Milwaukee Bucks vs Chicago Bulls Match Player Stats
Milwaukee Bucks vs Chicago Bulls match player stats from the December 27, 2025 meeting at United Center tell a much more detailed story than the final score alone. Milwaukee defeated Chicago 112-103, with Giannis Antetokounmpo making a major impact in his return from an eight-game absence. Ryan Rollins added 20 points, Bobby Portis produced 17 points and 11 rebounds, while Kevin Porter Jr. contributed 8 points and 9 assists. For Chicago, Nikola Vucevic and Coby White each scored 16 points, while Josh Giddey delivered 13 points, 7 rebounds and 9 assists.
The game was competitive for most of the night. Milwaukee led 54-50 at halftime and then created separation in the fourth quarter, winning the final period 27-23. The Bucks also finished with better shooting efficiency, fewer turnovers and more steals, which helped them control the game despite Chicago winning the overall rebounding battle 52-47.
This breakdown goes beyond listing points. It examines the most important player performances, shooting efficiency, playmaking, rebounding, defensive contributions, fourth-quarter execution and the statistical reasons Milwaukee left Chicago with the victory.
Milwaukee Bucks vs Chicago Bulls Match Player Stats
The most important numbers from the matchup are summarized below.
| Category | Milwaukee Bucks | Chicago Bulls |
| Final Score | 112 | 103 |
| Field Goal Percentage | 47% | 42% |
| Three-Point Percentage | 36% | 34% |
| Free Throw Percentage | 79% | 75% |
| Rebounds | 47 | 52 |
| Assists | 22 | 28 |
| Turnovers | 10 | 15 |
| Steals | 12 | 5 |
| Blocks | 3 | 2 |
| Fourth Quarter | 27 | 23 |
| Record After Game | 13-19 | 15-16 |
| Attendance | 20,934 | 20,934 |
The official box score confirms Milwaukee’s 112-103 victory, with the Bucks shooting 46.5% from the field and 36.1% from three-point range. Chicago shot 41.9% overall and 34.2% from three.
One of the clearest statistical differences was ball security. Chicago recorded 15 turnovers compared with Milwaukee’s 10. The Bucks also generated 12 steals, more than twice Chicago’s five. That combination created additional possessions and helped compensate for Chicago’s five-rebound advantage.
Game Overview and Final Score
The Bucks won every quarter by a narrow margin.
| Quarter | Milwaukee | Chicago |
| First | 28 | 26 |
| Second | 26 | 24 |
| Third | 31 | 30 |
| Fourth | 27 | 23 |
| Final | 112 | 103 |
The scoring pattern is important because Milwaukee did not need a huge single-quarter explosion to win. Instead, the Bucks gradually built an advantage.
They led 28-26 after the first quarter and 54-50 at halftime. Chicago remained within striking distance through the third period, but Milwaukee’s fourth-quarter execution proved decisive.
The game was tied at several stages and remained competitive late. According to the game recap, Milwaukee led 95-94 with roughly five minutes remaining before three-pointers from Ryan Rollins and AJ Green helped fuel an 8-0 run. Chicago could not fully recover from that sequence.
That stretch is one of the most useful pieces of context when studying the player statistics. A nine-point final margin can make the game appear comfortable in hindsight, but the underlying contest was much closer.
Giannis Antetokounmpo Leads Milwaukee
Giannis Antetokounmpo was the headline performer and the most influential player on the floor.
He finished with:
- 29 points
- 8 rebounds
- 1 assist
- 1 steal
- 1 block
- 10-for-15 shooting
- 1-for-3 from three-point range
- 8-for-10 from the free-throw line
- 2 turnovers
- +13 plus/minus
He accomplished all of that in just 24:42 of playing time.
The significance of the performance goes beyond the raw scoring total. Antetokounmpo had missed eight games because of a right calf strain and had not played since December 3. His return immediately changed the offensive geometry of the game.
The Bulls had to account for his ability to attack the paint, draw defensive attention and finish around the basket. That created opportunities for Milwaukee’s shooters and secondary scorers.
Antetokounmpo was particularly efficient early. He scored 15 points on 7-for-9 shooting in the first half, helping Milwaukee establish a 54-50 halftime lead.
His +13 plus/minus was also the best among Milwaukee’s five starters.
Why Giannis’ Return Mattered
The most interesting aspect of the performance was not simply that Giannis scored 29.
He did it under a controlled workload.
The Bucks had planned to restrict his minutes after the calf injury, and he played fewer than 25 minutes.
That makes the efficiency especially notable. His 10-for-15 shooting translated into a 66.7% field-goal percentage.
He also made eight of his ten free throws, giving him reliable scoring opportunities even when Chicago prevented clean finishes.
From an analytical perspective, this was an efficient return rather than a volume-heavy performance.
Ryan Rollins Provides a Major Scoring Boost
Ryan Rollins was arguably Milwaukee’s most important supporting scorer.
He posted:
- 20 points
- 7-for-12 field goals
- 5-for-9 three-pointers
- 1-for-2 free throws
- 7 rebounds
- 5 assists
- 2 steals
- 1 block
- 1 turnover
His five made three-pointers were particularly valuable because they forced Chicago to defend the perimeter while also dealing with Antetokounmpo inside.
Rollins also delivered one of the game’s biggest late shots. With Milwaukee protecting a narrow lead, his three-pointer helped start the decisive 8-0 run that turned a one-point game into a more manageable advantage.
There is an important lesson in these statistics. Milwaukee did not need Giannis to carry every offensive possession. Rollins’ shooting created another scoring source that Chicago could not easily eliminate without giving additional room elsewhere.
His seven rebounds also gave Milwaukee useful production from the guard position.
Kevin Porter Jr. Controls the Offense
Kevin Porter Jr. scored only 8 points, but looking only at his scoring would significantly undervalue his contribution.
His complete line was:
- 8 points
- 3-for-10 shooting
- 0-for-3 from three
- 2-for-2 free throws
- 6 rebounds
- 9 assists
- 4 steals
- 4 turnovers
- +10 plus/minus
The nine assists were second only to Josh Giddey’s nine on the Chicago side, while his four steals tied for the game high.
Porter Jr. therefore played a classic secondary playmaking role. He did not shoot efficiently, but he created opportunities for teammates and applied pressure defensively.
His four steals were especially important in a game where turnover margin mattered.
This is a good example of why a player-stat analysis should not focus only on points. An eight-point performance can still be highly valuable when it includes nine assists, six rebounds and four steals.
Myles Turner Gives Milwaukee Frontcourt Balance
Myles Turner finished with:
- 13 points
- 4-for-9 shooting
- 2-for-5 from three
- 3-for-4 free throws
- 5 rebounds
- 1 assist
- +11 plus/minus
His perimeter shooting was useful because it gave Milwaukee another frontcourt player capable of stretching the defense.
Turner’s two three-pointers forced Chicago’s interior defenders to respect him away from the basket. That matters when Antetokounmpo is operating in the same lineup.
His +11 plus/minus also indicates that Milwaukee’s starting group generally performed well during his minutes.
Bobby Portis Delivers Efficient Interior Production
Bobby Portis supplied 17 points and 11 rebounds in 24 minutes.
His line included:
- 17 points
- 7-for-16 shooting
- 2-for-3 from three
- 11 rebounds
- 1 assist
- 2 steals
His offensive efficiency was not as high as Giannis’ or Rollins’, but his double-double provided important second-unit production.
Portis also collected four offensive rebounds, helping Milwaukee generate additional opportunities.
Interestingly, his individual plus/minus was -9 despite his productive box score. That is a useful reminder that plus/minus should be viewed as supporting evidence rather than a standalone measure of performance.
AJ Green’s Shooting Was More Important Than His Scoring Total
AJ Green scored only 6 points on 2-for-9 shooting.
At first glance, that appears to be an underwhelming offensive night.
However, Green’s two made three-pointers came on eight attempts, and one of those threes arrived during Milwaukee’s decisive fourth-quarter run. He also recorded two steals and finished with a +14 plus/minus, the best mark on either team.
This is a useful example of why three-point role players should be evaluated within game context.
Green did not need to score 15 or 20 points. His job was partly to create spacing and punish defensive help. His shooting volume kept the perimeter threat alive even when his percentage was modest.
Milwaukee’s Bench Production
The Bucks’ bench contributed meaningful scoring.
Bobby Portis led the reserves with 17 points, while Kyle Kuzma added 12 points. Jericho Sims contributed 4 points and 6 rebounds, and Gary Harris scored 3 points.
Kuzma’s line included four assists and a block, while Sims went 2-for-2 from the field. Harris added a steal and finished +10.
The bench was not simply about scoring. Milwaukee received rebounding, defensive plays and ball movement from its secondary players.
That depth mattered because Giannis was returning under a minutes restriction.
Chicago Bulls Player Stats
Chicago produced several strong individual performances, but none could match Giannis’ overall efficiency and Milwaukee’s late-game execution.
The Bulls’ starting lineup consisted of Isaac Okoro, Matas Buzelis, Nikola Vucevic, Coby White and Josh Giddey.
Nikola Vucevic
Vucevic recorded:
- 16 points
- 7-for-14 shooting
- 2-for-4 from three
- 7 rebounds
- 1 assist
- 1 steal
- 1 block
- 2 turnovers
- -8 plus/minus
His 50% shooting was one of Chicago’s better efficient scoring performances among its high-volume players.
Vucevic also helped Chicago stretch the floor with two three-pointers.
However, the Bulls needed more consistent offensive efficiency around him, particularly during the final quarter.
Coby White
Coby White also scored 16 points.
His statistics included:
- 16 points
- 6-for-12 field goals
- 4-for-8 three-pointers
- 2 rebounds
- 1 assist
- 5 turnovers
- -5 plus/minus
White’s four made threes were important because Milwaukee had to respect his perimeter shooting.
The biggest negative was his five turnovers.
Chicago finished with 15 turnovers as a team, and unnecessary possessions became increasingly costly as Milwaukee converted defensive pressure into transition opportunities.
White’s scoring was solid, but the turnover total illustrates the difference between productive offense and efficient possession management.
Josh Giddey Creates for Chicago
Josh Giddey had one of the most complete statistical performances for Chicago despite the loss.
He finished with:
- 13 points
- 4-for-10 shooting
- 1-for-3 from three
- 4-for-4 free throws
- 7 rebounds
- 9 assists
- 4 turnovers
- -11 plus/minus
His nine assists tied Porter Jr. for the game high.
Giddey’s passing was particularly valuable because Chicago recorded 28 assists compared with Milwaukee’s 22.
That tells us the Bulls moved the ball effectively.
The problem was that ball movement did not fully translate into scoring efficiency. Chicago shot 41.9% from the field, compared with Milwaukee’s 46.5%.
In other words, Chicago created opportunities but did not finish enough of them.
Zach Collins Provides Rebounding Help
Zach Collins came off the bench and produced 10 points and 10 rebounds.
His rebounding contribution was part of a larger Chicago advantage on the glass. The Bulls collected 52 total rebounds compared with Milwaukee’s 47.
Chicago also received 10 rebounds from Jalen Smith.
That means the Bulls did several things well on the boards, especially considering Milwaukee had Antetokounmpo and Portis available.
The issue was that rebounding superiority did not overcome the turnover and shooting gaps.
Jalen Smith Adds Ten Rebounds
Jalen Smith scored 6 points but grabbed 10 rebounds in 22 minutes.
He shot 2-for-8 from the field and 2-for-6 from three, so his offensive efficiency was limited. However, his rebounding was useful, and he added one block.
His +3 plus/minus was also one of Chicago’s better individual marks.
This was a classic example of a player contributing more through possession work than scoring.
Chicago’s Supporting Cast
Several Bulls reached double figures:
- Nikola Vucevic: 16 points
- Coby White: 16 points
- Josh Giddey: 13 points
- Ayo Dosunmu: 11 points
- Zach Collins: 10 points
- Isaac Okoro: 10 points
NBA’s recap noted that six Chicago players scored in double figures, although the scoring distribution still did not produce enough efficiency to beat Milwaukee.
Ayo Dosunmu finished with 11 points and two steals.
Isaac Okoro added 10 points on 4-for-8 shooting and made his only three-point attempt.
The Bulls had enough contributors to remain competitive, but the team lacked a late offensive sequence capable of matching Milwaukee’s shot-making.
Shooting Efficiency Decided the Matchup
The simplest statistical explanation for the result is shooting efficiency.
Milwaukee shot 46.5% from the field.
Chicago shot 41.9%.
That difference may appear small, but across a full NBA game it represents a meaningful gap in scoring efficiency.
Milwaukee also made 13 three-pointers on 36 attempts.
Chicago made 13 three-pointers on 38 attempts.
The number of made threes was identical, but Milwaukee required fewer attempts to get there.
That gave the Bucks a better three-point percentage:
- Milwaukee: 36.1%
- Chicago: 34.2%
Free-throw shooting also favored Milwaukee:
- Milwaukee: 19-for-24, 79.2%
- Chicago: 12-for-16, 75.0%
The combined effect was enough to give Milwaukee a substantial efficiency advantage.
Turnovers Were a Major Difference
Turnovers are often overlooked when a game has several recognizable scoring performances.
They should not be overlooked here.
Milwaukee committed 10 turnovers.
Chicago committed 15.
The Bucks also recorded 12 steals, compared with five for Chicago.
That means Milwaukee generated seven more steals than Chicago and committed five fewer turnovers.
The resulting possession advantage helped offset Chicago’s superior rebounding.
This is one of the clearest tactical insights from the box score: Milwaukee won the battle for possession quality even though Chicago won the raw rebounding battle.
Chicago Won the Rebounding Battle
The Bulls collected 52 rebounds.
Milwaukee collected 47.
Chicago also grabbed 16 offensive rebounds compared with Milwaukee’s 11.
Ordinarily, that type of offensive-rebounding advantage can be enough to swing a close game.
Chicago converted some of those additional possessions, but not enough to compensate for its weaker shooting and higher turnover count.
This is why evaluating one category in isolation can produce the wrong conclusion.
The Bulls won rebounds.
The Bucks won shooting efficiency.
The Bucks also won turnovers and steals.
The latter categories proved more influential in the final result.
Assist Comparison Shows Two Different Offensive Styles
Chicago recorded 28 assists.
Milwaukee recorded 22.
At first glance, that might suggest Chicago’s offense was more organized.
There is some truth to that.
Josh Giddey and Kevin Porter Jr. each finished with nine assists, while Chicago received six from Tre Jones as well. Milwaukee’s distribution was more concentrated around its scoring threats.
However, assists do not automatically equal efficient offense.
Chicago’s 28 assists came with 15 turnovers and a 41.9% field-goal percentage.
Milwaukee had six fewer assists but shot 46.5%.
That distinction matters.
The better question is not simply which team had more assists. It is which team converted possessions into points more effectively.
On that measure, Milwaukee had the edge.
Fourth Quarter Analysis
The fourth quarter was where the game was decided.
Milwaukee scored 27 points.
Chicago scored 23.
That four-point difference does not fully capture the importance of the closing stretch.
The game was still within one possession late in the fourth before Milwaukee’s 8-0 run. Rollins and Green both hit three-pointers during that sequence.
That sequence demonstrated three important things.
First, Milwaukee trusted its perimeter shooters.
Second, the Bucks were able to generate offense without relying exclusively on Antetokounmpo.
Third, Chicago could not respond with a comparable scoring run.
The final margin therefore reflects Milwaukee’s ability to execute when the game became most important.
Plus/Minus Tells an Interesting Story
Plus/minus can sometimes be misleading, but several values from this matchup are worth examining.
For Milwaukee:
- AJ Green: +14
- Giannis Antetokounmpo: +13
- Myles Turner: +11
- Kevin Porter Jr.: +10
- Ryan Rollins: -2
- Bobby Portis: -9
For Chicago:
- Jalen Smith: +3
- Tre Jones: +2
- Ayo Dosunmu: -1
- Isaac Okoro: -2
- Coby White: -5
- Nikola Vucevic: -8
- Josh Giddey: -11
- Matas Buzelis: -13
These numbers show why box-score evaluation needs context.
Rollins scored 20 points and played a critical role late, yet his plus/minus was -2.
Portis produced a double-double but finished -9.
Meanwhile, Green scored only six points and posted the best plus/minus of the game at +14.
That does not mean Green was more important offensively than Giannis. It simply indicates that Milwaukee’s overall team performance during his minutes was strong.
The Giannis Factor
The larger context surrounding the matchup was Antetokounmpo’s return.
He had missed eight consecutive games because of a right calf strain. Before the game, Milwaukee was dealing with a difficult stretch and had lost six of its previous eight games.
His return immediately provided a reliable interior scoring option.
The effect was visible in the team’s shot profile.
Giannis shot 10-for-15.
Milwaukee as a team shot 40-for-86.
That means Antetokounmpo accounted for 15 field-goal attempts while converting at a substantially higher rate than the team average.
His presence also affected the way Chicago had to defend the floor.
Even when he was not taking the shot, his presence changed defensive priorities.
Milwaukee’s Most Important Statistical Advantages
Several numbers explain the Bucks’ victory.
Better Field-Goal Percentage
Milwaukee shot 46.5%, compared with Chicago’s 41.9%.
That was probably the most important overall efficiency advantage.
Better Three-Point Percentage
Milwaukee shot 36.1% from three.
Chicago shot 34.2%.
Both teams made 13 threes, but Milwaukee did so on two fewer attempts.
Fewer Turnovers
Milwaukee committed 10 turnovers.
Chicago committed 15.
Five possessions may sound small, but in a nine-point game, they matter.
More Steals
Milwaukee recorded 12 steals.
Chicago recorded five.
That defensive activity contributed to the possession battle.
Stronger Free-Throw Shooting
Milwaukee made 19 of 24 free throws.
Chicago made 12 of 16.
That gave the Bucks seven more made free throws.
Where Chicago Was Better
The Bulls were not outplayed in every category.
They had clear advantages.
Rebounding
Chicago won the rebounding battle 52-47.
Assists
Chicago had 28 assists compared with Milwaukee’s 22.
Offensive Rebounding
The Bulls grabbed 16 offensive rebounds compared with Milwaukee’s 11.
Balanced Scoring
Chicago had six players in double figures.
That scoring balance kept the game competitive.
The problem was that these strengths were not enough to overcome Milwaukee’s shooting efficiency and ball security.
What the Matchup Reveals About Both Teams
The game provided a useful snapshot of two different team profiles.
Milwaukee relied on star power, efficient shooting and defensive pressure.
Chicago relied more heavily on ball movement, rebounding and multiple scoring contributors.
Neither approach is inherently superior.
But on this night, Milwaukee’s advantages were more valuable.
The Bucks generated better results from their possessions.
Chicago generated more possessions but did not convert enough of them.
That distinction is central to understanding the game.
Key Takeaways From the Player Statistics
The biggest lessons from this matchup are straightforward.
- Giannis Antetokounmpo made an immediate impact after returning from injury.
- Ryan Rollins supplied critical perimeter scoring with five three-pointers.
- Kevin Porter Jr. contributed nine assists and four steals despite scoring only eight points.
- Bobby Portis provided a double-double from the bench.
- Chicago won the rebounding battle but lost the turnover battle.
- Coby White and Nikola Vucevic each scored 16 points, but Chicago needed greater efficiency late.
- Josh Giddey’s nine assists helped Chicago move the ball, but his four turnovers reduced the value of that playmaking.
- Milwaukee’s 36.1% three-point shooting was better than Chicago’s 34.2%.
- Milwaukee’s 10 turnovers compared with Chicago’s 15 was a significant possession advantage.
- The fourth-quarter 8-0 run was a major turning point.
Why the Final Score Was Closer Than It Looks
A 112-103 final score might suggest a relatively comfortable Milwaukee victory.
The game itself was more competitive.
The Bucks led by only four points at halftime.
Chicago stayed within striking distance during the third quarter.
The decisive stretch came late, when Milwaukee turned a 95-94 lead into a more comfortable advantage through consecutive three-pointers and defensive pressure.
This is why final-margin analysis should always be combined with quarter-by-quarter scoring.
Milwaukee did not dominate for 48 minutes.
Instead, the Bucks consistently stayed slightly ahead and then executed better during the most important possessions.
What Fantasy Basketball Players Can Learn
For fantasy basketball analysis, this game offers several useful observations.
Giannis’ 29 points, 8 rebounds, steal and block showed how quickly he could return to productive fantasy output after an absence.
Rollins’ 20 points, seven rebounds and five assists also made him a notable contributor.
Portis delivered a strong double-double.
On Chicago’s side, Giddey’s 13 points, seven rebounds and nine assists demonstrated his all-around fantasy value, while Vucevic and White provided 16-point scoring performances.
However, fantasy evaluation should also consider efficiency and turnovers.
For example, White’s 16 points look strong until his five turnovers are included.
Likewise, Porter Jr.’s eight points look modest until his nine assists, six rebounds and four steals are considered.
How to Read Milwaukee Bucks vs Chicago Bulls Match Player Stats Correctly
A useful approach is to evaluate five categories rather than focusing on points alone.
1. Scoring
Start with points, but immediately check field-goal attempts.
A player scoring 20 points on 7-for-12 shooting has a different impact from a player scoring 20 points on 7-for-20 shooting.
2. Efficiency
Compare field-goal percentage, three-point percentage and free-throw percentage.
This shows how effectively each team converted its opportunities.
3. Possessions
Look at turnovers, steals and offensive rebounds.
These categories explain who generated extra opportunities.
4. Creation
Assists reveal who was responsible for generating shots for teammates.
But assists should be compared with turnovers.
5. Context
Finally, check plus/minus and the game situation.
A player can have modest scoring numbers while making an important contribution to a winning lineup.
Official Game Record
For readers who want to verify the complete box score, the official NBA game record is the best primary source for the matchup’s player statistics, team totals, officials, attendance and quarter-by-quarter scoring. official NBA box score and game record
The official record lists the attendance at 20,934 and confirms the officiating crew of Kevin Cutler, Gediminas Petraitis and Evan Scott.
FAQs About Milwaukee Bucks vs Chicago Bulls Match Player Stats
Who scored the most points in the Bucks vs Bulls game?
Giannis Antetokounmpo led all scorers with 29 points for Milwaukee. He shot 10-for-15 from the field and added eight rebounds in his return to the lineup.
What was the final score between the Bucks and Bulls?
The Milwaukee Bucks defeated the Chicago Bulls 112-103 at United Center. Milwaukee led 54-50 at halftime and finished the fourth quarter with a 27-23 scoring advantage.
Who led the Bulls in scoring?
Nikola Vucevic and Coby White both scored 16 points to lead Chicago. Vucevic shot 7-for-14, while White made 6 of 12 field-goal attempts and four three-pointers.
Who had the most assists in the game?
Kevin Porter Jr. of Milwaukee and Josh Giddey of Chicago each recorded nine assists. Both players also contributed in other statistical categories, although each committed four turnovers.
Which team had more rebounds?
Chicago won the rebounding battle 52-47 and also had a 16-11 advantage in offensive rebounds. Despite that, Milwaukee won because of superior shooting efficiency and better ball security.
Why did Milwaukee win the game?
Milwaukee combined better shooting efficiency with fewer turnovers and more steals. The Bucks shot 46.5% from the field compared with Chicago’s 41.9%, committed five fewer turnovers and recorded seven more steals. The late 8-0 run was also critical.
Conclusion
The Milwaukee Bucks vs Chicago Bulls match player stats show that Milwaukee’s 112-103 victory was built on efficiency, defensive activity and timely execution rather than overwhelming dominance from start to finish.
Giannis Antetokounmpo’s return was the central storyline. His 29 points on 10-for-15 shooting immediately gave Milwaukee a high-efficiency scoring option, while his eight rebounds, steal and block added value across the floor.
Ryan Rollins provided the biggest secondary scoring punch with 20 points and five three-pointers. Bobby Portis added a double-double, while Kevin Porter Jr. influenced the game through nine assists, six rebounds and four steals despite scoring only eight points.
Chicago had several positives. The Bulls outrebounded Milwaukee 52-47, recorded 28 assists and received double-figure scoring from six players. Josh Giddey was particularly effective as a facilitator with nine assists, while Coby White and Nikola Vucevic each scored 16 points.
The difference came down to efficiency and possession control. Milwaukee shot better from the field, made threes at a higher rate, committed fewer turnovers and generated significantly more steals. Those advantages became especially important during the closing minutes.
The game also demonstrates why a complete player-stat analysis should never be reduced to the scoring column. Porter Jr.’s eight points, Green’s six points and Rollins’ -2 plus/minus all require additional context. The same applies to Chicago’s rebounding advantage and Giddey’s nine assists.
Ultimately, the statistics show a Bucks team that converted its opportunities more effectively and executed better when the game entered its decisive phase. Chicago competed throughout the night, but Milwaukee’s combination of Giannis’ return, perimeter shooting and defensive pressure was enough to secure the nine-point road victory.
