Utah Jazz vs Boston Celtics Match Player Stats

The utah jazz vs boston celtics match player stats from this matchup tell a much more interesting story than the final score alone. Utah defeated Boston 105-103 in a tightly contested game at TD Garden, overcoming a 10-point halftime deficit and turning a slow offensive start into a 38-point third quarter. Keyonte George led Utah with 31 points, while Jaylen Brown produced 36 points for Boston. Jusuf Nurkic then delivered the decisive putback with 0.6 seconds remaining. The official NBA game record lists the matchup as November 3, 2025 in Boston, although some databases and local date references display it as November 4. (NBA.com)

The result was not simply about one final possession. Utah’s 55-36 rebounding advantage, Boston’s 11-of-51 shooting from three-point range, the Jazz’s third-quarter explosion, and the contrasting turnover numbers all shaped the game. Those details provide the real value behind the box score.

Utah Jazz vs Boston Celtics Match Player Stats

The final score was:

Team	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4	Final
Utah Jazz	21	15	38	31	105
Boston Celtics	25	21	26	31	103

Utah entered the second half trailing 46-36. Instead of allowing Boston’s defense to control the game, the Jazz changed the rhythm after halftime and scored 38 points in the third quarter.

That 38-point period was the central statistical turning point.

Boston scored 26 in the same quarter, meaning Utah erased 12 points of the deficit in only 12 minutes. The Jazz then matched Boston’s 31 points in the fourth quarter to complete the comeback.

The NBA’s official game record confirms the 105-103 result and provides the player-level box score and game charts for the contest. (NBA.com)

Game Overview and Context

This game was played at TD Garden in Boston, with an attendance of 19,156.

The supplied game data records Utah at 3-4 overall and 1-3 on the road after the win. Boston moved to 3-5 overall and 1-3 at home.

Those early-season records are important because they provide context without defining the teams’ entire seasons. A single November game is a snapshot rather than a complete measure of team quality.

What makes this matchup particularly useful for statistical analysis is how differently the two teams generated their offense.

Utah:

• Shot 45 percent from the field.
• Made 9 of 31 three-point attempts.
• Made 20 of 25 free throws.
• Collected 55 rebounds.
• Recorded 23 assists.
• Turned the ball over 18 times.
• Recorded 4 steals.
• Had 2 blocks.

Boston:

• Shot 42 percent from the field.
• Made 11 of 51 three-point attempts.
• Made 18 of 22 free throws.
• Collected 36 rebounds.
• Recorded 21 assists.
• Turned the ball over only 10 times.
• Recorded 12 steals.
• Had 4 blocks.

This creates an interesting statistical contrast.

Boston protected the ball much better and created more defensive events through steals and blocks. Utah, however, dominated the glass and finished with a better overall field-goal percentage.

That balance explains why the final score remained extremely close.

Keyonte George’s 31-Point Performance

Keyonte George was the leading scorer for Utah, finishing with 31 points.

His shooting line was particularly important:

• 9-of-16 from the field
• 2-of-5 from three
• 11-of-13 from the free-throw line
• 5 rebounds
• 4 assists
• 1 steal
• 1 turnover

George’s 31 points were not generated simply through high-volume shooting. He converted 56.3 percent of his field-goal attempts and 84.6 percent of his free throws.

That efficiency matters.

When a player scores 31 points while attempting only 16 field goals, the offensive contribution becomes much more significant than a basic points total suggests. George also added four assists and five rebounds, giving Utah additional value beyond scoring.

The third quarter was particularly important for George. NBA’s official highlight description notes that he scored 16 of his 31 points during that quarter. (YouTube)

That performance fits directly with the game’s overall momentum shift.

Utah scored 38 points during the third quarter, and George was one of the primary reasons the Jazz transformed the game from a double-digit deficit into a competitive fourth quarter.

Jusuf Nurkic’s Double-Double and Game-Winning Play

Jusuf Nurkic finished with 11 points and 11 rebounds, giving Utah a double-double.

He also recorded four assists.

His statistical contribution was therefore spread across multiple categories:

Category	Nurkic
Points	11
Rebounds	11
Assists	4
Field Goals	5-12
Three-Pointers	0-2
Free Throws	1-2
Blocks	1
Turnovers	3

But his biggest contribution came at the end.

With the score tied at 103-103, Nurkic converted the decisive putback with 0.6 seconds left. That basket produced the final two points of the game and gave Utah its 105-103 victory. (Reuters)

This is a good example of why player statistics should not be evaluated only through scoring.

Nurkic scored 11 points, far fewer than George or Brown, but his rebounding, interior presence, passing, and final offensive rebound opportunity all mattered.

His 11 rebounds also contributed to Utah’s 19-rebound advantage over Boston.

Lauri Markkanen’s Supporting Production

Lauri Markkanen added 20 points and nine rebounds for Utah.

His shooting line was:

• 7-of-17 from the field
• 2-of-6 from three
• 4-of-4 from the free-throw line
• 9 rebounds
• 2 assists

Markkanen was especially valuable because Boston could not focus exclusively on George.

A 20-point performance alongside a 31-point game from George gave Utah two dependable scoring options. His nine rebounds also helped Utah maintain its advantage on the boards.

The NBA’s official game coverage lists Markkanen with 20 points and nine rebounds, while George finished with 31 points, five rebounds and four assists. (YouTube)

Kyle Filipowski’s Efficient Contribution

Kyle Filipowski provided another useful scoring contribution for Utah.

He finished with:

• 13 points
• 8 rebounds
• 4-of-7 field goals
• 2-of-3 three-pointers
• 3-of-5 free throws
• 1 block

His 13 points were valuable because they came efficiently.

Filipowski did not need a large number of shots to affect the game. His eight rebounds also strengthened Utah’s frontcourt presence.

When combined with Nurkic’s 11 rebounds and Markkanen’s nine, Utah had three important contributors helping create the 55-rebound team total.

Jaylen Brown’s 36-Point Performance

Jaylen Brown was Boston’s leading scorer and the game’s highest individual scorer.

He finished with 36 points.

His performance included:

• 13-of-28 field goals
• 0-of-9 three-pointers
• 10-of-11 free throws
• 2 rebounds
• 4 assists

Brown’s 36 points were a major reason Boston remained within reach after Utah’s third-quarter comeback.

However, his three-point shooting was a major statistical weakness for Boston.

Brown attempted nine three-pointers and missed all nine.

That matters because Boston attempted 51 three-pointers as a team and made only 11. The Celtics therefore shot 21.6 percent from beyond the arc.

The Boston Celtics’ own postgame report highlighted Brown’s 36 points and noted that he scored 27 in the second half. It also described the game as one in which Boston controlled stretches of the contest before Utah’s third-quarter response. (NBA.com)

Boston’s Three-Point Shooting Was a Major Factor

One of the clearest statistical differences in the game was three-point efficiency.

Boston:

11-of-51, 21.6 percent

Utah:

9-of-31, 29.0 percent

Utah actually made only two fewer three-pointers, despite attempting 20 fewer shots from beyond the arc.

This is an important distinction.

Boston’s offensive strategy generated a very high volume of three-point attempts, but the conversion rate was poor enough to limit the value of that volume.

The Celtics’ 51 attempts represented more than half of their 89 total field-goal attempts.

That means Boston relied heavily on perimeter shooting.

Utah’s approach was more balanced. The Jazz attempted 84 field goals and 31 of them came from three-point range. They also attempted 25 free throws.

The result was a stronger overall field-goal percentage and a more favorable rebounding profile.

Rebounding Created Utah’s Statistical Advantage

The rebounding numbers may be the single clearest explanation for Utah’s ability to win despite committing eight more turnovers.

Utah grabbed 55 rebounds.

Boston grabbed 36.

That is a 19-rebound difference.

A team can survive some offensive mistakes when it consistently wins extra possessions through rebounding.

Utah’s advantage was not limited to one player.

Nurkic recorded 11 rebounds.

Markkanen had nine.

Filipowski collected eight.

Svi Mykhailiuk added six.

George contributed five.

That distribution shows that Utah’s rebounding advantage came from team-wide participation rather than one player dominating the category.

Boston’s leading rebounder was Neemias Queta with eight.

The Celtics therefore did not have an individual rebounding performance capable of matching Utah’s collective production.

Turnovers Tell a Different Story

Boston had a clear advantage in ball security.

Utah committed 18 turnovers.

Boston committed only 10.

That eight-turnover difference gave Boston additional opportunities and was one reason the Celtics remained competitive despite losing the rebounding battle.

Boston also recorded 12 steals compared with four for Utah.

This tells us that the Celtics were active defensively and successfully created turnovers.

The problem was converting that defensive activity into enough efficient offense.

A useful way to understand the game is therefore to separate possession creation from possession quality.

Boston:

• Better turnover margin
• More steals
• More blocks
• More three-point attempts

Utah:

• More rebounds
• Better overall field-goal percentage
• More free-throw attempts
• Better three-point percentage
• More points in the decisive third quarter

Neither side dominated every statistical category.

That is precisely why the final score was only two points apart.

Free-Throw Shooting and Pressure at the Rim

Both teams shot well from the free-throw line.

Utah converted 20 of 25 attempts for 80 percent.

Boston converted 18 of 22 for 81.8 percent.

The difference was not efficiency. It was opportunity.

Utah attempted three more free throws.

That small advantage mattered in a game decided by two points.

George was particularly effective at the line, making 11 of 13 attempts.

Markkanen made all four of his free throws.

Those possessions helped Utah generate efficient points even when its three-point shooting was below 30 percent.

Third Quarter: The Turning Point

The third quarter deserves its own analysis because the entire game changed during those 12 minutes.

Utah scored 38.

Boston scored 26.

The Jazz therefore won the quarter by 12 points.

The first half had belonged to Boston.

Boston entered halftime ahead 46-36.

Utah then produced a dramatic offensive response.

George scored 16 points in the third quarter, according to NBA’s official game highlights. (YouTube)

That scoring burst gave Utah the offensive momentum it needed.

The third quarter also demonstrates why halftime scorelines can be misleading.

Boston had held Utah to only 36 points across the first two quarters. Utah then nearly matched that total in one quarter.

For analysts examining the utah jazz vs boston celtics match player stats, the quarter-by-quarter breakdown is therefore just as important as the final box score.

Fourth Quarter: Both Teams Stayed Close

The fourth quarter ended 31-31.

That detail is significant because Utah did not win the game by continuing to expand its lead.

Instead, the Jazz survived a competitive final period.

Boston kept attacking, and Brown continued producing offensively.

The game eventually reached a 103-103 tie.

From there, Utah’s final possession produced the deciding basket.

This was a game where the third quarter created the comeback, but the fourth quarter determined whether that comeback became a victory.

The Final Possession

The closing sequence has become one of the most discussed parts of the matchup.

With the game tied late, Utah received a crucial opportunity after a loose-ball sequence involving Brown and George.

ESPN reported that Brown believed a foul should have been called after George fell while defending him. The officiating crew’s explanation was that George slipped before contact and that the ball became loose as a result. (ESPN)

The important point for a statistical analysis is to separate the documented sequence from the opinions surrounding it.

The official outcome was clear.

Utah regained possession, eventually got the ball into the frontcourt, and Nurkic converted the decisive putback with 0.6 seconds remaining.

Boston then had no successful final response.

That produced the 105-103 final.

Utah’s Offensive Profile

Utah’s 105 points came from a relatively balanced statistical profile.

The Jazz shot 38-of-84 from the field.

That is 45.2 percent.

They made 9-of-31 from three.

They also made 20-of-25 free throws.

The combination suggests three important elements:

1. Utah converted its overall field-goal opportunities better.
2. Utah generated meaningful scoring at the free-throw line.
3. Utah avoided depending entirely on three-point shooting.

George was the primary perimeter scorer, Markkanen supplied frontcourt scoring, and Nurkic helped create second-chance opportunities.

This diversity made Utah harder to shut down once the offense began operating efficiently in the second half.

Boston’s Offensive Profile

Boston scored 103 points despite shooting only 42 percent from the field and 22 percent from three.

The Celtics made 37 of 89 field-goal attempts.

They attempted 51 three-pointers.

That means Boston took 60 percent of its field-goal attempts from three-point range.

When a team shoots 21.6 percent from that distance, the strategy becomes vulnerable even when the team creates plenty of attempts.

Brown’s 36 points helped offset some of the inefficiency.

Pritchard added 18.

Anfernee Simons scored 15.

Derrick White scored 10 and led Boston with six assists.

But the overall shooting numbers left very little margin for error.

Derrick White’s All-Around Contribution

Derrick White did not lead Boston in scoring, but he supplied one of the Celtics’ most useful all-around performances.

He recorded:

• 10 points
• 6 assists
• 5 rebounds
• 3 steals

His six assists were the highest total for Boston.

His three steals also reflected Boston’s defensive activity.

White’s contribution illustrates why the leading scorer is not always the player responsible for the largest number of different statistical functions.

Brown carried the scoring load.

White helped connect the offense while contributing on the glass and creating defensive pressure.

Payton Pritchard’s Scoring Support

Payton Pritchard finished with 18 points and provided Boston with another important scoring option.

He also recorded five rebounds and three assists.

His four made three-pointers were particularly useful given Boston’s overall perimeter struggles.

Without Pritchard’s shooting, Boston’s 103-point total would have been even harder to reach.

His production also helped prevent Utah from simply loading the defense toward Brown.

Neemias Queta’s Rebounding Contribution

Neemias Queta led Boston in rebounds with eight.

That was a respectable individual total, but it was not enough to close the team-wide rebounding gap.

Utah had 55 rebounds compared with Boston’s 36.

The difference was 19.

For a game decided by two points, that is an enormous statistical margin.

The Celtics’ defensive activity was strong in several areas, but Utah’s ability to repeatedly secure missed shots gave the Jazz extra control over possession.

Team Statistical Comparison

Statistic	Utah Jazz	Boston Celtics
Points	105	103
Field Goals	38-84	37-89
Field-Goal %	45%	42%
Three-Pointers	9-31	11-51
Three-Point %	29%	22%
Free Throws	20-25	18-22
Free-Throw %	80%	82%
Rebounds	55	36
Assists	23	21
Turnovers	18	10
Steals	4	12
Blocks	2	4

This table makes the game’s complexity easy to see.

Boston won the turnover battle by eight.

Boston also had eight more steals and two more blocks.

Utah, however, won the rebounding battle by 19 and shot better from the field and from three.

The Jazz also made more free throws.

The final score reflects those competing advantages.

What the Numbers Say About Possession Control

There is a useful distinction between possession security and possession control.

Boston was better at protecting possessions.

Ten turnovers is an excellent number compared with Utah’s 18.

But Utah controlled more of the missed-shot opportunities.

A 55-36 rebounding advantage means Utah repeatedly recovered possessions after missed shots.

This helps explain how the Jazz could commit significantly more turnovers and still win.

In practical basketball analysis, this is one of the most important lessons from the matchup.

A team does not need to win every statistical category.

It needs enough advantages in high-value areas to compensate for weaknesses elsewhere.

Utah’s rebounding and shooting efficiency were large enough to offset Boston’s turnover and defensive-event advantages.

Why Keyonte George Was So Important

George’s importance went beyond his 31 points.

He created offense.

He made 9 of 16 field goals.

He made 11 of 13 free throws.

He collected five rebounds.

He delivered four assists.

He committed only one turnover.

That final number is particularly notable considering how much offensive responsibility he carried.

A high-usage scorer who also protects the ball creates a valuable combination.

His third-quarter scoring surge then directly matched the period when Utah changed the game’s direction.

Why Jaylen Brown’s 36 Points Were Not Enough

Brown had the highest individual scoring total in the game.

His 36 points were significant, and Boston relied heavily on him during the comeback attempts.

But scoring totals must be considered alongside shooting efficiency.

Brown shot 13-of-28 from the field and 0-of-9 from three.

His free-throw shooting was excellent at 10-of-11, but the missed three-point attempts reduced the overall efficiency of his scoring.

This does not diminish the value of his 36 points.

It simply demonstrates why points alone cannot explain a close NBA game.

Boston needed more efficient production around Brown to turn its defensive advantages into a victory.

Biggest Statistical Takeaways

Several conclusions stand out from the numbers.

1. Utah’s third quarter changed everything

The Jazz scored 38 points in the third quarter after scoring only 36 in the first half.

2. Rebounding was a major Utah advantage

Utah collected 55 rebounds compared with Boston’s 36.

3. Boston’s perimeter volume did not translate into efficiency

The Celtics attempted 51 threes and made only 11.

4. George provided efficient high-volume scoring

His 31 points came on 16 field-goal attempts.

5. Brown carried Boston’s scoring load

He finished with 36 points and remained central to Boston’s offensive production.

6. Turnovers kept Boston in the game

Boston committed only 10 turnovers compared with Utah’s 18.

7. Nurkic decided the outcome

His late putback with 0.6 seconds remaining produced the final two points.

Utah Jazz vs Boston Celtics Match Player Stats: What Readers Should Look At

If you are researching utah jazz vs boston celtics match player stats, the most useful approach is to avoid looking only at points.

Start with these categories:

• Points for primary scoring responsibility
• Field-goal percentage for shooting efficiency
• Three-point percentage for perimeter effectiveness
• Free throws for scoring pressure and efficiency
• Rebounds for possession control
• Assists for offensive creation
• Turnovers for possession security
• Steals and blocks for defensive disruption
• Plus/minus for lineup impact, with appropriate context

For this particular matchup, those categories tell a much fuller story.

George led Utah in scoring.

Nurkic led Utah in rebounding and provided the winning play.

Brown led all scorers.

White led Boston in assists.

But the team-level numbers explain why Utah won.

How to Read the Box Score Without Missing the Story

A good box-score analysis should move from individual numbers to team relationships.

For example, George scored 31 points.

That is useful.

But then ask how efficiently he scored.

He shot 9-of-16 from the field.

Then ask what happened around him.

Markkanen scored 20.

Nurkic scored 11 and grabbed 11 rebounds.

Filipowski added 13.

The next question becomes whether Utah created enough possessions.

The answer is clear from the rebounding numbers.

Then compare that with Boston.

Brown scored 36.

Pritchard added 18.

Simons scored 15.

White scored 10.

But Boston’s three-point shooting was inefficient, while Utah had a major rebounding advantage.

This layered approach produces a much stronger understanding of the game than simply copying a box score.

Historical Matchup Context

This result gave Utah a 1-0 lead in the season series based on the supplied game record.

The next listed matchup was Boston at Utah on December 31, 2025.

That later matchup is useful context for readers researching the teams’ 2025-26 meetings, but it should not be confused with the statistics from this game.

The focus here remains the 105-103 contest at TD Garden.

Frequently Asked Questions

Who led the Utah Jazz in scoring against the Boston Celtics?

Keyonte George led Utah with 31 points. He also recorded five rebounds and four assists.

Who led the Boston Celtics in scoring?

Jaylen Brown led all scorers with 36 points. He also recorded four assists and two rebounds.

What was the final score between Utah and Boston?

The Utah Jazz defeated the Boston Celtics 105-103.

Who hit the game-winning basket?

Jusuf Nurkic scored the decisive putback with 0.6 seconds remaining, giving Utah a 105-103 victory. (Reuters)

Which team had more rebounds?

Utah had 55 rebounds, while Boston had 36.

How did Boston shoot from three-point range?

Boston made 11 of 51 three-point attempts, which was approximately 22 percent.

Conclusion

The utah jazz vs boston celtics match player stats reveal a game decided by several contrasting strengths rather than one simple advantage.

Keyonte George’s 31 points gave Utah its leading offensive force. Lauri Markkanen added 20 points and nine rebounds, while Jusuf Nurkic produced an 11-point, 11-rebound double-double and scored the decisive putback.

Boston received 36 points from Jaylen Brown, 18 from Payton Pritchard and 15 from Anfernee Simons. Derrick White contributed six assists and three steals.

The team statistics explain the result even more clearly.

Utah shot 45 percent from the field compared with Boston’s 42 percent. The Jazz also outrebounded the Celtics 55-36 and made 20 free throws. Boston protected the ball better, committing only 10 turnovers compared with Utah’s 18, and created 12 steals.

The defining contrast was therefore efficiency and rebounding versus possession security and defensive disruption.

Utah’s 38-point third quarter transformed a 10-point halftime deficit into a game that went down to the final possession. Boston responded in the fourth, but Nurkic’s late putback completed the comeback.

For anyone studying utah jazz vs boston celtics match player stats, the key lesson is that individual scoring numbers become much more meaningful when they are connected to shooting efficiency, rebounding, turnovers, and quarter-by-quarter momentum.