Seattle Storm vs Phoenix Mercury Match Player Stats

The seattle storm vs phoenix mercury match player stats from June 4, 2026, reveal how the Phoenix Mercury secured a hard-fought 72-68 victory over the Seattle Storm in a closely contested WNBA Commissioner’s Cup matchup. Played at Climate Pledge Arena in Seattle, Washington, the game featured strong individual performances, defensive pressure, contrasting shooting approaches, and an important rebounding advantage for Phoenix. Although Seattle connected on more three-pointers, Phoenix controlled the glass and made better use of its opportunities at the free-throw line.

Natasha Mack and Kahleah Copper led Phoenix with 16 points apiece, while Mack added a double-double with 10 rebounds and three blocks. Alyssa Thomas contributed nine points, nine rebounds, and five assists, providing valuable support across multiple areas. For Seattle, Awa Fam delivered an impressive 18-point performance, and Natisha Hiedeman added 15 points. Flau’jae Johnson also contributed nine points and five assists.

The four-point final margin tells only part of the story. Seattle actually finished with more made field goals and three-pointers, but Phoenix recorded 10 additional rebounds and converted 21 free throws compared with Seattle’s three. Those differences helped determine the outcome.

This detailed breakdown examines the complete player statistics, individual contributions, team comparisons, quarter-by-quarter scoring, defensive performances, and the wider season series between these two WNBA teams.

Match Overview: Phoenix Mercury vs Seattle Storm

The June 4 meeting was the opening game of the three-game season series between Phoenix and Seattle. Both teams entered the contest with a 3-8 overall record according to the game-page information.

Phoenix arrived in Seattle looking to establish a stronger competitive position, while the Storm had the advantage of playing at home. However, home-court support did not translate into a victory for Seattle.

The Mercury produced a balanced performance, receiving meaningful contributions from their frontcourt players and experienced playmakers. Seattle had several productive offensive stretches, but its inability to maintain consistent scoring in the fourth quarter proved costly.

Match Details

Match Information	Details
Competition	WNBA Commissioner’s Cup
Match Date	June 4, 2026
Matchup	Phoenix Mercury vs Seattle Storm
Final Score	Phoenix Mercury 72-68 Seattle Storm
Winning Team	Phoenix Mercury
Losing Team	Seattle Storm
Venue	Climate Pledge Arena
Location	Seattle, Washington
Attendance	9,109
Game Status	Final
Game ID	401856960
Phoenix Record	3-8 overall
Seattle Record	3-8 overall
Phoenix Away Record	2-4
Seattle Home Record	2-4

The game was officiated by Agon Abazi, Clare Simmons, and Ashley Gloss.

According to the supplied ESPN game information, the available broadcast options included USA Network, CW Seattle, and three additional options.

seattle storm vs phoenix mercury match player stats: Complete Box Score

The individual box score provides a clearer picture of how each team approached the matchup.

Phoenix depended on efficient interior scoring, offensive rebounding, and trips to the free-throw line. Seattle generated more perimeter production and finished with a higher number of field goals, but its limited free-throw opportunities reduced its scoring advantage.

The following tables contain the player statistics from the June 4 contest.

Phoenix Mercury Player Statistics

Player	MIN	PTS	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST
Alyssa Thomas	34	9	4-9	0-0	1-3	9	5
Natasha Mack	26	16	7-7	0-0	2-2	10	2
Noemie Brochant	24	4	2-7	0-2	0-0	4	1
Kahleah Copper	35	16	4-14	2-6	6-6	6	1
Monique Akoa Makani	28	12	3-8	1-4	5-7	6	2
DeWanna Bonner	25	10	3-12	0-7	4-5	2	1
Valeriane Ayayi	4	1	0-2	0-0	1-2	3	1
Jovana Nogic	12	4	1-2	0-1	2-2	2	2
Lexi Held	13	0	0-3	0-2	0-0	2	2

Phoenix Mercury inactive players:

• Kyara Linskens: DNP, coach’s decision.
• Sami Whitcomb: DNP, left knee.
• Quionche Carter: DNP, coach’s decision.

Additional Phoenix Mercury Statistics

Player	TO	STL	BLK	OREB	DREB	PF	+/-
Alyssa Thomas	4	2	0	1	8	2	+2
Natasha Mack	1	0	3	4	6	1	+11
Noemie Brochant	2	2	2	0	4	2	-6
Kahleah Copper	1	1	0	1	5	2	+4
Monique Akoa Makani	3	2	0	1	5	3	+4
DeWanna Bonner	1	2	0	0	2	2	0
Valeriane Ayayi	0	0	0	3	0	1	+2
Jovana Nogic	0	0	0	0	2	1	-4
Lexi Held	1	2	1	0	2	1	+7

Natasha Mack was one of the most influential players in the game. Her perfect shooting performance, double-digit rebounding, and three blocks provided Phoenix with an important advantage on both ends of the floor.

Seattle Storm Player Statistics

Player	MIN	PTS	FG	3PT	FT	REB	AST
Jordan Horston	21	5	2-5	1-4	0-0	5	1
Stefanie Dolson	25	0	0-1	0-1	0-0	2	1
Awa Fam	33	18	9-17	0-4	0-0	6	2
Natisha Hiedeman	30	15	6-17	3-8	0-1	4	4
Flau’jae Johnson	29	9	3-11	2-6	1-2	4	5
Katie Lou Samuelson	17	3	1-7	1-5	0-0	2	1
Mackenzie Holmes	19	4	2-5	0-1	0-0	6	1
Zia Cooke	14	9	4-9	1-3	0-0	1	0
Jade Melbourne	13	5	1-1	1-1	2-2	4	2

Seattle Storm inactive players:

• Joyner Holmes: DNP, coach’s decision.
• Ezi Magbegor: DNP, right foot.
• Dominique Malonga: DNP, coach’s decision.
• Lexie Brown: DNP, coach’s decision.

Additional Seattle Storm Statistics

Player	TO	STL	BLK	OREB	DREB	PF	+/-
Jordan Horston	2	0	1	1	4	1	-4
Stefanie Dolson	2	1	0	0	2	3	0
Awa Fam	2	1	2	1	5	3	-1
Natisha Hiedeman	0	2	1	1	3	2	+3
Flau’jae Johnson	4	2	0	0	4	2	+5
Katie Lou Samuelson	1	1	0	0	2	1	-2
Mackenzie Holmes	0	1	1	1	5	2	-8
Zia Cooke	2	1	0	0	1	1	-9
Jade Melbourne	1	1	0	0	4	3	-4

These numbers demonstrate that Seattle received useful contributions from several players. However, the Storm struggled to generate enough scoring from the free-throw line and did not match Phoenix’s rebounding production.

Phoenix Mercury’s Winning Performance

Phoenix did not dominate every statistical category. The Mercury shot just 38% from the field and made only three three-pointers. Nevertheless, they found other ways to produce points and protect their narrow lead.

Three areas were particularly important: Natasha Mack’s interior efficiency, Kahleah Copper’s scoring, and Alyssa Thomas’s all-around contribution.

Natasha Mack Delivered a Perfect Shooting Performance

Natasha Mack finished with 16 points, 10 rebounds, and three blocks in 26 minutes.

Her shooting numbers were especially impressive:

• Field goals: 7 of 7.
• Three-pointers: 0 attempts.
• Free throws: 2 of 2.
• Total rebounds: 10.
• Blocks: 3.
• Turnovers: 1.
• Plus/minus: +11.

Mack was Phoenix’s most efficient scorer. She converted every field-goal attempt and every free throw, giving her a perfect shooting night from the available opportunities.

Her 10 rebounds also helped Phoenix control possessions. Four of those rebounds came on the offensive glass, creating additional opportunities for the Mercury.

The three blocks were equally important. They provided defensive resistance around the basket and helped Phoenix challenge Seattle’s attempts to score inside.

A particularly useful detail is her +11 plus/minus. This means Phoenix outscored Seattle by 11 points during the minutes Mack was on the court. It does not mean she personally scored 11 more points than her opponent, but it does illustrate the positive impact of her minutes.

Kahleah Copper Provided Reliable Scoring

Kahleah Copper also scored 16 points, making her Phoenix’s joint-leading scorer.

She played 35 minutes and contributed:

• 16 points.
• 4 rebounds.
• 6-of-6 free throws.
• 2 made three-pointers.
• 1 steal.
• 1 turnover.

Copper’s shooting efficiency from the field was less impressive than Mack’s. She made four of her 14 attempts, but her ability to draw fouls and convert free throws helped maintain Phoenix’s scoring.

Her six successful free throws were especially important because the Mercury finished the contest with a four-point advantage.

Copper also played the most minutes among Phoenix’s players. Her presence gave the Mercury a consistent scoring option throughout the game.

Alyssa Thomas Controlled Multiple Areas

Alyssa Thomas did not lead Phoenix in scoring, but her contribution was valuable.

She finished with nine points, nine rebounds, and five assists. She also recorded two steals.

Thomas played 34 minutes, giving Phoenix a dependable player who could contribute in several different situations.

Her five assists helped connect the offense. Instead of relying entirely on individual scoring, Phoenix could use Thomas to create opportunities for teammates.

Her nine rebounds were also significant. Together with Mack, she helped the Mercury establish a strong presence on the boards.

Thomas recorded four turnovers, which was a negative part of her performance. However, her overall contribution remained important to the team’s victory.

Monique Akoa Makani Added Valuable Support

Monique Akoa Makani scored 12 points in 28 minutes.

She shot 3-of-8 from the field and 1-of-4 from three-point range. Her most productive area was the free-throw line, where she converted five of seven attempts.

She also collected six rebounds and recorded two assists and two steals.

Her contribution was important because Phoenix needed additional scoring beyond its leading players. Copper and Mack supplied 16 points each, but Makani’s 12-point performance helped prevent the offense from becoming too dependent on two players.

DeWanna Bonner Contributed in a Different Way

DeWanna Bonner finished with 10 points, two rebounds, one assist, and two steals.

Her shooting was challenging. She made three of 12 field-goal attempts and missed all seven three-point attempts.

Despite those difficulties, she remained involved defensively and contributed to Phoenix’s ability to disrupt Seattle’s possessions.

Her four successful free throws from five attempts helped her reach double figures.

Seattle Storm’s Strong Individual Performances

Seattle lost by four points, but the team’s individual statistics show that several players produced effective offensive performances.

Awa Fam led the Storm in scoring, while Natisha Hiedeman supplied important perimeter production. Flau’jae Johnson contributed as a playmaker and defender.

Awa Fam Led Seattle With 18 Points

Awa Fam was Seattle’s leading scorer with 18 points.

She played 33 minutes and made nine of her 17 field-goal attempts.

Her statistical contribution included:

• 18 points.
• 9-of-17 field goals.
• 6 rebounds.
• 2 assists.
• 1 steal.
• 2 blocks.
• 2 turnovers.

Fam’s 18 points were the highest individual scoring total in the game.

Her 53% field-goal shooting was also more efficient than the overall shooting percentage of either team. She demonstrated an ability to finish scoring opportunities without relying on the three-point line.

However, Fam did not attempt a free throw. That detail matters because Phoenix generated 27 free-throw attempts as a team.

Although Fam played an effective offensive game, Seattle needed more scoring support and additional opportunities at the line to overcome Phoenix’s interior production.

Natisha Hiedeman Offered Perimeter Scoring

Natisha Hiedeman finished with 15 points, four rebounds, and four assists.

She played 30 minutes and made:

• 6 of 17 field-goal attempts.
• 3 of 8 three-point attempts.
• 0 of 1 free-throw attempts.

Her three successful three-pointers represented one-third of Seattle’s nine made shots from beyond the arc.

Hiedeman also recorded two steals and finished with no turnovers, an important achievement for a player involved in both scoring and ball movement.

Her +3 plus/minus was the best among Seattle’s regular rotation players in this game.

This statistic suggests that the Storm performed better relative to Phoenix during her minutes, even though Seattle ultimately lost.

Flau’jae Johnson Contributed as a Playmaker

Flau’jae Johnson finished with nine points, four rebounds, and five assists.

She played 29 minutes and helped organize Seattle’s offense.

Her five assists tied Alyssa Thomas for the highest assist total in the game.

Johnson also recorded two steals, showing that her contribution extended beyond scoring and passing.

However, four turnovers were a concern. In a close game, possessions become increasingly important, and turnovers can remove opportunities to score.

Johnson’s +5 plus/minus was another positive indicator. Seattle had a better scoring margin during her time on the floor, despite her individual turnovers.

Zia Cooke Provided Bench Scoring

Zia Cooke contributed nine points in 14 minutes.

She made four of nine field-goal attempts, including one three-pointer.

Her shooting helped Seattle receive additional scoring from its bench. She was particularly effective at converting opportunities within the field-goal area.

Cooke’s overall plus/minus was -9, meaning Seattle was outscored by nine points during her minutes. This figure should be considered alongside the broader game situation rather than treated as a complete evaluation of her individual performance.

Jade Melbourne Was Perfect From the Field

Jade Melbourne produced five points, four rebounds, and two assists in 13 minutes.

She made her only field-goal attempt, which was also her only three-point attempt, and converted both free throws.

Her perfect shooting line was an encouraging contribution in limited playing time.

She also recorded one steal, giving Seattle another useful defensive presence from the bench.

Quarter-by-Quarter Scoring Breakdown

The scoring pattern explains why the final result remained close despite Phoenix’s early advantage.

The Mercury won the first quarter, but Seattle responded in the second and third periods. Phoenix then produced the strongest fourth-quarter performance and protected its lead.

Quarter Scores

Quarter	Phoenix Mercury	Seattle Storm	Quarter Winner
First Quarter	21	15	Phoenix
Second Quarter	15	18	Seattle
Third Quarter	16	22	Seattle
Fourth Quarter	20	13	Phoenix
Final	72	68	Phoenix

First Quarter: Phoenix Established Early Control

Phoenix opened the game with 21 points, while Seattle scored 15.

The six-point difference gave the Mercury an early advantage and allowed them to approach the next period with a useful cushion.

Phoenix’s interior scoring was particularly important. Mack’s ability to finish close to the basket helped the team produce efficient opportunities.

Seattle struggled to match Phoenix’s early offensive output, although the Storm remained close enough to recover.

Second Quarter: Seattle Started Responding

Seattle won the second quarter 18-15.

The Storm increased their scoring and reduced Phoenix’s advantage.

This period showed that Seattle could compete offensively despite the difficult start.

However, Phoenix still entered halftime with a three-point lead.

The Mercury’s ability to maintain a scoring advantage during a period won by Seattle was an important part of the eventual result.

Third Quarter: Seattle Took Control of the Period

The third quarter was Seattle’s most productive stretch.

The Storm scored 22 points compared with Phoenix’s 16, winning the period by six.

That performance erased Phoenix’s halftime advantage and placed Seattle in a stronger position entering the final quarter.

Seattle’s perimeter shooting and improved offensive rhythm helped the team regain momentum.

However, the Storm did not create a sufficiently large lead to make the fourth quarter comfortable.

Fourth Quarter: Phoenix Finished Stronger

Phoenix scored 20 points in the final period, while Seattle managed just 13.

This seven-point difference was enough to decide the contest.

The Mercury improved their offensive output and limited Seattle’s scoring opportunities.

Phoenix’s ability to produce points from free throws was especially valuable during this stage.

Seattle had the opportunity to finish the comeback, but its offense did not maintain the productivity shown in the third quarter.

The final period was the clearest example of Phoenix’s ability to respond under pressure.

Team Statistics Comparison

Individual performances explain the contributions of players, but team statistics reveal the broader differences between the two sides.

Phoenix and Seattle both finished with a 38% field-goal percentage. However, the number of attempts and the distribution of their scoring were different.

Complete Team Comparison

Statistical Category	Phoenix Mercury	Seattle Storm
Final Score	72	68
Field Goals	24-64	28-73
Field-Goal Percentage	38%	38%
Three-Pointers	3-22	9-33
Three-Point Percentage	14%	27%
Free Throws	21-27	3-5
Free-Throw Percentage	78%	60%
Total Rebounds	44	34
Offensive Rebounds	10	4
Defensive Rebounds	34	30
Assists	17	17
Turnovers	13	14
Steals	11	10
Blocks	6	5
Personal Fouls	15	18

The most important differences were rebounding and free-throw production.

Phoenix collected 44 rebounds, compared with Seattle’s 34. The Mercury also attempted 22 more free throws than the Storm.

Seattle’s advantage from three-point range was not enough to compensate for those differences.

Why Phoenix Won the Rebounding Battle

Rebounding was one of the strongest indicators of Phoenix’s control.

The Mercury collected 10 more rebounds than Seattle, including six additional offensive rebounds.

Offensive rebounds are valuable because they give a team another opportunity to score after an unsuccessful shot.

Phoenix’s 10 offensive rebounds compared with Seattle’s four show how effectively the Mercury competed for second chances.

Natasha Mack led the Mercury with 10 total rebounds. Alyssa Thomas added nine, while Copper and Makani each recorded six.

Seattle’s leading rebounders were Awa Fam and Mackenzie Holmes, with six apiece.

The Storm had reasonable individual rebounding contributions, but the team total was not enough to match Phoenix.

The Three-Point Shooting Difference

Seattle had a clear advantage from outside.

The Storm made nine three-pointers on 33 attempts, producing a 27% success rate.

Phoenix made just three of 22 attempts, converting 14%.

That meant Seattle made six additional three-pointers.

In a game decided by four points, this was a significant offensive advantage for the Storm.

However, three-point production was only one part of the scoring equation.

Phoenix generated more points from two-point opportunities and free throws. The Mercury’s ability to finish near the basket helped offset Seattle’s perimeter advantage.

This matchup illustrates why a team can make more three-pointers and still lose.

Free-Throw Production Changed the Score

The free-throw numbers were among the most important statistics in the contest.

Phoenix attempted 27 free throws and made 21.

Seattle attempted only five and converted three.

The difference was 18 made free throws.

This is a substantial gap in a game with a four-point final margin.

Copper converted all six of her attempts, while Mack made both of hers. Makani added five successful free throws, and Bonner contributed four.

Seattle’s limited opportunities at the line made it harder to keep pace with Phoenix’s scoring.

Turnovers and Ball Security

Phoenix committed 13 turnovers, while Seattle committed 14.

The one-turnover difference was relatively small.

Both teams also finished with 17 assists, indicating that their overall assist totals were identical.

However, the distribution of individual turnovers varied.

Thomas recorded four turnovers for Phoenix, while Johnson also recorded four for Seattle.

Hiedeman was particularly effective in this category, finishing without a turnover despite recording 15 points and four assists.

Phoenix did not win because of a major advantage in ball security. Its success came from a combination of rebounding, interior scoring, and free-throw production.

Key Statistical Battles That Decided the Game

Several individual and team-level comparisons help explain the result more clearly.

Natasha Mack vs Seattle’s Interior Defense

Mack’s 7-of-7 shooting was a major problem for Seattle’s defense.

When a player converts every field-goal attempt, the opposing team has limited opportunities to recover from defensive mistakes.

Her 10 rebounds and three blocks also gave Phoenix an advantage in the paint.

Seattle needed a more effective response to her interior presence. Preventing second-chance opportunities and forcing more difficult shots could have reduced her influence.

Alyssa Thomas vs Flau’jae Johnson

Thomas and Johnson both finished with five assists.

Thomas added nine rebounds and nine points, while Johnson contributed four rebounds and nine points.

Thomas had the stronger rebounding contribution, while Johnson provided an important playmaking presence for Seattle.

Both players demonstrated why basketball performance cannot be judged by scoring alone.

Their ability to create opportunities for teammates was a significant part of their respective teams’ offensive structures.

Awa Fam vs Kahleah Copper

Fam scored 18 points, while Copper finished with 16.

Fam was more efficient from the field, making nine of 17 attempts. Copper converted four of 14 field goals but made all six free throws.

Fam delivered the highest individual scoring total, but Copper’s scoring came within a winning team performance.

This comparison also shows the difference between shooting efficiency and total offensive impact. Both players contributed, but their teams required different types of production.

The Bench Contribution

Phoenix received useful support from Makani, Bonner, Nogic, and Held.

Seattle received scoring contributions from Cooke, Melbourne, and other rotation players.

Cooke’s nine points in 14 minutes were particularly useful for the Storm.

However, Phoenix’s bench and supporting rotation helped the team maintain its scoring options while its leading players handled important minutes.

The overall contribution was not limited to the starting group.

Understanding the Plus/Minus Statistics

Plus/minus is often misunderstood when readers examine basketball box scores.

The statistic measures the difference between a team’s points scored and points allowed while a specific player is on the court.

For example, Natasha Mack recorded +11. This means Phoenix outscored Seattle by 11 points during the minutes she played.

Alyssa Thomas recorded +2, while Copper finished at +4.

For Seattle, Flau’jae Johnson recorded +5 and Natisha Hiedeman recorded +3.

These numbers offer useful context, but they should not be used as the only measure of a player’s performance.

Plus/minus is affected by teammates, opponents, substitutions, and game situations. A player can perform well individually while finishing with a negative number.

The most reliable approach is to examine plus/minus alongside points, shooting efficiency, rebounds, assists, defensive statistics, and playing time.

What the Player Statistics Reveal About Phoenix’s Strategy

Phoenix’s victory was built on a balanced approach rather than exceptional three-point shooting.

The Mercury made only three shots from beyond the arc, so they needed other ways to generate offense.

Their 27 free-throw attempts and 44 rebounds were important indicators of their strategy.

Prioritizing Interior Opportunities

Mack’s perfect field-goal performance demonstrated the value of efficient scoring near the basket.

Phoenix did not need every possession to end with a difficult perimeter shot.

Instead, the team benefited from opportunities inside and used its size to challenge Seattle defensively.

Creating Second-Chance Opportunities

The Mercury’s 10 offensive rebounds provided additional scoring chances.

This mattered because Phoenix did not shoot particularly well overall.

When a team misses shots, offensive rebounds can help reduce the impact of poor shooting.

Phoenix took advantage of that opportunity more effectively than Seattle.

Using Experienced Playmakers

Thomas’s five assists and Makani’s two assists helped Phoenix maintain ball movement.

The Mercury finished with 17 assists, matching Seattle’s total.

Although the team did not have an overwhelming advantage in playmaking numbers, it successfully combined passing with individual scoring.

What Seattle Could Have Done Differently

Seattle had several positive statistical areas but could not convert them into a victory.

Its 27% three-point shooting was better than Phoenix’s 14%, and the Storm made four more field goals.

However, the team needed to improve in other areas.

Improve Interior Rebounding

Seattle collected 34 rebounds, which was 10 fewer than Phoenix.

More effective defensive rebounding could have limited Phoenix’s second-chance opportunities.

The Storm also needed to prevent Mack and Thomas from establishing such a strong presence around the basket.

Generate More Free-Throw Opportunities

Seattle attempted just five free throws.

Even a modest increase in successful free-throw opportunities could have changed the final scoring margin.

The Storm needed to put more pressure on Phoenix’s defense rather than relying heavily on perimeter attempts.

Maintain Fourth-Quarter Offensive Production

Seattle scored 22 points in the third quarter but only 13 in the fourth.

That decline was a major reason for the loss.

Maintaining offensive movement, reducing turnovers, and creating higher-quality attempts would have helped the Storm protect their comeback.

Improve Scoring Balance

Fam and Hiedeman combined for 33 points.

That was a strong contribution, but Seattle needed more consistent production from the rest of its rotation.

Johnson, Cooke, and the other supporting players provided useful contributions, but the team could have benefited from additional efficient scoring.

Season Series: Phoenix Mercury vs Seattle Storm

The June 4 contest was the first of three meetings between Phoenix and Seattle in the 2026 season series.

Phoenix eventually won all three games, finishing with a 3-0 series record.

The later matchups demonstrated that the Mercury maintained their advantage beyond the opening contest.

Season Series Results

Game	Date	Result	Winner
Game 1	June 4, 2026	Phoenix 72-68 Seattle	Phoenix
Game 2	June 21, 2026	Phoenix 93-73 Seattle	Phoenix
Game 3	July 3, 2026	Phoenix 90-67 Seattle	Phoenix

Phoenix won the opening game by four points, but the following victories were more comfortable.

The second meeting produced a 20-point difference, while the third ended with a 23-point margin.

The series results show that Phoenix was able to translate its first victory into continued success against the Storm.

Game 1: June 4, 2026

Phoenix defeated Seattle 72-68 at Climate Pledge Arena.

The game was competitive throughout, particularly during the second and third quarters.

Natasha Mack and Kahleah Copper led Phoenix with 16 points each, while Awa Fam scored 18 for Seattle.

The Mercury’s rebounding and free-throw advantages proved decisive.

Game 2: June 21, 2026

Phoenix won the second matchup 93-73.

The 20-point victory demonstrated a much stronger offensive performance from the Mercury.

Unlike the opening meeting, Phoenix produced more than 90 points and created a substantial scoring gap.

Seattle was unable to maintain the same level of competitiveness across the full game.

Game 3: July 3, 2026

Phoenix completed the season-series sweep with a 90-67 victory.

The 23-point difference was the largest margin of the three meetings.

Winning all three games gave Phoenix a clear advantage in the season matchup.

For Seattle, the series highlighted the need for stronger interior defense, better rebounding, and more consistent offensive execution.

Why This Match Matters for WNBA Statistical Analysis

This contest provides a useful example of how basketball games are influenced by more than points and shooting percentages.

A quick review of the scoreboard might suggest that Seattle’s perimeter shooting should have produced a victory.

The Storm made nine three-pointers, compared with Phoenix’s three. They also made 28 field goals, compared with the Mercury’s 24.

Yet Phoenix won.

The reason becomes clearer when the other statistics are examined.

Shooting Efficiency Needs Context

Both teams recorded a 38% field-goal percentage.

However, Seattle attempted nine more field goals.

The extra attempts did not automatically create a scoring advantage because Phoenix generated more free throws and offensive rebounds.

Rebounding Creates More Opportunities

The 44-34 rebounding advantage gave Phoenix greater control of missed shots.

This is especially important when a team struggles from the field.

Phoenix’s offensive rebounding helped compensate for its low three-point percentage.

Free Throws Can Decide Close Games

Phoenix made 21 free throws, while Seattle made three.

That difference was larger than the final margin.

Free-throw production was therefore one of the clearest statistical explanations for the result.

Defensive Contributions Extend Beyond Blocks

Phoenix recorded 11 steals and six blocks.

Seattle recorded 10 steals and five blocks.

Both teams showed defensive activity, but Phoenix produced slightly better totals in these categories.

Mack’s three blocks were especially important because they helped protect the basket.

Where to Find the Official Box Score

Readers who want to examine the complete game record can consult the ESPN box score.

The game ID is 401856960.

The box score provides the recorded player statistics, team totals, scoring information, and game details used in this analysis.

When comparing player performances, it is important to distinguish between official recorded statistics and broader interpretations of how a player influenced the game.

The numbers establish what happened statistically. Tactical conclusions, such as the importance of rebounding or late-game execution, should be understood as analysis based on those numbers.

Important Statistical Terms Explained

For readers who are less familiar with basketball box scores, the following definitions make the player statistics easier to understand.

Points (PTS)

Points represent the total number of points a player scores during a game.

A field goal can be worth two or three points, while a successful free throw is worth one point.

Field Goals (FG)

Field goals represent successful two-point and three-point shots.

A player listed at 7-7 made seven field goals from seven attempts.

Three-Point Field Goals (3PT)

This category records successful shots from beyond the three-point line.

Seattle made nine three-pointers, while Phoenix made three.

Free Throws (FT)

Free throws are awarded after specific defensive fouls and certain other situations.

Phoenix made 21 of its 27 attempts, while Seattle converted three of five.

Rebounds (REB)

Rebounds are recorded when a player gains possession after a missed field-goal or free-throw attempt.

They are divided into offensive and defensive rebounds.

Assists (AST)

An assist is credited when a pass directly leads to a teammate’s successful field goal.

Both teams recorded 17 assists.

Turnovers (TO)

Turnovers occur when a team loses possession without completing a successful scoring attempt.

Phoenix recorded 13, while Seattle recorded 14.

Steals (STL)

A steal is credited when a defensive player legally takes possession from the opposing team.

Phoenix recorded 11 steals.

Blocks (BLK)

A block occurs when a defensive player legally deflects an opponent’s field-goal attempt.

Natasha Mack led the game with three blocks.

Personal Fouls (PF)

Personal fouls are recorded when players commit illegal physical contact under basketball rules.

Phoenix recorded 15 team fouls, compared with Seattle’s 18.

Minutes Played (MIN)

Minutes indicate how much playing time a player received.

Copper played 35 minutes for Phoenix, while Thomas played 34. Awa Fam led Seattle with 33 minutes.

FAQs About Seattle Storm vs Phoenix Mercury Match Player Stats

1. Who won the Seattle Storm vs Phoenix Mercury game on June 4, 2026?

The Phoenix Mercury defeated the Seattle Storm 72-68 in the WNBA Commissioner’s Cup matchup at Climate Pledge Arena in Seattle.

2. Who was the highest scorer in the game?

Awa Fam was the highest scorer with 18 points for Seattle. Natasha Mack and Kahleah Copper were Phoenix’s leading scorers, recording 16 points each.

3. How many rebounds did Natasha Mack record?

Natasha Mack collected 10 rebounds, including four offensive rebounds and six defensive rebounds. She also scored 16 points and recorded three blocks.

4. How many three-pointers did Seattle and Phoenix make?

Seattle made nine three-pointers from 33 attempts, while Phoenix made three from 22 attempts. Seattle therefore held a six-three-pointer advantage.

5. Why did Phoenix win despite making fewer three-pointers?

Phoenix won because it controlled the rebounding battle and generated more free-throw opportunities. The Mercury collected 44 rebounds compared with Seattle’s 34 and made 21 free throws compared with Seattle’s three.

6. Did Phoenix Mercury sweep Seattle Storm in the 2026 season series?

Yes. Phoenix won all three listed meetings, defeating Seattle 72-68 on June 4, 93-73 on June 21, and 90-67 on July 3, 2026.

Conclusion

The June 4, 2026, meeting between Phoenix and Seattle demonstrated how several statistical advantages can determine the outcome of a closely contested basketball game. The Phoenix Mercury secured a 72-68 victory despite shooting just 14% from three-point range.

Natasha Mack delivered one of the game’s strongest individual performances with 16 points, 10 rebounds, and three blocks. Kahleah Copper also scored 16 points, while Alyssa Thomas contributed nine points, nine rebounds, and five assists.

Seattle had its own outstanding performances. Awa Fam led all scorers with 18 points, Natisha Hiedeman added 15, and Flau’jae Johnson recorded five assists. The Storm also made nine three-pointers, six more than Phoenix.

However, the Mercury’s 44-34 rebounding advantage and 21-3 advantage in made free throws proved decisive. Phoenix also performed better in the fourth quarter, scoring 20 points while limiting Seattle to 13.

The complete statistical picture shows that successful basketball depends on much more than perimeter shooting. Rebounding, interior efficiency, defensive activity, and free-throw production all played important roles in this result.

Phoenix’s three victories in the 2026 season series further confirmed its advantage in this matchup.