate added six.
LaMelo Ball recorded four.
Boston’s best individual totals came from Jaylen Brown with seven assists and Baylor Scheierman with five.
However, Boston’s 15 turnovers reduced the benefit of those playmaking numbers.
Rebounding Did Not Decide the Game
Interestingly, Boston actually won the overall rebounding battle.
Boston collected 45 rebounds.
Charlotte collected 43.
Boston also had 36 defensive rebounds compared with Charlotte’s 32.
That means the 29-point result cannot reasonably be attributed to Charlotte dominating the glass.
Charlotte did have a small advantage in offensive rebounds, 11 to nine.
But the major differences came elsewhere.
This is an important distinction when analyzing a box score. The team with more rebounds does not automatically control the game, particularly when shooting and turnovers produce much larger possession and scoring differences.
Free-Throw Shooting Favored Boston
Boston shot 19-of-20 from the free-throw line.
That is 95%.
Charlotte shot 17-of-21, or 81%.
So Boston was more accurate at the free-throw line.
Yet the Celtics still lost by 29 points.
This is another example of why one statistical category should not be isolated from the complete box score.
Boston’s free-throw efficiency was excellent, but the Celtics did not get enough benefit from their overall field-goal shooting and committed far more turnovers.
Plus-Minus Highlights Charlotte’s Team Success
Charlotte had several strongly positive plus-minus numbers.
The top figures included:
- Kon Knueppel: +22
- Miles Bridges: +21
- Coby White: +17
- Brandon Miller: +12
- Ryan Kalkbrenner: +13
- Moussa Diabate: +11
- Sion James: +11
Boston’s listed players, meanwhile, all finished with negative plus-minus figures.
The closest Boston figure was Neemias Queta at -12, while Derrick White finished at -18 and Jaylen Brown at -20.
Hugo Gonzalez had a -19.
Again, plus-minus should be viewed as supporting evidence rather than a standalone ranking system. Still, the distribution is consistent with the final result: Charlotte’s lineups generally outscored Boston’s lineups during the game.
Why Charlotte’s Four-Turnover Game Matters
Four turnovers is one of the most important numbers in this matchup.
Charlotte attempted 89 field goals and finished with only four turnovers.
That indicates a high level of possession security.
Boston’s 15 turnovers created additional opportunities for Charlotte and interrupted Boston’s offensive rhythm.
The turnover gap was 11 possessions in Charlotte’s favor.
Combined with Charlotte’s superior three-point shooting, that created a difficult situation for Boston.
The Celtics could not afford to shoot 38% from the field and 28% from three while also giving away 15 possessions.
The Statistical Profile of the Game
When the major categories are considered together, a clear pattern appears.
Charlotte’s advantages were concentrated in four areas:
- Better overall field-goal shooting
- Better three-point shooting
- Far fewer turnovers
- More assists and steals
Boston’s advantages were comparatively limited:
- More total rebounds
- Better free-throw percentage
The magnitude of Charlotte’s advantages in shooting and turnovers outweighed Boston’s rebounding and free-throw efficiency.
That is why the final score reached 118-89.
What the Match Says About Individual Statistics
The game also illustrates why a box score should be read as a connected set of numbers.
Derrick White scored 29 points, the most by any player.
Yet Charlotte won by 29 points.
Jaylen Brown recorded 20 points, 11 rebounds, and seven assists.
Yet his team finished 29 points behind.
Miles Bridges scored only nine points but had a +21 plus-minus.
Moussa Diabate scored nine points while recording nine rebounds and six assists.
Coby White scored 17 points in only 20 minutes.
These examples show that individual scoring totals do not always identify the biggest statistical differences in a game.
Charlotte’s Offensive Balance
Charlotte had four players score at least 17 points.
That is an important feature of the performance.
Knueppel scored 20.
Miller scored 18.
Ball scored 18.
White scored 17.
This created multiple scoring options and reduced Charlotte’s dependence on one player.
The team also made 19 three-pointers, spreading the perimeter threat across several players.
Knueppel and Ball each made four three-pointers.
White made two.
Miller made two.
Miles Bridges made two.
Several other players also contributed from distance.
Boston’s Offensive Concentration
Boston’s scoring distribution was less balanced.
Derrick White scored 29 and Jaylen Brown scored 20.
Together, they produced 49 of Boston’s 89 points.
The remaining Celtics therefore accounted for 40 points.
This does not mean Boston’s other players were solely responsible for the defeat. Team results are created by the interaction of shooting, defense, possessions, lineup combinations, and opponent performance.
However, the scoring distribution helps explain why Boston had difficulty keeping pace once Charlotte established its early advantage.
Charlotte Hornets vs Celtics Match Player Stats: Key Takeaways
The most useful takeaways from the game can be summarized in a few points.
Charlotte Shot More Efficiently
The Hornets made 46% of their field goals compared with Boston’s 38%.
Charlotte Was Far Better From Three
Charlotte made 19 three-pointers at 39%.
Boston made 10 at 28%.
Charlotte Protected the Ball
The Hornets committed only four turnovers.
Boston committed 15.
Boston Rebounded Slightly Better
Boston finished with 45 rebounds compared with Charlotte’s 43.
Boston Had the Better Free-Throw Percentage
The Celtics shot 95% from the free-throw line.
Charlotte shot 81%.
Charlotte Had More Balanced Scoring
Four Hornets scored at least 17 points.
Derrick White Was Boston’s Leading Scorer
White scored 29 points on 9-of-17 shooting.
Charlotte Won Every Quarter
The Hornets outscored Boston 35-23, 29-20, 27-25, and 27-21.
How to Read These Player Stats Correctly
For readers comparing game statistics, it is useful to avoid focusing on one number.
A practical approach is to examine five layers:
1. Scoring
Start with points, but then check field-goal attempts and shooting percentage.
2. Shooting
Look at both overall shooting and three-point efficiency.
3. Possessions
Turnovers and offensive rebounds provide important context for how many opportunities each team created.
4. Playmaking
Assists reveal how much offensive creation was shared among teammates.
5. Defensive Activity
Steals, blocks, and defensive rebounds can reveal how teams disrupted or ended possessions.
Using all five layers gives a more complete picture than simply looking at the highest scorer.
Historical Context of the Season Series
According to the supplied game data, Charlotte led the season series 1-0 at this point.
The next listed matchup was scheduled for March 30, 2026, with Boston traveling to Charlotte.
That makes the March 5 result especially relevant for understanding the early season-series context.
The first meeting showed Charlotte winning in Boston by a substantial margin, but the next meeting would represent a separate game with different circumstances.
Individual statistics from one matchup should therefore be treated as game-specific evidence rather than automatic predictions of future performances.
Data Accuracy and Responsible Statistical Analysis
For readers using game statistics for fantasy analysis, historical research, team comparisons, or sports writing, accuracy matters.
The figures in this article are based on the detailed game data supplied for the March 5, 2026 matchup.
When analyzing a box score, it is also useful to distinguish between raw statistics and interpretation.
For example, saying that Derrick White scored 29 points is a direct statistical observation.
Saying that his scoring was not enough to overcome Charlotte’s team performance is an interpretation supported by the final score and broader statistics.
That distinction keeps statistical analysis clear and avoids turning a box score into unsupported speculation.
For broader guidance on creating useful, reliable web content, publishers can consult Google Search Central. Google’s Search documentation emphasizes avoiding manipulative practices and creating content that provides genuine value to users. (Google for Developers)
Frequently Asked Questions
Who was Charlotte’s leading scorer against Boston?
Kon Knueppel led Charlotte with 20 points. He shot 7-of-14 from the field and 4-of-8 from three-point range.
Who led Boston in scoring?
Derrick White led Boston with 29 points. He shot 9-of-17 from the field and made all eight of his free throws.
What was the final score between Charlotte and Boston?
Charlotte defeated Boston 118-89 on March 5, 2026, at TD Garden.
Which team shot better from three-point range?
Charlotte shot 39% from three-point range, making 19 of 49 attempts. Boston shot 28%, making 10 of 36.
Which team had more turnovers?
Boston had 15 turnovers, while Charlotte had only four.
Who had the most rebounds for Boston?
Jaylen Brown led Boston with 11 rebounds.
Conclusion
The charlotte hornets vs celtics match player stats from March 5, 2026, show a game that was defined by Charlotte’s efficiency and consistency across four quarters.
The Hornets finished with 118 points while shooting 46% from the field and 39% from three-point range. They also recorded 26 assists, 10 steals, and only four turnovers.
Kon Knueppel led Charlotte with 20 points, while Brandon Miller and LaMelo Ball scored 18 each. Coby White added 17 points and six assists in 20 minutes. Miles Bridges and Moussa Diabate also made meaningful contributions that went beyond their scoring totals.
Boston’s Derrick White produced a game-high 29 points, and Jaylen Brown posted 20 points, 11 rebounds, and seven assists. However, Boston shot only 38% overall and 28% from three-point range while committing 15 turnovers.
The Celtics did win the rebounding battle 45-43 and shot 95% from the free-throw line, but those advantages were outweighed by Charlotte’s perimeter shooting, ball security, assists, steals, and balanced scoring.
Charlotte also won every quarter, making the 118-89 result a reflection of sustained team performance rather than a single late-game swing.
