Timberwolves vs Oklahoma City Thunder Match Player Stats
The timberwolves vs oklahoma city thunder match player stats from Game 3 of the 2025 Western Conference Finals tell the story of one of Minnesota’s most dominant playoff performances. The Timberwolves defeated the Oklahoma City Thunder 143-101 at Target Center, cutting Oklahoma City’s series lead to 2-1. Anthony Edwards led Minnesota with 30 points, 9 rebounds and 6 assists, while Julius Randle added 24 points in a performance that completely changed the tone of the series.
The result was more than a simple home-court victory. Minnesota controlled the game from the opening minutes, shot exceptionally well from both the field and three-point range, dominated the rebounding battle and prevented Oklahoma City from generating the defensive pressure that had caused problems in the first two games.
This breakdown examines the individual performances, team statistics, shooting efficiency, playmaking, rebounding, turnovers and the tactical reasons behind the 42-point margin.
Game Overview
Game 3 took place at Target Center in Minneapolis as the Western Conference Finals moved to Minnesota after Oklahoma City won the opening two games.
The Thunder entered the matchup with a 2-0 series advantage and a 68-14 regular-season record. Minnesota entered with a 49-33 record and a 25-16 home mark.
The Timberwolves needed a response, and they produced one immediately.
Minnesota scored 34 points in the opening quarter while limiting Oklahoma City to only 14. The second quarter continued in the same direction, with Minnesota adding 38 points and taking a 72-41 halftime advantage.
From there, the game was effectively controlled by the Timberwolves.
The final quarter scores were:
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Final |
| Oklahoma City Thunder | 14 | 27 | 29 | 31 | 101 |
| Minnesota Timberwolves | 34 | 38 | 35 | 36 | 143 |
The 143 points were a franchise playoff record for Minnesota.
Timberwolves vs Oklahoma City Thunder Match Player Stats: Key Numbers
The clearest way to understand this game is to look beyond the final score.
Minnesota won because several important statistical categories moved in the same direction.
| Category | Thunder | Timberwolves |
| Points | 101 | 143 |
| Field Goals | 35-86 | 55-96 |
| Field Goal % | 41% | 57% |
| Three-Pointers | 14-44 | 20-40 |
| Three-Point % | 32% | 50% |
| Free Throws | 17-19 | 13-17 |
| Rebounds | 31 | 50 |
| Assists | 19 | 30 |
| Turnovers | 14 | 10 |
| Steals | 5 | 6 |
| Blocks | 3 | 3 |
Several of these differences are especially important.
Minnesota attempted 10 more field goals than Oklahoma City and made 20 more shots. The Timberwolves also made six more three-pointers despite taking four fewer attempts.
The rebounding difference was even more significant.
Minnesota collected 50 rebounds compared with 31 for Oklahoma City, giving the Timberwolves a 19-rebound advantage.
That meant Minnesota was not only shooting better, but also controlling the extra-possession battle.
Anthony Edwards Leads Minnesota
Anthony Edwards was the most important individual player in the game.
He finished with:
- 30 points
- 9 rebounds
- 6 assists
- 2 steals
- 12-for-17 shooting
- 5-for-8 from three-point range
- 70.6% field-goal shooting
- 62.5% three-point shooting
- +36 plus/minus
The shooting performance is particularly notable.
Edwards entered the game after struggling from three-point range during the opening two games of the series. He responded by making 5 of 8 three-point attempts in Game 3.
That adjustment changed the spacing of the entire Minnesota offense.
When Edwards was hitting perimeter shots, Oklahoma City’s defense could not simply focus on stopping his drives. Defenders had to respect him outside, which created more room for attacks toward the basket and opportunities for teammates.
His 30 points came in only 29 minutes and 42 seconds.
That is important because this was not a case of a star accumulating statistics during a close game. Minnesota had built such a large advantage that Edwards did not need to play in the fourth quarter.
Edwards’ Offensive Efficiency Was the Difference
A 30-point performance can sometimes be misleading if a player takes an enormous number of shots.
That was not the case here.
Edwards made 12 of 17 field-goal attempts.
That works out to an exceptional 70.6% shooting rate.
He also made five of his eight three-point attempts.
His scoring efficiency gave Minnesota a reliable offensive foundation from the beginning.
Edwards scored 16 points in the first quarter alone, helping Minnesota establish a 34-14 advantage.
This early production mattered because it forced Oklahoma City to react rather than dictate.
The Thunder had been extremely effective at creating uncomfortable possessions for Minnesota earlier in the series. In Game 3, Edwards attacked with more confidence, found better shooting opportunities and used his athleticism to pressure the defense.
The result was a performance that combined scoring with playmaking and rebounding.
Julius Randle’s Response
Julius Randle was another major reason Minnesota produced such a large margin.
He scored 24 points while shooting 9-for-15 from the field.
Randle also recorded:
- 4 rebounds
- 3 assists
- +38 plus/minus
His performance was especially meaningful because his Game 2 outing had been difficult.
Instead of allowing that performance to carry into the next game, Randle became one of Minnesota’s most aggressive offensive players.
His ability to score from the interior and mid-range created another offensive problem for Oklahoma City.
The Thunder could not devote all of its defensive attention to Edwards because Randle was capable of attacking mismatches and creating his own shot.
That balance is one of the biggest lessons from the game.
Minnesota did not win because one player carried the entire offense. It won because multiple players were productive at the same time.
Minnesota’s Supporting Cast Stepped Up
The box score also shows how much production Minnesota received beyond its two leading scorers.
Naz Reid scored 10 points in fewer than 19 minutes while shooting 4-for-6 from the field and 2-for-3 from three-point range.
Donte DiVincenzo scored 6 points but was perfect from the field, making both of his field-goal attempts and both three-point attempts.
Nickeil Alexander-Walker added 12 points on 5-for-9 shooting and made two three-pointers.
Terrence Shannon Jr. provided an important spark from the bench with 15 points.
The distribution mattered.
When a team has several players capable of making shots, opposing defenses have fewer opportunities to load up against the primary scorer.
Minnesota also had seven players reach double figures.
That is a strong indication that the offense was functioning collectively rather than depending on one individual.
Oklahoma City Thunder Player Performance
The Thunder’s individual numbers were much more difficult to interpret because the team struggled collectively.
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander led Oklahoma City with:
- 14 points
- 6 assists
- 2 rebounds
He shot only 4-for-13 from the field and finished 0-for-3 from three-point range.
For an MVP-level offensive player, that was a major reduction in scoring efficiency.
Jalen Williams scored 13 points but shot 3-for-9 from the field.
Chet Holmgren finished with 10 points, 5 rebounds and 2 assists.
Isaiah Hartenstein led Oklahoma City in rebounding with 6 boards.
The Thunder also received 10 points from Alex Caruso.
The problem for Oklahoma City was not simply that one player had a poor shooting night.
The entire offense struggled to maintain efficiency against Minnesota’s defensive pressure.
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander’s Difficult Night
Gilgeous-Alexander was one of the central storylines of the game.
He had been one of the defining offensive players throughout the season, but Minnesota made his scoring attempts much harder.
He finished with 14 points on 4-for-13 shooting.
His six assists showed that he still influenced the game as a passer, but the Thunder needed much more scoring efficiency from their leading offensive option.
Minnesota’s crowd applied heavy pressure whenever Gilgeous-Alexander handled the ball, while the Timberwolves’ defensive approach emphasized ball pressure and collective help.
That defensive environment made it harder for Oklahoma City to establish the rhythm it had enjoyed earlier in the series.
Shooting Was the Biggest Statistical Separation
One of the strongest conclusions from the timberwolves vs oklahoma city thunder match player stats is that shooting efficiency created the foundation for Minnesota’s victory.
Minnesota:
- Shot 57% from the field
- Shot 50% from three
- Made 20 three-pointers
- Made 55 field goals
Oklahoma City:
- Shot 41% from the field
- Shot 32% from three
- Made 14 three-pointers
- Made 35 field goals
The difference was enormous.
Minnesota made 20 more field goals overall.
That is not something that can easily be overcome through free throws or isolated individual performances.
The Timberwolves also did not rely exclusively on three-point shooting. They made 35 two-point field goals, meaning their offense was effective from multiple areas of the court.
That made the defense difficult to solve.
The Three-Point Battle
The three-point numbers deserve special attention.
Minnesota went 20-for-40 from behind the arc.
Oklahoma City went 14-for-44.
The Timberwolves therefore made six more three-pointers while taking four fewer attempts.
That is a major efficiency advantage.
It also explains why the score became so lopsided so quickly.
Every made three-pointer adds three points while simultaneously forcing the defense to extend farther from the basket.
When a team shoots 50% from three, defensive mistakes become extremely costly.
Minnesota’s success from deep also created driving lanes.
This is an important tactical connection. Three-point shooting was not only about adding points. It changed the geometry of the floor.
Rebounding Created Extra Control
Minnesota dominated the glass 50-31.
That 19-rebound advantage is one of the clearest indicators of how physical control shifted during the game.
Rebounding affects a game in two ways.
First, defensive rebounds end possessions.
Second, offensive rebounds can create additional scoring opportunities.
Minnesota’s size and activity around the basket helped limit Oklahoma City’s opportunities while giving the Timberwolves more control over possession.
Anthony Edwards himself grabbed nine rebounds, which was an unusually strong contribution from the guard position.
Naz Reid added eight rebounds in limited minutes.
Oklahoma City’s leading rebounder, Isaiah Hartenstein, finished with six.
The rebounding numbers therefore reflected a team-wide advantage rather than a single matchup.
Ball Movement and Playmaking
Minnesota finished with 30 assists compared with 19 for Oklahoma City.
That 11-assist advantage supports the idea that Minnesota generated more connected offense.
Edwards had six assists.
Randle had three.
Conley had two.
DiVincenzo had three.
Naz Reid had two.
Alexander-Walker had two.
The important point is that the offense did not become stagnant around Edwards.
Players moved the ball, made quick decisions and created opportunities for one another.
When the ball moves efficiently, defenses have fewer chances to load up on one player.
That is particularly important against Oklahoma City because the Thunder’s defensive identity is built around pressure, activity and turnovers.
Turnovers Favored Minnesota
Minnesota committed 10 turnovers.
Oklahoma City committed 14.
The four-turnover difference is not enormous by itself, but it becomes more important when combined with the shooting and rebounding numbers.
The Timberwolves were:
- More efficient from the field
- More efficient from three
- Better on the glass
- Better in assists
- Better in turnovers
When one team wins almost every major possession category, a large scoring margin becomes much more likely.
Why the First Quarter Mattered So Much
The opening quarter deserves more attention than the final 143-101 score.
Minnesota scored 34 points while Oklahoma City scored 14.
That created a 20-point difference before the game had even reached the second quarter.
The Timberwolves did not spend the game slowly building an advantage.
They immediately established physical and offensive control.
Anthony Edwards was central to that start, scoring 16 of Minnesota’s 34 first-quarter points.
This type of opening can have a psychological effect.
The team that falls behind must begin making decisions under greater pressure. Shots become more valuable. Defensive mistakes become more costly. Players can become more aggressive than necessary while trying to recover.
Minnesota avoided that problem because it controlled the game from the beginning.
Minnesota’s Defense Deserves Equal Credit
It is easy to focus on 143 points.
The defensive performance was just as important.
The Timberwolves held Oklahoma City to 101 points and limited the Thunder to 41% shooting.
Minnesota also held the Thunder to 32% from three-point range.
The defensive effort forced Oklahoma City into difficult offensive possessions.
The Thunder still scored 101 points, but that number was inflated by 31 fourth-quarter points after the game had already been decided.
Through three quarters, Oklahoma City had scored only 70 points.
Minnesota had 107.
That tells you more about the competitive portion of the game than the final-quarter scoring does.
The Third Quarter Was Different From the First Two Games
The third quarter was a major storyline because Oklahoma City had previously been able to make significant adjustments after halftime.
Minnesota prevented that from happening.
The Timberwolves entered halftime with a 72-41 lead and then scored another 35 points in the third quarter.
Oklahoma City scored 29.
The lead therefore expanded instead of shrinking.
That was strategically important.
The Timberwolves were not simply taking advantage of a hot first half.
They continued executing after Oklahoma City had an opportunity to adjust.
Plus/Minus Shows the Impact of Minnesota’s Main Lineups
Julius Randle posted the best plus/minus on the Timberwolves at +38.
Anthony Edwards was close behind at +36.
Those numbers are consistent with what happened while the main players were on the court.
The game was already heavily tilted in Minnesota’s favor by the time many reserves entered.
Plus/minus should never be treated as a complete player evaluation by itself, especially in a blowout.
However, in this specific game, the statistic supports the visual and box-score evidence that Minnesota’s main rotation created a substantial advantage.
What the Game Says About Anthony Edwards
The most useful lesson from Edwards’ performance is not simply that he scored 30 points.
It is how he scored them.
He combined:
- Efficient shooting
- Perimeter accuracy
- Rim pressure
- Rebounding
- Passing
- Defensive activity
That combination made him difficult to scheme against.
- If Oklahoma City defended him tightly outside, he could attack the basket.
- If defenders backed off, he could shoot.
- If help defenders committed to him, he could pass.
- If Minnesota missed, he could contribute on the glass.
This is what makes a complete playoff performance different from a high-volume scoring game.
What the Game Says About Julius Randle
Randle’s 24-point performance demonstrated why Minnesota needed secondary scoring.
The Timberwolves could not expect Edwards to carry every offensive possession throughout a playoff series.
Randle gave them another player who could attack mismatches, score from the mid-range and pressure the interior.
His 9-for-15 shooting also meant Minnesota received efficient production rather than simply additional volume.
The psychological side was important too.
After struggling in Game 2, Randle responded immediately.
That type of response can matter in a long playoff series because confidence and role clarity can change quickly from game to game.
Comparing the Two Stars
A direct comparison between Edwards and Gilgeous-Alexander provides a useful summary.
| Statistic | Anthony Edwards | Shai Gilgeous-Alexander |
| Points | 30 | 14 |
| Rebounds | 9 | 2 |
| Assists | 6 | 6 |
| Field Goals | 12-17 | 4-13 |
| Three-Pointers | 5-8 | 0-3 |
| Steals | 2 | 0 |
| Plus/Minus | +36 | Not a positive impact indicator |
Both players produced six assists.
The major difference was scoring efficiency.
Edwards made 12 of 17 shots.
Gilgeous-Alexander made 4 of 13.
That contrast illustrates why individual scoring totals need context.
Thirty points on 17 attempts is dramatically different from 14 points on 13 attempts.
A Closer Look at Minnesota’s Offensive Formula
Minnesota’s success can be reduced to a simple formula:
Efficient shooting + rebounding + ball movement + defensive pressure = control.
The Timberwolves shot 57% from the field.
- They shot 50% from three.
- They collected 50 rebounds.
- They produced 30 assists.
- They committed only 10 turnovers.
At the same time, they held Oklahoma City to 41% shooting and 32% three-point shooting.
No single number explains a 42-point playoff victory.
The combination does.
Why the 42-Point Margin Matters
A 42-point playoff victory is unusual because playoff games generally feature tighter rotations, more defensive preparation and fewer easy possessions.
Minnesota led by as many as 45 points during the game.
The margin also demonstrated that the first two games did not define the matchup.
Oklahoma City had won the first two games and appeared to have significant control of the series.
Minnesota’s response showed that the series could change dramatically when the Timberwolves controlled pace, spacing and physicality.
How the Series Context Changes the Numbers
The game should not be viewed in isolation.
Oklahoma City still led the Western Conference Finals 2-1 after the victory.
That means Minnesota’s 143-point performance did not erase the Thunder’s earlier advantage.
Instead, it changed the series from a potential 3-0 situation into a competitive 2-1 matchup.
That distinction is important.
The statistics tell us that Minnesota was overwhelmingly better in Game 3.
They do not prove that the same performance would automatically continue in the next game.
Playoff series are built around adjustments.
The Thunder would have opportunities to respond.
The Timberwolves would have to prove that Game 3 was more than one extraordinary shooting night.
The Most Important Numbers to Remember
If you want a quick statistical summary of the game, these are the numbers that matter most:
143: Minnesota’s final point total.
101: Oklahoma City’s final point total.
42: Minnesota’s winning margin.
30: Anthony Edwards’ points.
24: Julius Randle’s points.
50: Minnesota’s rebounds.
31: Oklahoma City’s rebounds.
30: Minnesota’s assists.
19: Oklahoma City’s assists.
20: Minnesota’s made three-pointers.
14: Oklahoma City’s made three-pointers.
57%: Minnesota’s field-goal percentage.
41%: Oklahoma City’s field-goal percentage.
50%: Minnesota’s three-point percentage.
32%: Oklahoma City’s three-point percentage.
These numbers provide a concise picture of the game’s statistical imbalance.
What Fans Should Look for When Studying Player Stats
Player statistics are most useful when they are connected to the actual flow of the game.
Instead of asking only who scored the most points, consider these questions:
- How many shots did the player need to reach the scoring total?
- Did the player create opportunities for teammates?
- Did the player contribute on the glass?
- Did the player’s team win the minutes he played?
- Was the player efficient from three-point range?
- Did turnovers reduce his offensive value?
- Did defensive pressure influence his shooting opportunities?
Using those questions produces a more meaningful evaluation than looking at points alone.
For Game 3, Edwards scores extremely well across nearly all of those categories.
Why Efficiency Matters More Than Raw Scoring
Suppose two players each score 30 points.
One player shoots 12-for-17.
Another shoots 10-for-30.
The point totals are identical, but the performances are completely different.
Edwards’ Game 3 line was valuable because he combined volume with efficiency.
His 12-for-17 shooting created very little wasted possession cost.
His five made three-pointers also meant that a large portion of his scoring came from high-value shots.
This is why advanced analysis should always consider shooting efficiency alongside traditional scoring totals.
Minnesota’s Offensive Rebounding and Second Chances
Although the overall rebound number is the headline, the individual offensive and defensive rebound distribution also matters.
Minnesota’s ability to secure missed shots limited Oklahoma City’s chances to build momentum.
Every defensive rebound ended an opposing possession.
Every offensive rebound created another chance for Minnesota.
In a game where the Timberwolves were already shooting 57%, additional opportunities were especially dangerous for the Thunder.
The combination of efficient first attempts and control of second chances made Minnesota’s offense extremely difficult to slow.
Why Oklahoma City’s 101 Points Can Be Misleading
A casual reading of the final score might suggest that Oklahoma City had a respectable offensive night because the Thunder reached 101.
The quarter-by-quarter breakdown tells a different story.
After three quarters:
- Minnesota had 107 points.
- Oklahoma City had 70 points.
The Thunder scored 31 points in the fourth quarter, when the outcome had already been determined.
That means the 101-point final total does not accurately describe how competitive the offensive battle was during the decisive portions of the game.
This is an important example of why quarter-by-quarter statistics can provide more insight than final totals alone.
Game 3 Player Leaders at a Glance
Minnesota Timberwolves
Anthony Edwards: 30 points, 9 rebounds, 6 assists
Julius Randle: 24 points, 4 rebounds, 3 assists
Terrence Shannon Jr.: 15 points
Nickeil Alexander-Walker: 12 points
Naz Reid: 10 points, 8 rebounds
Mike Conley: 6 points, 3 rebounds, 2 assists
Donte DiVincenzo: 6 points, 3 assists
Oklahoma City Thunder
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander: 14 points, 6 assists, 2 rebounds
Jalen Williams: 13 points, 4 rebounds, 2 assists
Chet Holmgren: 10 points, 5 rebounds, 2 assists
Isaiah Hartenstein: 6 rebounds
The individual lines show that Minnesota received more efficient scoring and broader production throughout its rotation.
What This Performance Means for Minnesota
The biggest positive for Minnesota was not merely the size of the win.
It was the way the win was produced.
The Timberwolves showed that they could:
- Create high-quality shots
- Make perimeter shots
- Control the glass
- Move the ball
- Pressure the Thunder defensively
- Get secondary scoring
- Protect a large lead
That combination is exactly what Minnesota needed after losing the first two games.
The victory also restored confidence in players who had struggled earlier in the series.
Randle responded.
Edwards responded.
The defense responded.
The bench contributed.
That collective response made the victory more meaningful than the margin alone suggests.
What This Performance Means for Oklahoma City
The Thunder’s biggest concern was offensive consistency.
A team with a star like Gilgeous-Alexander needs efficient scoring from its primary creator, particularly in a playoff environment where every possession can become difficult.
The Thunder also needed more from its supporting scorers.
Jalen Williams scored 13.
Holmgren scored 10.
Those numbers were not enough to keep pace with a Minnesota offense that produced 143 points.
Oklahoma City also needed to improve its defensive resistance.
Allowing 55 made field goals and 20 made threes created an almost impossible situation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who led the Timberwolves in Game 3?
Anthony Edwards led Minnesota with 30 points, 9 rebounds and 6 assists. He shot 12-for-17 from the field and made five three-pointers.
Who led the Thunder in Game 3?
Shai Gilgeous-Alexander led Oklahoma City with 14 points and 6 assists. He also recorded 2 rebounds.
What was the final score of the game?
Minnesota defeated Oklahoma City 143-101 at Target Center.
How many three-pointers did Minnesota make?
The Timberwolves made 20 of 40 three-point attempts, shooting 50% from beyond the arc.
How many rebounds did each team have?
Minnesota had 50 rebounds, while Oklahoma City finished with 31.
What was the series score after Game 3?
Oklahoma City still led the Western Conference Finals 2-1 after Minnesota won Game 3.
Conclusion
The timberwolves vs oklahoma city thunder match player stats from Game 3 reveal a complete Minnesota performance rather than a victory built around one hot scorer.
Anthony Edwards led the way with 30 points, 9 rebounds and 6 assists while shooting 70.6% from the field. Julius Randle added 24 points on 9-for-15 shooting, while Minnesota received useful contributions from several other players.
The team statistics explain the size of the victory even more clearly. Minnesota shot 57% from the field, made 20 three-pointers, collected 50 rebounds, recorded 30 assists and committed only 10 turnovers. Oklahoma City shot 41%, made 14 threes, collected 31 rebounds and finished with 19 assists.
The most important statistical difference was efficiency. Minnesota consistently converted its opportunities while limiting Oklahoma City’s ability to create efficient offense.
The 143-101 final score therefore represented more than a simple scoring outburst. It reflected Minnesota’s control of shooting, rebounding, ball movement, defensive pressure and overall possession quality.
The Thunder still held a 2-1 series advantage, so the result did not settle the Western Conference Finals. What it did establish was that Minnesota could dramatically change the complexion of the matchup when Edwards, Randle and the supporting cast all performed at a high level.
