Los Angeles Sparks vs Indiana Fever Match Player Stats
The los angeles sparks vs indiana fever match player stats from June 28, 2026, tell the story of a game that quickly moved away from Los Angeles and became one of Indiana’s most efficient offensive performances of the season. The Indiana Fever defeated the Los Angeles Sparks 111-87 at Gainbridge Fieldhouse in Indianapolis, winning each of the first three quarters and building a 33-point advantage before Los Angeles reduced the margin in the fourth. The official WNBA game record lists 16,018 fans in attendance and records the contest in its game archive.
For readers looking beyond the final score, this matchup offers several useful statistical lessons. Indiana did not simply win because Kelsey Mitchell scored 26 points. The Fever shot 55% from the field, made 10 of 19 three-point attempts, converted 27 of 33 free throws, and outrebounded Los Angeles 41-25. Those numbers created a much wider offensive margin than the Sparks could overcome.
The los angeles sparks vs indiana fever match player stats also show how different types of production shaped the result. Mitchell provided the headline scoring performance, while Aliyah Boston, Tyasha Harris, and Monique Billings supplied important secondary scoring. For Los Angeles, Nneka Ogwumike led the team with 17 points, followed by Dearica Hamby with 15, Ariel Atkins with 12, and Rae Burrell with 11.
Game Overview
The June 28, 2026 matchup was played at Gainbridge Fieldhouse in Indianapolis, Indiana. Indiana entered the game with an 11-8 record and an 8-4 home mark, while Los Angeles came in at 8-10 overall and 5-4 on the road.
The final score was:
Indiana Fever 111, Los Angeles Sparks 87
The scoring progression explains how the game developed:
| Quarter | Los Angeles Sparks | Indiana Fever |
| First | 21 | 27 |
| Second | 16 | 30 |
| Third | 21 | 32 |
| Fourth | 29 | 22 |
| Final | 87 | 111 |
Indiana’s advantage was established before halftime. The Fever led 27-21 after one quarter and extended that margin to 20 points by halftime, leading 57-37.
The third quarter made the gap even larger. Indiana scored 32 points while Los Angeles managed 21, meaning the Fever entered the final period with a 33-point advantage.
Los Angeles did respond in the fourth quarter, scoring 29 points to Indiana’s 22. That late offensive improvement, however, came after the decisive portion of the game had already been played.
The official WNBA recap also identifies Mitchell as the game’s leading scorer and confirms Indiana’s 55% shooting performance.
Los Angeles Sparks vs Indiana Fever Match Player Stats
The most important individual numbers provide a clearer picture of how the game unfolded.
Los Angeles Sparks Player Leaders
Nneka Ogwumike: 17 points
Ogwumike was Los Angeles’ leading scorer with 17 points. She also contributed seven rebounds, giving the Sparks production from one of their most experienced frontcourt players.
Her scoring total was not enough to keep pace with Indiana’s offensive efficiency, but her rebounding contribution remained important considering that Los Angeles finished with only 25 total rebounds.
Dearica Hamby: 15 points
Hamby finished with 15 points and was the second-highest scorer for Los Angeles. Her ability to contribute inside was particularly relevant because the Sparks struggled to control the overall rebounding battle.
Indiana finished with 41 rebounds compared with 25 for Los Angeles, a 16-rebound difference.
Ariel Atkins: 12 points
Atkins added 12 points to the Sparks’ offensive output. Her scoring helped give Los Angeles four players in double figures, but the team lacked the volume and efficiency needed to turn those individual contributions into a competitive offensive total.
Rae Burrell: 11 points
Burrell rounded out Los Angeles’ double-digit scorers with 11 points.
The Sparks therefore had four players reach double figures:
- Nneka Ogwumike: 17
- Dearica Hamby: 15
- Ariel Atkins: 12
- Rae Burrell: 11
Together, those four players accounted for 55 of Los Angeles’ 87 points.
That distribution shows that the Sparks were not completely dependent on one scorer. Their bigger problem was that the team as a whole could not match Indiana’s efficiency, three-point production, rebounding, and free-throw volume.
Indiana Fever Player Leaders
Kelsey Mitchell: 26 points
Mitchell was the game’s leading scorer with 26 points. She shot 9 of 13 from the field, including 4 of 6 from three-point range, and made all four of her free-throw attempts.
That combination is significant because Mitchell did not need a high number of attempts to reach 26 points. Her 9-for-13 field-goal performance translated to an extremely efficient scoring night.
She also produced 13 points in the third quarter, helping Indiana turn its already substantial halftime advantage into an even larger lead. The WNBA’s official recap confirms that Mitchell’s third-quarter scoring helped Indiana push the lead to 33 points.
Aliyah Boston: 17 points
Boston scored 17 points and was especially productive during the first half.
She scored 15 of her 17 points before halftime and collected all seven of her rebounds in the opening two quarters. That was a major part of Indiana’s ability to establish a 20-point halftime lead.
Tyasha Harris: 16 points
Harris scored 16 points while starting in place of Caitlin Clark.
Her contribution was particularly valuable because Indiana still produced 111 points despite Clark not playing in this matchup. Harris helped fill the offensive and ball-handling responsibilities associated with the starting guard position.
Monique Billings: 15 points
Billings added 15 points, giving Indiana four players with at least 15 points.
That balance was one of the defining statistical differences between the teams.
Indiana’s four leading scorers produced:
- Kelsey Mitchell: 26
- Aliyah Boston: 17
- Tyasha Harris: 16
- Monique Billings: 15
That group combined for 74 points, compared with 55 from Los Angeles’ four leading scorers.
Shooting Efficiency Decided the Game
The most obvious statistical separator was shooting.
Los Angeles finished 33-for-77 from the field, or approximately 43%.
Indiana finished 37-for-67, or approximately 55%.
The difference is important for two reasons.
First, Indiana made four more field goals despite taking 10 fewer attempts. Second, the Fever generated considerably more value from their three-point shooting.
Three-Point Shooting
Los Angeles:
- 4-for-20
- 20% from three
Indiana:
- 10-for-19
- 53% from three
This was one of the biggest reasons the final margin reached 24 points.
Los Angeles attempted one more three-pointer than Indiana but made six fewer.
Indiana’s 10 made threes represented 30 points. Los Angeles’ four made threes represented only 12 points.
That created an 18-point difference from three-point field goals alone.
The importance becomes even clearer when combined with Indiana’s superior overall field-goal percentage. The Fever were efficient both inside and outside the arc.
For Los Angeles, a 43% overall shooting rate was respectable in isolation, but 20% three-point shooting made it difficult to keep pace with a team shooting 53% from long range.
Free Throws Added Another Advantage
The free-throw numbers also favored Indiana.
Los Angeles went:
17-for-21, 81%
Indiana went:
27-for-33, 82%
The percentages were almost identical, so this was not primarily an efficiency difference.
It was a volume difference.
Indiana attempted 33 free throws compared with 21 for Los Angeles. That gave the Fever 12 additional opportunities at the line and resulted in 10 more made free throws.
Indiana therefore created scoring opportunities through three major channels:
- More efficient overall field-goal shooting
- Much better three-point production
- More free-throw attempts
When a team wins all three areas, the opponent has very little margin for error.
Rebounding Was a Major Statistical Separator
The rebound totals were:
Indiana: 41
Los Angeles: 25
That is a 16-rebound advantage for the Fever.
Rebounding can sometimes be overlooked when discussing scoring-focused games, but this matchup shows why it matters.
A 16-rebound difference can influence possession count, second-chance opportunities, transition opportunities, and defensive stability.
The official WNBA statistics show Indiana finishing with the stronger overall rebounding total.
For Los Angeles, the low team rebound total made it harder to compensate for its shooting disadvantage.
The Sparks needed more possessions to generate offense because their three-point shooting was not efficient. Winning the glass could have helped them create extra chances. Instead, Indiana controlled that category as well.
Assists and Ball Security
Los Angeles recorded 21 assists, while Indiana finished with 23.
The assist numbers were relatively close.
That is useful because it shows the game was not simply a case of Indiana overwhelming Los Angeles through passing volume. Both teams generated a similar number of assisted baskets.
The bigger difference came from what happened after those possessions developed.
Los Angeles committed nine turnovers.
Indiana committed 12.
That means the Sparks actually had the lower turnover total.
From a basic box-score perspective, that is an area where Los Angeles performed better. Yet it did not translate into a competitive game because Indiana’s advantages in shooting, rebounding, three-point accuracy, and free throws were much larger.
This is an important lesson when interpreting player statistics: one favorable category does not necessarily outweigh several major disadvantages elsewhere.
The Three-Point Gap Changed the Offensive Math
A useful way to understand the game is to compare made three-pointers.
Indiana made 10.
Los Angeles made 4.
That six-shot difference equals 18 points.
The Fever also attempted 19 three-pointers while making more than half of them.
Los Angeles attempted 20 but converted only four.
So the Sparks had slightly more three-point attempts but received far less scoring value from those attempts.
This is a classic example of why shot volume alone should not be used to judge offensive strategy.
A team can take enough three-point shots and still lose the perimeter battle if the conversion rate is substantially lower.
First Half: Indiana Established Control
The first half was the foundation of the result.
Indiana scored 57 points.
Los Angeles scored 37.
That created a 20-point halftime difference.
Boston was especially effective during this stage. She scored 15 points before halftime and collected all seven of her rebounds during the first two quarters.
Indiana’s offense also benefited from its overall shooting efficiency.
The Fever were not forced to rely on one player. Mitchell, Boston, Harris, and Billings all contributed meaningfully to the scoring total.
For Los Angeles, Ogwumike and Hamby provided the strongest individual scoring production, but the team could not generate enough offense to match Indiana’s pace.
Third Quarter: The Game Became a Blowout
The third quarter was the decisive statistical period.
Indiana scored 32 points.
Los Angeles scored 21.
That added another 11 points to Indiana’s lead.
Mitchell was central to the surge, scoring 13 points in the quarter.
By the end of the third period, Indiana had built a 33-point advantage.
At that point, the fourth quarter became more about reducing the final margin than determining the winner.
This distinction matters when analyzing the final score. Los Angeles scored 29 points in the fourth quarter, which was its best scoring quarter of the game, but the comeback effort started from too large a deficit.
Fourth Quarter: Sparks Show Offensive Improvement
The Sparks did not stop competing after the game became one-sided.
They scored 29 fourth-quarter points, their highest total of the contest.
Indiana scored 22.
That gave Los Angeles a seven-point advantage in the final period.
However, the improvement came too late to materially alter the result.
This quarter demonstrates why quarter-by-quarter analysis is more informative than looking only at the final 111-87 score.
The final margin was 24 points, but Indiana’s largest advantage was built during the second and third quarters.
Starting Lineups
Los Angeles started:
- Nneka Ogwumike
- Dearica Hamby
- Erica Wheeler
- Ariel Atkins
- Rae Burrell
Indiana started:
- Monique Billings
- Aliyah Boston
- Kelsey Mitchell
- Tyasha Harris
- Lexie Hull
The starting lineups provide useful context for the player statistics.
Indiana’s starting group had to absorb additional responsibility because Caitlin Clark was unavailable for this game. Harris stepped into the starting role and scored 16 points.
That production helped Indiana maintain an efficient offense without one of its primary creators.
What the Team Statistics Reveal
A useful summary of the major numbers is below.
| Category | Sparks | Fever | Advantage |
| Points | 87 | 111 | Indiana |
| FG | 33-77 | 37-67 | Indiana |
| FG% | 43% | 55% | Indiana |
| 3PT | 4-20 | 10-19 | Indiana |
| 3PT% | 20% | 53% | Indiana |
| FT | 17-21 | 27-33 | Indiana |
| FT% | 81% | 82% | Indiana |
| Rebounds | 25 | 41 | Indiana |
| Assists | 21 | 23 | Indiana |
| Turnovers | 9 | 12 | Los Angeles |
| Steals | 4 | 6 | Indiana |
| Blocks | 4 | 6 | Indiana |
The table makes the overall story clear.
Indiana led in nearly every major team statistic except turnovers.
The Fever’s advantage was not dependent on one unusual number. It was broad-based.
Why Indiana Scored 111 Points
Indiana’s 111-point total can be explained through several connected factors.
Efficient field-goal shooting
The Fever made 37 of 67 attempts.
That is approximately 55%.
High-level perimeter shooting
Indiana made 10 of 19 three-point attempts.
That is approximately 53%.
Strong free-throw volume
The Fever made 27 of 33 free throws.
Multiple double-digit scorers
Four Indiana players scored at least 15 points.
Rebounding advantage
Indiana collected 41 rebounds.
Together, these factors created an offense that did not depend entirely on isolation scoring.
Mitchell’s 26 points were the headline, but the supporting production made the performance much more difficult to defend.
Why Los Angeles Finished With 87 Points
Los Angeles still scored 87 points, so its offense was not completely ineffective.
The Sparks made 33 field goals and converted 81% of their free throws.
They also had four players in double figures.
The main issue was efficiency from outside.
Four made three-pointers on 20 attempts gave Los Angeles only 12 points from long range.
Against a team that made 10 threes, that created a substantial scoring gap.
The Sparks also lost the rebounding battle by 16.
Those two categories combined to make the offensive challenge much harder.
Individual Performance Versus Team Performance
One of the most important lessons from this matchup is that individual scoring totals should not be viewed in isolation.
Mitchell’s 26 points were outstanding, but Indiana’s 111-point total required contributions from the entire lineup.
Boston scored 17.
Harris scored 16.
Billings scored 15.
That means Mitchell was not required to carry the offense alone.
Los Angeles had a similar distribution at the top, with Ogwumike, Hamby, Atkins, and Burrell all reaching double figures. Yet the Sparks did not receive the same level of efficiency from those possessions.
This is why player-stat analysis should combine individual numbers with team shooting and possession statistics.
Season Series Context
The 2026 season series ultimately went 2-1 in Indiana’s favor.
The supplied series record lists:
- May 14, 2026: Indiana Fever 78, Los Angeles Sparks 87
- June 28, 2026: Indiana Fever 111, Los Angeles Sparks 87
- July 9, 2026: Indiana Fever 106, Los Angeles Sparks 92
The June matchup therefore represented a major scoring reversal from the first meeting.
Los Angeles won the first game by nine points, but Indiana responded with a 24-point victory in the June contest.
The third meeting again went to Indiana in the supplied season-series record.
The official WNBA archive confirms the June game as a 111-87 Indiana victory.
A Note About the Game Date
The supplied data identifies the matchup as June 28, 2026.
The official WNBA game page labels the contest June 27 in its headline and also lists the game information at 12:00 AM on June 28. This reflects the late-night scheduling displayed in the official archive.
For consistency with the requested keyword and supplied game record, this article refers to the matchup as June 28, 2026.
Key Statistical Takeaways
The los angeles sparks vs indiana fever match player stats provide several clear takeaways for anyone studying the box score.
1. Mitchell was the scoring leader
Kelsey Mitchell finished with 26 points and shot 9-for-13 from the field.
Her four made three-pointers were especially important.
2. Indiana’s supporting cast was highly productive
Boston, Harris, and Billings combined for 48 points.
That gave Indiana a strong scoring base beyond Mitchell.
3. Indiana dominated three-point efficiency
The Fever shot 53% from three.
The Sparks shot 20%.
That was one of the largest statistical differences in the game.
4. Indiana controlled the boards
The 41-25 rebounding advantage gave the Fever a 16-rebound edge.
5. Los Angeles protected the ball better
The Sparks committed nine turnovers compared with Indiana’s 12.
That was a positive statistical area for Los Angeles, although it was not enough to offset the larger shooting and rebounding gaps.
6. The third quarter was critical
Indiana scored 32 points in the third quarter and extended its lead to 33.
Mitchell’s 13 points during the period were particularly important.
What This Game Says About Reading Player Stats
A strong box-score analysis should not stop at identifying the player with the most points.
The more useful approach is to connect individual production to team-level outcomes.
For this game, the chain is straightforward:
Mitchell’s scoring + Indiana’s shooting efficiency + three-point accuracy + rebounding + free-throw volume = 111 points.
For Los Angeles:
Four double-digit scorers + respectable free-throw shooting – poor three-point efficiency – rebounding deficit = 87 points.
This framework makes the statistics easier to understand without reducing the game to a single headline number.
Where the Sparks Had Positive Numbers
Even in a 24-point loss, Los Angeles had several statistics worth noting.
The Sparks:
- Committed only nine turnovers
- Shot 81% from the free-throw line
- Had 21 assists
- Had four players reach double figures
- Scored 29 points in the fourth quarter
These numbers show that the loss was not caused by a complete offensive collapse.
Instead, the biggest problems were efficiency and possession quality, particularly from three-point range and on the glass.
Where the Fever Created Separation
Indiana’s biggest statistical advantages came from:
- 55% overall shooting
- 53% three-point shooting
- 41 rebounds
- 27 made free throws
- Six steals
- Six blocks
- Four players scoring at least 15 points
The combination is more important than any single number.
A team that shoots 55% overall and 53% from three is already putting significant pressure on the opponent. Adding a 16-rebound advantage and 12 more free-throw attempts makes the margin even harder to overcome.
Official Record and Game Reference
For readers who want to verify the box score, scoring sequence, attendance, officials, and official game information, the official WNBA game page is the primary reference.
The listed officials were Isaac Barnett, Ryan Sassano, and Kelsey Reynolds. Attendance was recorded at 16,018.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who was the leading scorer in the Sparks vs Fever game?
Kelsey Mitchell led all scorers with 26 points for Indiana. She shot 9-for-13 from the field and made four three-pointers.
What was the final score between the Los Angeles Sparks and Indiana Fever?
The Indiana Fever defeated the Los Angeles Sparks 111-87.
Who led the Sparks in scoring?
Nneka Ogwumike led Los Angeles with 17 points. Dearica Hamby scored 15, Ariel Atkins scored 12, and Rae Burrell scored 11.
How well did Indiana shoot from three-point range?
Indiana made 10 of 19 three-point attempts, producing a 53% three-point percentage.
How many rebounds did each team have?
Indiana recorded 41 rebounds, while Los Angeles had 25.
What was the season series result?
Indiana won the 2026 season series 2-1 according to the supplied game record, including victories in the June 28 and July 9 meetings.
Conclusion
The los angeles sparks vs indiana fever match player stats show a game decided by broad statistical superiority rather than one isolated performance.
Kelsey Mitchell’s 26 points led the way, but Indiana’s result was built around efficient team basketball. The Fever shot 55% from the field, made 10 three-pointers at a 53% rate, converted 27 free throws, and controlled the rebounding battle 41-25.
Aliyah Boston’s 17 points, Tyasha Harris’ 16, and Monique Billings’ 15 gave Indiana the secondary scoring needed to turn Mitchell’s performance into a 111-point team total.
For Los Angeles, Nneka Ogwumike led the team with 17 points, while Dearica Hamby, Ariel Atkins, and Rae Burrell also reached double figures. The Sparks protected the ball well with only nine turnovers and finished the game strongly with 29 fourth-quarter points, but the 20-point halftime deficit and 33-point third-quarter deficit were too large to erase.
The most revealing numbers are therefore not just the final score or Mitchell’s scoring total. The 55% field-goal shooting, 53% three-point shooting, 41 rebounds, and 27 made free throws explain why Indiana controlled the contest so thoroughly.
For readers studying player performance, this matchup is a useful example of why individual statistics should always be read alongside team efficiency, rebounding, shot distribution, and quarter-by-quarter scoring.
