Portland Trail Blazers vs Utah Jazz Match Player Stats: An Ultimate Breakdown

Introduction

The Portland Trail Blazers vs Utah Jazz match player stats from the latest NBA encounter showcased a high-scoring battle where both teams delivered strong offense, key contributions from starters, and impactful bench performances. Portland leveraged their balanced scoring and floor spacing to secure a convincing 137–117 win, while Utah fought hard but struggled to keep pace in the second half.

This breakdown highlights individual player performances, team comparisons, and critical stats that shaped the outcome, offering fans clear insights into how the game unfolded.

Match Overview & Final Score

In a game full of energy and momentum swings, Portland outscored Utah 137–117. The Trail Blazers built an early lead through sharp shooting from their starters and timely contributions off the bench, forcing the Jazz to play catch-up. Utah’s key players performed admirably, but Portland’s depth, spacing, and defensive rotations allowed them to maintain control throughout the second half.

Both teams displayed aggressive offense and strategic defense, but Portland’s consistent scoring and ability to capitalize on Utah’s turnovers made the difference in this matchup.

Portland Trail Blazers Key Players

Deni Avdija – SG

Avdija led the Blazers with scoring and playmaking, keeping the team ahead throughout the contest.

• Points: 33
• Rebounds: 8
• Assists: 9
• Steals: 0
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 2
  His aggressive drives and clutch three-pointers opened opportunities for teammates and set the offensive tempo for Portland.

Sharife Cooper – PG

Cooper orchestrated the offense efficiently while contributing key points.

• Points: 29
• Rebounds: 5
• Assists: 7
• Steals: 2
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 1
  His vision and scoring ability helped maintain Portland’s rhythm, especially during critical stretches in the second half.

Trey Camara – SF

Camara contributed both offensively and defensively, adding versatility.

• Points: 15
• Rebounds: 4
• Assists: 3
• Steals: 1
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 3
  His energy and timely scoring provided support for Portland’s starters.

Darius Clingan – PF

Clingan dominated the boards and offered rim protection.

• Points: 12
• Rebounds: 17
• Assists: 2
• Steals: 0
• Blocks: 3
• Turnovers: 4
  His defensive presence limited Utah’s second-chance points and contributed to the Blazers’ control of the paint.

Keon Murray – SG

Murray played a critical role on defense and in transition.

• Points: 10
• Rebounds: 3
• Assists: 2
• Steals: 3
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 0
  His defensive activity created opportunities for fast breaks and disrupted Utah’s offensive flow.

Utah Jazz Key Players

Lauri Markkanen – PF

Markkanen was Utah’s top scorer and inside-outside threat.

• Points: 22
• Rebounds: 4
• Assists: 4
• Steals: 3
• Blocks: 1
• Turnovers: 5
  His shooting efficiency and ability to draw defenders kept the Jazz competitive in the early stages.

Jusuf Nurkic – C

Nurkic anchored the paint, scoring and facilitating for Utah.

• Points: 21
• Rebounds: 12
• Assists: 5
• Steals: 2
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 1
  His double-double performance highlighted his importance on both ends of the floor.

Kawhi George – SF

George contributed with scoring and defensive support.

• Points: 15
• Rebounds: 4
• Assists: 4
• Steals: 1
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 4
  His all-around play helped Utah stay close in key moments.

Svi Mykhailiuk – SG

Mykhailiuk provided perimeter shooting and spacing.

• Points: 8
• Rebounds: 1
• Assists: 0
• Steals: 0
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 0
  His threes helped open lanes for Nurkic and other scorers.

Bryce Sensabaugh – PF

Sensabaugh added energy and versatility for Utah.

• Points: 8
• Rebounds: 5
• Assists: 4
• Steals: 1
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 3
  His hustle and defensive awareness kept Utah competitive during Portland’s runs.

For another detailed NBA breakdown, check out our Lakers vs Brooklyn Nets Match Player Stats, covering key player performances and team comparisons.

Bench Player Contributions – Portland Trail Blazers

Sekou Cissoko – SG

Cissoko provided instant scoring off the bench, hitting critical threes and spacing the floor.

• Points: 14
• Rebounds: 0
• Assists: 2
• Steals: 2
• Blocks: 1
• Turnovers: 0
  His perimeter shooting stretched Utah’s defense, creating driving lanes for the starters.

Cedi Love – SF

Love contributed with scoring and floor facilitation.

• Points: 14
• Rebounds: 3
• Assists: 4
• Steals: 0
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 3
  Love’s ability to move without the ball and knock down open shots added depth to Portland’s offense.

Rui Rupert – SG

Rupert offered a brief spark off the bench.

• Points: 4
• Rebounds: 2
• Assists: 1
• Steals: 0
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 0
  His energy helped sustain momentum during rotation changes.

R. Williams III – PF

Williams III contributed in limited minutes with rebounding and playmaking.

• Points: 2
• Rebounds: 2
• Assists: 2
• Steals: 1
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 0
  His defensive awareness and floor spacing complemented the starters’ efforts.

D. Reath – PF

Reath’s minimal contribution added rest for starters while keeping the ball moving.

• Points: 1
• Rebounds: 1
• Assists: 0
• Steals: 0
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 0

Bench Player Contributions – Utah Jazz

K. Filipowski – PF

Filipowski provided scoring punch and helped stretch the floor.

• Points: 13
• Rebounds: 5
• Assists: 2
• Steals: 1
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 0

I. Collier – SF

Collier combined scoring with playmaking for Utah’s second unit.

• Points: 10
• Rebounds: 3
• Assists: 8
• Steals: 1
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 0

C. Williams – SG

Williams contributed points and spacing for the Jazz.

• Points: 8
• Rebounds: 2
• Assists: 1
• Steals: 1
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 0

T. Hendricks – PF

Hendricks added scoring efficiency in short bursts.

• Points: 7
• Rebounds: 5
• Assists: 1
• Steals: 1
• Blocks: 0
• Turnovers: 1

W. Clayton Jr. – SG

Clayton provided passing and perimeter support.

• Points: 5
• Rebounds: 1
• Assists: 3
• Steals: 0
• Blocks: 1
• Turnovers: 1

Team Stats Comparison

Portland’s shooting efficiency, especially from the free-throw line and overall FG%, created separation, while Utah kept pace in three-point accuracy but lagged in interior scoring and defensive rebounds.

Match Timeline & Momentum Shifts

The game opened with high intensity, as Portland raced to an early lead through Avdija’s scoring and Clingan’s rebounding. Utah responded with efficient shooting from Markkanen and Nurkic, keeping the margin within single digits in the first quarter.

By the second quarter, Portland’s bench contributed key points from Cissoko and Love, extending the lead while Utah struggled to contain the perimeter attack. Momentum firmly shifted when Portland went on a mid-quarter run, forcing Jazz turnovers that led to fast-break points.

In the second half, Portland maintained control, with Avdija and Sharpe executing pick-and-rolls effectively. Utah attempted to counter with inside play from Nurkic and spacing from George and Mykhailiuk, but Portland’s defensive rotations and rebounding presence limited second-chance opportunities.

Portland’s consistent offensive efficiency and ability to capitalize on Jazz turnovers were decisive in sustaining a lead throughout the game.

Offensive & Defensive Performance Breakdown

Portland Trail Blazers – Offense:

Portland’s offense thrived on ball movement and high-volume scoring from their starters. Deni Avdija and Shaedon Sharpe led the charge with efficient shooting, while Clingan and Murray facilitated inside-out plays. The team emphasized quick decision-making, spacing the floor, and attacking the rim whenever Utah’s defense collapsed. Their bench, particularly Cissoko and Love, added critical points that prevented Utah from mounting a comeback.

Portland Trail Blazers – Defense:

Defensively, Portland focused on limiting second-chance points and contesting three-point shots. Clingan’s presence on the boards and smart rotations by Avdija and Sharpe forced Utah into mid-range jumpers instead of easy baskets inside. The team’s defensive discipline minimized open shots for Utah’s perimeter shooters, which was key to maintaining their lead in the second half.

Utah Jazz – Offense:

Utah’s offense relied heavily on interior scoring from J. Nurkic and Lauri Markkanen. Deni Avdija provided perimeter scoring and playmaking, keeping Portland’s defense honest. Bench players like Collier and Filipowski attempted to provide supplemental scoring, but Portland’s defensive rotations limited their effectiveness late in the game.

Utah Jazz – Defense:

Utah’s defensive scheme focused on contesting drives and three-point attempts from Portland’s sharpshooters. While effective at times, the Jazz struggled with rebounding and missed opportunities to convert turnovers into points. Portland’s aggressive ball movement and spacing created mismatches that Utah could not consistently counter.

Coaching & Tactical Decisions

Portland Trail Blazers:

• Head Coach emphasized balanced minutes between starters and bench players, keeping the team fresh and consistent.
• Off-ball movement and pick-and-roll execution allowed Avdija and Sharpe to find high-percentage shots.
• Defensive rotations prioritized protecting the paint, forcing Utah into contested mid-range shots.

Utah Jazz:

• Coach focused on inside scoring through Nurkic and Markkanen while spacing the floor with shooters like George and Mykhailiuk.
• Attempted to slow Portland’s pace, but rotations were sometimes late, giving Trail Blazers’ perimeter shooters open opportunities.
• Bench rotations tried to offset Portland’s scoring runs but were unable to consistently capitalize.

Key Moments That Changed the Game

1. Mid-Second Quarter Run – Portland Trail Blazers:
   Cissoko and Love combined for consecutive three-pointers, forcing Utah to call a timeout as Portland extended the lead. This swing established momentum and made it difficult for Utah to recover.
2. Clutch Rebounding by D. Clingan:
   Several key defensive rebounds in the third quarter prevented Utah from generating second-chance points, preserving Portland’s narrow lead.

1. Late Third Quarter Scoring Stretch – Deni Avdija:
   Avdija scored consecutive baskets off pick-and-roll plays, putting Portland ahead by double digits and demoralizing Utah’s attempts to catch up.
2. Free-Throw Execution:
   Portland’s high efficiency from the line (20/21) allowed them to capitalize on fouls and maintain separation during critical late-game possessions. Utah struggled to match this level of execution, leaving points on the floor.

What This Match Tells Us About Both Teams

• Portland Trail Blazers:
  Demonstrated strong depth, disciplined defense, and high-efficiency scoring. The team’s ability to execute offensive sets and maintain composure under pressure highlights their potential for sustained performance against competitive opponents.
• Utah Jazz:
  Showed individual scoring talent and perimeter shooting but were limited by inconsistent bench contributions and defensive lapses. Closing efficiency and defensive rotations remain areas for improvement.

Individual Player Impact Beyond the Box Score

Deni Avdija (Trail Blazers)
Avdija’s influence went beyond his scoring line. His off-ball movement, quick decision-making, and defensive positioning helped Portland maintain offensive flow and control transition opportunities.

Shaedon Sharpe (Trail Blazers)
Sharpe’s scoring efficiency and confident shot selection stretched Utah’s defense. His athletic drives consistently forced defensive rotations, opening space for teammates.

Donovan Clingan (Trail Blazers)
Clingan’s presence was felt most on the defensive end. His rebounding control and rim protection limited Utah’s second-chance points and discouraged paint attacks.

Lauri Markkanen (Jazz)
Markkanen carried Utah’s scoring responsibility and provided consistent perimeter pressure. However, increased defensive attention reduced his efficiency in key stretches.

Jusuf Nurkic (Jazz)
Nurkic delivered physical interior play and strong rebounding. Despite his effort, Portland’s size and help defense restricted his impact during critical possessions.

Bench Contribution & Rotation Summary

Portland’s bench provided timely scoring and defensive energy, allowing the starters to maintain rhythm. Utah’s second unit showed effort but lacked consistent scoring and defensive stops when momentum shifted.

Key Takeaways for Future Matchups

• Portland’s balanced offense and disciplined defense stood out
• Utah must improve late-game execution and defensive consistency
• Rebounding control and bench efficiency played a decisive role

FAQs – Portland Trail Blazers vs Utah Jazz Match Player Stats

Final Thoughts

The Portland Trail Blazers vs Utah Jazz match player stats highlight a composed and efficient team performance by Portland. Strong rebounding, smart shot selection, and bench contributions helped them close the game effectively.

Utah showed competitiveness and individual effort, but execution gaps in key moments proved costly. Overall, this matchup demonstrated how discipline and depth can decide outcomes in closely contested NBA games.