Phoenix Suns vs 76ers Match Player Stats
The phoenix suns vs 76ers match player stats from January 20, 2026, tell the story of a competitive NBA game in which the Phoenix Suns defeated the Philadelphia 76ers 116-110 at Xfinity Mobile Arena in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Devin Booker led Phoenix with 27 points, while VJ Edgecombe scored a team-high 25 points for Philadelphia. The contest featured strong individual performances, a significant difference in three-point shooting, and an important late-game advantage for the Suns. Although the 76ers collected more rebounds and steals, Phoenix converted its opportunities from the free-throw line and made five more three-pointers to secure the six-point victory.
The game provides a useful example of why basketball results cannot be explained by one statistic alone. Philadelphia created extra opportunities through rebounding and defensive pressure, but Phoenix benefited from outside shooting and perfect free-throw accuracy. Examining the final score, individual player performances, team statistics, and quarter-by-quarter scoring helps explain how the Suns won and where the 76ers fell short.
Phoenix Suns vs 76ers Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The matchup brought together two teams with different strengths. Phoenix relied on Devin Booker’s scoring, contributions from its supporting players, and perimeter shooting. Philadelphia received productive performances from VJ Edgecombe, Kelly Oubre Jr., and Tyrese Maxey, while Andre Drummond and Adem Bona contributed on the glass.
Here are the essential details of the game.
| Game Detail | Information |
| Matchup | Phoenix Suns vs. Philadelphia 76ers |
| Game date | January 20, 2026 |
| Venue | Xfinity Mobile Arena |
| Location | Philadelphia, Pennsylvania |
| Final score | Suns 116, 76ers 110 |
| Winning team | Phoenix Suns |
| Losing team | Philadelphia 76ers |
| Attendance | 17,839 |
| Suns’ displayed record | 27-17 overall, 13-12 away |
| 76ers’ displayed record | 23-19 overall, 11-12 home |
| Suns’ leading scorer | Devin Booker, 27 points |
| 76ers’ leading scorer | VJ Edgecombe, 25 points |
| Margin of victory | 6 points |
The supplied ESPN game information identifies the contest as a completed regular-season matchup. Some listings display January 21 because of local game information and date presentation differences. The game is identified by ESPN game ID 401810468, which provides a consistent reference for the box score.
The central takeaway is that Phoenix won without dominating every category. Philadelphia finished with more rebounds, steals, and blocks. Phoenix, however, made more three-pointers and converted every free throw it attempted. Those differences were especially meaningful in a game decided by six points.
Quarter-by-Quarter Scoring Breakdown
The final score does not fully explain how the game changed over four quarters. Phoenix and Philadelphia traded the lead early, but the third quarter became the decisive stretch. The Suns scored 40 points in that period, creating a cushion that Philadelphia could not erase despite a stronger fourth-quarter effort.
| Quarter | Phoenix Suns | Philadelphia 76ers | Quarter Winner |
| First | 27 | 30 | 76ers |
| Second | 30 | 23 | Suns |
| Third | 40 | 31 | Suns |
| Fourth | 19 | 26 | 76ers |
| Final | 116 | 110 | Suns |
First Quarter: Philadelphia Starts Strong
Philadelphia scored 30 points in the opening quarter, three more than Phoenix. Kelly Oubre Jr. helped establish an offensive rhythm, while VJ Edgecombe and Tyrese Maxey gave the home team additional scoring options.
Phoenix remained within reach by producing 27 points of its own. The early deficit was small enough that the Suns did not need a major tactical overhaul. Instead, they needed to improve their shot conversion and limit Philadelphia’s ability to dictate the pace.
The opening period also demonstrated why a strong home start does not guarantee a victory. Philadelphia won the quarter, but the three-point advantage proved temporary.
Second Quarter: Phoenix Regains Control
The Suns outscored Philadelphia 30-23 in the second quarter. That seven-point advantage erased the deficit and gave Phoenix a 57-53 halftime lead.
The improvement reflected a more productive offensive stretch. Phoenix had several players capable of contributing beyond Booker, which made it harder for Philadelphia to concentrate its defensive attention on one scorer.
The halftime score was important for another reason. Phoenix entered the break four points ahead despite having committed numerous turnovers over the course of the game. Its shooting efficiency and ability to score from the perimeter helped offset those mistakes.
Third Quarter: The Decisive 40-Point Surge
The third quarter was the defining period of the contest. Phoenix scored 40 points against Philadelphia’s 31, extending its halftime lead from four points to 13.
Philadelphia actually opened the second half with a 13-2 run, moving ahead 66-59. That sequence showed that the 76ers still had the ability to disrupt Phoenix’s rhythm and put pressure on the visitors.
However, the Suns responded, tied the game at 68, and then built a substantial advantage. Their scoring was distributed across several contributors rather than relying entirely on Booker.
By the end of the third quarter, Phoenix led 97-84. This was the biggest turning point in the game because it forced Philadelphia to spend the final period chasing the score instead of simply playing its normal offensive rhythm.
Fourth Quarter: Philadelphia Fights Back
Philadelphia won the fourth quarter 26-19, reducing the margin but not completing the comeback.
Phoenix had built a lead as large as 17 points, reaching 103-86 with 9:37 remaining after a technical foul was called following Philadelphia coach Nick Nurse’s objection to a call. The Suns’ advantage gave them room to absorb Philadelphia’s late scoring push.
The 76ers continued to compete, but the deficit created by the third-quarter surge was too large to overcome.
Key lesson: The Suns did not need to win every quarter. They needed to win the middle two periods decisively enough to survive Philadelphia’s late response.
Phoenix Suns Player Stats: Complete Performance Analysis
The Phoenix roster produced a balanced offensive performance. Booker led the team in scoring, but Grayson Allen, Jordan Goodwin, Collin Gillespie, Oso Ighodaro, and Jalen Green all made meaningful contributions.
The following figures are drawn from the supplied game data. Shooting figures are presented as made shots and attempts, while playing time is rounded to the nearest minute for readability.
Phoenix Suns Box Score
| Player | MIN | PTS | REB | AST | FG | 3PT | FT |
| Devin Booker | 34 | 27 | 3 | 4 | 9-23 | 2-5 | 7-7 |
| Royce O’Neale | 24 | 9 | 3 | 2 | 3-7 | 3-7 | 0-0 |
| Dillon Brooks | 30 | 6 | 5 | 1 | 2-13 | 0-3 | 2-2 |
| Mark Williams | 18 | 4 | 9 | 0 | 2-3 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| Collin Gillespie | 28 | 12 | 4 | 4 | 3-6 | 3-6 | 3-3 |
| Oso Ighodaro | 29 | 12 | 5 | 3 | 5-7 | 0-0 | 2-2 |
| Ryan Dunn | 9 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1-2 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| Grayson Allen | 29 | 16 | 5 | 6 | 5-11 | 4-9 | 2-2 |
| Jordan Goodwin | 20 | 16 | 5 | 2 | 6-9 | 2-4 | 2-2 |
| Jalen Green | 20 | 12 | 2 | 3 | 4-11 | 2-4 | 2-2 |
MIN = minutes, PTS = points, REB = rebounds, AST = assists, FG = field goals, 3PT = three-pointers, and FT = free throws.
Devin Booker: Phoenix’s Leading Scorer
Booker finished with 27 points, three rebounds, and four assists in approximately 34 minutes. He made nine of his 23 field-goal attempts and converted all seven free throws.
His scoring total was the highest of any player in the game. More importantly, he provided Phoenix with a dependable offensive option during a contest in which the team needed to answer Philadelphia’s scoring runs.
Booker’s 7-for-7 free-throw performance deserves particular attention. Free throws allow an offensive player to add points without requiring a successful field-goal attempt. In a six-point game, perfect conversion from the line helped Phoenix preserve the value of its scoring opportunities.
His 9-for-23 field-goal shooting also adds useful context. Booker did not have an exceptionally efficient shooting night by field-goal percentage alone. He made up for some of that limitation through free throws and by remaining a central part of the offense.
The lesson is that scoring volume and shooting efficiency are different measures. A player can lead a team in points without having the highest shooting percentage, especially when that player handles a large share of the team’s offensive responsibility.
Grayson Allen: Shooting and Playmaking Combined
Allen recorded 16 points, five rebounds, and six assists. He shot 5-for-11 from the field, including 4-for-9 from three-point range, and made both of his free throws.
His six assists were the highest total among Phoenix players in the supplied box score. That makes his performance more significant than a scoring-only summary might suggest.
Allen gave Phoenix two forms of offensive value:
- He converted four three-pointers, helping the team stretch Philadelphia’s defense.
- He created scoring opportunities for teammates through six assists.
A perimeter shooter can influence a defense even when he does not have the ball. Opponents must account for the possibility of a three-point attempt, which can create additional space for drives, passes, and interior opportunities.
Allen’s combination of shooting and passing made him one of Phoenix’s most productive supporting players.
Jordan Goodwin: Efficient Bench Scoring
Goodwin finished with 16 points, five rebounds, and two assists in about 20 minutes. He made six of nine field-goal attempts, two of four three-pointers, and both free throws.
His 66.7% field-goal percentage was especially notable. Unlike a player who needs a high number of attempts to accumulate points, Goodwin converted a large share of his opportunities.
His contribution was important because Phoenix did not need Booker to generate every successful possession. Goodwin’s scoring helped spread the offensive burden and gave the Suns another player capable of taking advantage of defensive gaps.
Goodwin also grabbed five rebounds, adding value beyond his shooting. That combination of efficient scoring and rebounding is useful when evaluating bench players because it shows how a reserve can affect more than one area of the game.
Collin Gillespie: Perimeter Accuracy and Ball Movement
Gillespie recorded 12 points, four rebounds, and four assists. He shot 3-for-6 from the field and made all three of his three-point attempts and all three free throws.
His perfect three-point shooting was one of the most efficient performances among Phoenix’s main contributors. Although three attempts represent a relatively small sample, converting all three helped the Suns maximize the value of his minutes.
Gillespie also supplied four assists. This meant that he contributed both as a shooter and as a facilitator, giving Phoenix another option to organize its offense when Booker was not directly creating the scoring opportunity.
His performance illustrates an important statistical distinction: a player can contribute substantially without taking a large number of shots. Efficient shooting, passing, and sound decision-making can make limited offensive involvement highly productive.
Oso Ighodaro: Finishing Around the Basket
Ighodaro finished with 12 points, five rebounds, and three assists in approximately 29 minutes. He made five of seven field-goal attempts and converted both free throws.
His 71.4% field-goal percentage was the highest among Phoenix’s players with at least five attempts in the supplied table. His performance offered a contrast to Booker’s more difficult shot-making workload.
Ighodaro’s value came from converting a high proportion of his opportunities while remaining involved in the team’s broader offense. His three assists also indicate that his contribution was not limited to finishing plays.
A frontcourt player who can score efficiently and pass to teammates can help maintain offensive flow, particularly when perimeter defenders focus on a primary scorer.
Jalen Green: A Valuable Return to the Rotation
Green scored 12 points in approximately 20 minutes, shooting 4-for-11 from the field and 2-for-4 from three-point range. He added three assists and two rebounds.
The game recap reported that Green was returning to the Suns’ lineup after a right hamstring injury. His 12 points therefore mattered in two ways: they added to the team’s immediate scoring output, and they showed the offensive contribution he could provide while returning to action.
His shooting was mixed, but the two made three-pointers helped Phoenix maintain its perimeter threat. Three assists also demonstrated his ability to contribute when his own shot was not the only option.
The available statistics do not establish how his health or performance developed over subsequent games, so this single appearance should not be treated as proof of a longer-term trend.
Royce O’Neale, Dillon Brooks, and Mark Williams
The other Phoenix starters made different contributions.
Royce O’Neale scored nine points, shooting 3-for-7 from the field and from three-point range. His three made three-pointers were useful for a team that ultimately made 16 from beyond the arc.
Dillon Brooks scored six points, collected five rebounds, and made both free throws. His field-goal shooting was difficult, as he converted only two of 13 attempts. The low scoring total does not erase his rebounding contribution, but his shooting line shows an area where Phoenix could have been more efficient.
Mark Williams scored four points and collected nine rebounds in 18 minutes. His rebounding rate over that limited playing time was notable, although a short appearance should not be used alone to predict performance over a full game.
Together, these players illustrate why the starting lineup should not be judged solely by points. Rebounding, defensive responsibilities, spacing, and the work of teammates all contribute to the overall result.
Philadelphia 76ers Player Stats: Complete Performance Analysis
Philadelphia had three players score at least 20 points, but its offensive production did not translate into a win. VJ Edgecombe led the team with 25 points, followed by Kelly Oubre Jr. with 21 and Tyrese Maxey with 20.
The 76ers also received a strong rebounding performance from Andre Drummond and productive minutes from Adem Bona and Quentin Grimes. Their statistics show that the team had several successful individual performances even though Phoenix won the overall contest.
Philadelphia 76ers Box Score
| Player | MIN | PTS | REB | AST | FG | 3PT | FT |
| Dominick Barlow | 28 | 8 | 5 | 2 | 3-6 | 0-2 | 2-2 |
| Andre Drummond | 22 | 8 | 15 | 1 | 4-10 | 0-2 | 0-0 |
| Kelly Oubre Jr. | 34 | 21 | 4 | 1 | 6-15 | 5-10 | 4-6 |
| Tyrese Maxey | 43 | 20 | 2 | 7 | 7-25 | 2-8 | 4-5 |
| VJ Edgecombe | 37 | 25 | 7 | 1 | 10-21 | 2-7 | 3-4 |
| Trendon Watford | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| Jabari Walker | 6 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| Justin Edwards | 12 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 2-2 | 1-1 | 0-0 |
| Adem Bona | 26 | 11 | 10 | 0 | 4-5 | 0-0 | 3-4 |
| Quentin Grimes | 27 | 12 | 4 | 5 | 3-7 | 1-3 | 5-6 |
Minutes are rounded to the nearest minute. DNP means did not play; players listed as inactive or DNP are not included in the table.
VJ Edgecombe: Philadelphia’s Leading Scorer
Edgecombe scored 25 points, collected seven rebounds, and recorded one assist. He made 10 of 21 field-goal attempts and finished 2-for-7 from three-point range.
His 25 points led Philadelphia and ranked second among all players in the game. His field-goal percentage was approximately 47.6%, showing that he converted nearly half of his attempts.
Edgecombe’s performance was important because he provided Philadelphia with an additional scoring source alongside Maxey and Oubre. The Suns could not focus exclusively on one player without accounting for Edgecombe’s ability to score from different areas.
His seven rebounds also added value. Although Drummond dominated the rebounding total, Edgecombe helped Philadelphia collect possessions and contribute to the team’s overall work on the glass.
The key distinction is that a strong individual scoring performance does not necessarily produce a team victory. Edgecombe did his part offensively, but Philadelphia’s overall shooting and the timing of Phoenix’s third-quarter surge proved more decisive.
Kelly Oubre Jr.: A Major Perimeter Threat
Oubre recorded 21 points and four rebounds, shooting 6-for-15 from the field and 5-for-10 from three-point range. He also made four of six free throws.
His five made three-pointers were the most by any Philadelphia player in the supplied statistics. He gave the 76ers a reliable source of perimeter scoring, particularly when Phoenix needed to account for multiple offensive threats.
Oubre’s 50% three-point percentage was excellent for the night. However, Philadelphia as a team made only 11 of 34 attempts from beyond the arc. This highlights an important difference between individual and team performance: one player’s accuracy cannot fully offset less productive shooting from the rest of the lineup.
Oubre’s performance was one of Philadelphia’s clearest positives. His five three-pointers kept the team’s outside scoring competitive even though the Suns finished with more successful attempts.
Tyrese Maxey: Heavy Workload, Mixed Shooting Results
Maxey finished with 20 points, seven assists, and two rebounds. He played approximately 43 minutes, the highest total among the listed players.
He made seven of 25 field-goal attempts, including two of eight from three-point range, and converted four of five free throws.
His seven assists were a team high. This shows that Maxey continued to create scoring opportunities for teammates even when his own shooting efficiency was limited.
His 28% field-goal percentage, however, was a major limitation. A player taking 25 shots has substantial influence over the team’s offensive output. When a relatively small proportion of those attempts become baskets, the opportunity cost can be considerable.
That does not mean Maxey’s performance can be reduced to one percentage. He was responsible for playmaking, played heavy minutes, and faced a defense that was trying to contain Philadelphia’s principal offensive threats. Still, the shooting numbers identify a clear area where the 76ers could have gained an advantage with better conversion.
Andre Drummond: Dominance on the Glass
Drummond scored eight points and collected 15 rebounds in 22 minutes. He shot 4-for-10 from the field and recorded one assist.
His 15 rebounds were the highest total of any player in the game. That figure demonstrates how effectively Philadelphia competed for missed shots and secured possession opportunities.
Rebounds matter in two main ways. Defensive rebounds prevent opponents from extending possessions, while offensive rebounds create additional chances to score. Philadelphia finished with 18 offensive rebounds and 49 total rebounds, both higher than Phoenix’s totals.
Drummond was a major contributor to that advantage. However, rebounding does not guarantee victory when a team is less effective in other areas. Philadelphia’s lower three-point production and imperfect free-throw shooting reduced the benefit of its work on the glass.
Adem Bona: Efficient Scoring and a Double-Double
Bona recorded 11 points and 10 rebounds in approximately 26 minutes, making four of five field-goal attempts and three of four free throws.
His 10 rebounds and 11 points gave him a double-double, a statistical achievement in which a player reaches double digits in two categories, commonly points and rebounds.
Bona’s 80% field-goal percentage was highly efficient. He converted most of his attempts and provided Philadelphia with a productive interior option.
His performance also complemented Drummond’s rebounding. Having two players capable of collecting rebounds helped Philadelphia win the overall rebounding battle.
Bona’s numbers reinforce a key point about the result: Philadelphia had productive individual performances in the frontcourt, but those contributions were not enough to overcome Phoenix’s advantage in perimeter scoring.
Quentin Grimes: Useful Playmaking and Free Throws
Grimes finished with 12 points, four rebounds, and five assists. He made three of seven field-goal attempts and five of six free throws.
His five assists ranked second among Philadelphia’s listed players, behind Maxey’s seven. His ability to help create shots gave the team another facilitator, reducing the burden on Maxey alone.
Grimes also made five free throws, contributing to the team’s scoring without relying exclusively on field goals. However, Philadelphia’s team free-throw percentage was 77.8%, meaning the 76ers left some potential points at the line.
Grimes’s line was a useful supporting performance, particularly because he combined scoring with playmaking. His numbers show how role players can influence a game even when they are not among the team’s leading scorers.
Dominick Barlow, Justin Edwards, and the Remaining Bench
Barlow scored eight points with five rebounds and two assists. He shot 3-for-6 from the field and made both free throws, giving Philadelphia a balanced contribution in several categories.
Edwards scored five points on perfect shooting, converting both field-goal attempts, including his only three-point attempt. Although his scoring volume was limited, he made the most of his opportunities.
Watford and Walker recorded limited playing time, while other listed reserves were not included in the active statistical lines provided. Bench comparisons should therefore account for minutes played rather than judging players solely by raw totals.
Team Statistics Comparison: Suns vs. 76ers
The team box score provides the clearest explanation of the result. Phoenix won 116-110 despite recording fewer rebounds and steals. The Suns were more productive from three-point range and perfect at the free-throw line.
| Statistical Category | Phoenix Suns | Philadelphia 76ers |
| Points | 116 | 110 |
| Field goals | 40-92 | 39-93 |
| Field-goal percentage | 43% | 42% |
| Three-pointers | 16-39 | 11-34 |
| Three-point percentage | 41% | 32% |
| Free throws | 20-20 | 21-27 |
| Free-throw percentage | 100% | 78% |
| Total rebounds | 42 | 49 |
| Offensive rebounds | 15 | 18 |
| Defensive rebounds | 27 | 31 |
| Assists | 25 | 20 |
| Turnovers | 22 | 19 |
| Steals | 5 | 12 |
| Blocks | 2 | 6 |
| Personal fouls | 21 | 22 |
Percentages are rounded as displayed in the supplied game data.
Three-Point Shooting Made a Six-Point Difference
Phoenix made 16 three-pointers, while Philadelphia made 11. That is a difference of five successful shots from beyond the arc.
Since each made three-pointer is worth three points, Phoenix scored 48 points from three-point range compared with Philadelphia’s 33. The resulting 15-point difference in three-point scoring was one of the most significant statistical gaps in the game.
The teams were much closer in overall field-goal production. Phoenix made 40 field goals, while Philadelphia made 39. Their field-goal percentages were also similar.
This suggests that the difference was not simply that Phoenix made many more shots overall. The Suns received more value from the shots they made beyond the arc.
Three-point shooting is particularly important in close games because it can generate a substantial amount of scoring from a relatively small difference in successful attempts. Here, the Suns’ five additional three-pointers created an advantage large enough to help overcome Philadelphia’s strengths elsewhere.
Perfect Free-Throw Shooting Helped Phoenix Protect Its Lead
Phoenix converted all 20 free throws, while Philadelphia made 21 of 27 attempts.
The difference was six missed free throws for the 76ers compared with none for the Suns. Philadelphia scored one more point from the line in total, but it needed seven more attempts to do so.
This distinction matters when evaluating efficiency. Phoenix made the most of every free-throw opportunity, while Philadelphia left six points available through missed attempts.
A perfect free-throw percentage over one game does not imply that a team will sustain that level over an entire season. It does, however, describe a concrete advantage in this particular matchup.
When a game ends with a six-point margin, missed free throws are worth examining. They were not the only reason Philadelphia lost, but they contributed to the difference between the two teams.
Philadelphia Won the Rebounding Battle
Philadelphia collected 49 rebounds compared with Phoenix’s 42. The 76ers also won the offensive rebounding battle 18-15.
Those numbers indicate that Philadelphia created additional opportunities through its work on the glass. Offensive rebounds can be particularly valuable because they allow a team to attempt another shot without needing to regain possession through a defensive stop.
However, extra rebounds do not automatically translate into a higher score. The value of an offensive rebound depends on what happens next. A second-chance possession that ends in a missed shot or turnover does not produce the same benefit as one that results in points.
Phoenix’s ability to make three-pointers and free throws helped compensate for Philadelphia’s rebounding advantage.
Turnovers: A Potential Weakness for Both Teams
Phoenix committed 22 turnovers, while Philadelphia committed 19.
The Suns therefore gave away possession three more times than the 76ers. This was a weakness in an otherwise winning performance and an area that could have made the result more comfortable if managed better.
Turnovers have several consequences. They end an offensive possession without a shot, may create fast-break chances for the opponent, and can disrupt a team’s defensive organization before players have time to recover.
Philadelphia’s 12 steals compared with Phoenix’s five indicate that the 76ers were more successful at generating steals. Yet that defensive activity did not produce a win.
This is an important analytical distinction: forcing turnovers is useful, but the overall impact depends on how effectively a team converts those opportunities into points and prevents the opponent from scoring elsewhere.
Assists: Phoenix Shared the Ball More Often
Phoenix recorded 25 assists, compared with Philadelphia’s 20.
Assists do not capture every form of teamwork, but they provide a useful measure of how often made field goals followed a teammate’s pass. Phoenix’s higher total suggests that its offense generated more assisted baskets.
Allen contributed six assists, while Booker and Gillespie recorded four each. For Philadelphia, Maxey had seven assists and Grimes added five.
The team totals indicate that Phoenix received playmaking from more than one source. That can make an offense harder to defend because the opposition cannot focus entirely on stopping a single ball handler.
Philadelphia’s five-assist deficit is not conclusive proof of inferior teamwork, but it helps explain why Phoenix could distribute offensive responsibilities while still generating 116 points.
What the Player Statistics Reveal About the Match
The numbers become more useful when they are interpreted together rather than treated as isolated achievements. The Suns and 76ers each had clear strengths, but those strengths produced different results on the scoreboard.
1. Phoenix Had More Scoring Depth
Booker led Phoenix with 27 points, but Allen and Goodwin each scored 16. Gillespie, Ighodaro, and Green added 12 points apiece.
This distribution matters because it reduced the team’s dependence on a single player. If Philadelphia limited Booker’s opportunities, other Suns players could still produce points.
The 76ers also had a productive scoring trio in Edgecombe, Oubre, and Maxey. However, their supporting contributions did not entirely close the gap created by Phoenix’s outside shooting.
Scoring depth is not simply the number of players who score. It also concerns whether a team has different ways to generate points when its main option is closely guarded.
2. Phoenix Was More Accurate From Three-Point Range
The Suns converted approximately 41% of their three-point attempts, while the 76ers converted approximately 32%.
That nine-percentage-point gap is meaningful because three-point attempts carry a higher scoring value than two-point attempts. A team can make fewer total field goals yet still score more if it converts a greater share of its shots from beyond the arc.
Phoenix also had several players who made multiple three-pointers. O’Neale, Gillespie, Allen, Goodwin, and Green all contributed from outside, while Booker added two more.
Philadelphia’s perimeter scoring was more concentrated. Oubre made five three-pointers, but the team total remained five below Phoenix’s.
3. Philadelphia Created Defensive Pressure but Could Not Capitalize Enough
The 76ers recorded 12 steals and six blocks. Phoenix managed only five steals and two blocks.
Those numbers show that Philadelphia generated more defensive events that interrupted Phoenix’s offense. Yet the Suns still scored 116 points.
A useful way to interpret this is to distinguish between defensive disruption and defensive effectiveness. Steals and blocks describe certain successful defensive actions, but they do not measure every possession or the quality of the shots conceded afterward.
Philadelphia’s defensive pressure was real, but it did not fully compensate for Phoenix’s shooting advantage.
4. The Suns Won Despite Their Turnovers
Phoenix’s 22 turnovers are among the most notable figures in its box score. Giving away possession that often can undermine an otherwise strong offensive performance.
Philadelphia had 19 turnovers, so it did a better job in this category. However, the three-turnover advantage was not enough to overcome Phoenix’s three-point and free-throw advantages.
This is a useful reminder for readers comparing NBA box scores: the team that wins a category does not necessarily win the game. Basketball results emerge from the combined effect of shooting, possession management, rebounding, defense, and timing.
Key Matchups That Shaped the Result
Devin Booker vs. Tyrese Maxey
Booker scored 27 points on 9-for-23 shooting, while Maxey scored 20 on 7-for-25 shooting.
Booker had the higher scoring total and a better field-goal percentage. He also converted all seven free throws, while Maxey made four of five.
Maxey contributed seven assists to Booker’s four, so the comparison is not entirely one-sided. Maxey played a major playmaking role, but his shooting efficiency was lower.
Booker’s performance was more productive as a scoring display, while Maxey’s line reflected the dual demands of scoring and creating opportunities for others.
Supporting Shooters: Grayson Allen vs. Kelly Oubre Jr.
Allen and Oubre each made several important contributions from three-point range.
Allen scored 16 points, made four of nine three-pointers, and recorded six assists. Oubre scored 21 points, made five of 10 three-pointers, and collected four rebounds.
Oubre had the higher scoring total and one more made three-pointer. Allen, however, created more scoring opportunities for teammates.
Both performances show how perimeter players can stretch a defense, but their different statistical profiles also demonstrate that shooting and playmaking offer distinct kinds of value.
Frontcourt Battle: Mark Williams and Oso Ighodaro vs. Andre Drummond and Adem Bona
Philadelphia’s big men had the stronger combined rebounding presence.
Drummond collected 15 rebounds and Bona recorded 10. Together, they accounted for 25 rebounds, giving Philadelphia important control of the interior.
Phoenix’s Mark Williams recorded nine rebounds, while Ighodaro added five. Williams provided useful rebounding in limited minutes, and Ighodaro added efficient scoring.
The 76ers’ advantage on the glass did not translate into a victory because the contest also depended on perimeter scoring and free-throw conversion. This matchup is a good example of why frontcourt production must be considered alongside the team’s overall shooting.
Shooting Efficiency Explained: Beyond Points Scored
Readers searching for phoenix suns vs 76ers match player stats often want to know who performed best, not just who scored the most points. Shooting efficiency helps answer that question, but it should be interpreted carefully.
Field-Goal Percentage
Field-goal percentage is calculated by dividing made field goals by attempted field goals and multiplying the result by 100.
For example, Booker made nine of 23 attempts:
[ \frac{9}{23}\times100\approx39.1% ]
This means Booker made approximately 39.1% of his field-goal attempts.
By comparison, Edgecombe made 10 of 21 attempts:
[ \frac{10}{21}\times100\approx47.6% ]
Edgecombe had the better field-goal percentage, but Booker scored more points. The difference reflects several factors, including free throws and the number and type of shots attempted.
Three-Point Percentage
Three-point percentage is calculated by dividing successful three-pointers by three-point attempts.
Allen made four of nine attempts, giving him a three-point percentage of approximately 44.4%. Oubre made five of 10, producing a 50% rate.
At team level, Phoenix’s 16-for-39 performance was approximately 41.0%, compared with Philadelphia’s 11-for-34, or approximately 32.4%.
The team comparison is especially useful because it involves more attempts and provides a broader view of each offense’s perimeter performance.
Free-Throw Percentage
Free-throw percentage measures how often a player or team converts attempts from the line.
Phoenix made 20 of 20 free throws, while Philadelphia made 21 of 27. That gives the Suns 100% accuracy and the 76ers approximately 77.8%.
Free throws are often easier scoring opportunities than contested field-goal attempts, although pressure and game conditions can still affect results. In this matchup, Phoenix converted every attempt, eliminating wasted opportunities from the line.
Why One Efficiency Metric Is Not Enough
No single percentage can completely describe a player’s performance. A complete assessment should consider:
- Points scored and number of attempts.
- Three-point shooting and free-throw conversion.
- Assists and turnovers.
- Rebounds and defensive contributions.
- Minutes played and the player’s role in the offense.
A player who scores 12 points on five field-goal attempts has a different statistical profile from a player who scores 20 points on 25 attempts. The second player contributes more raw points, but the first may be using possessions more efficiently.
Context matters, too. A primary scorer may take difficult shots because teammates struggle to create their own opportunities. A reserve may have fewer attempts but benefit from favorable matchups or open looks created by starters.
The most reliable approach is to combine the box score with the game’s flow and the player’s responsibilities.
What Philadelphia Could Have Done Differently
The 76ers had several strengths in this game, so the most useful lessons concern how those strengths could have produced a better result.
Improve Perimeter Conversion
Philadelphia made 11 of 34 three-pointers. Although Oubre converted five attempts, the team’s overall percentage remained below Phoenix’s.
Better three-point conversion would have increased Philadelphia’s scoring without requiring a corresponding increase in possessions. Even a modest improvement could have reduced the difference in a six-point game.
However, it would be misleading to assume that every missed three-pointer was a poor shot. Shot quality, defensive pressure, and the players taking the attempts all affect the meaning of a shooting percentage.
Convert More Free Throws
The 76ers missed six free throws. Their 21 successful attempts were actually one more than Phoenix’s total, but the extra attempts did not produce a substantial scoring advantage.
Improving free-throw accuracy would have been a straightforward way to increase scoring without needing to create additional field-goal opportunities.
Reduce the Impact of Phoenix’s Third Quarter
Philadelphia entered halftime with a four-point deficit but allowed Phoenix to outscore it by nine in the third period.
That was the central game-management problem. The 76ers could have limited the damage by slowing Phoenix’s offensive rhythm, improving defensive communication, or reducing the number of open perimeter opportunities.
The supplied statistics do not establish exactly which defensive adjustment would have changed the outcome. They do show that Phoenix’s 40-point quarter was the period that most clearly separated the teams.
Make the Rebounding Advantage Count
Philadelphia won the rebounding battle 49-42 and collected three more offensive rebounds than Phoenix.
Those extra possessions were valuable, but the team still lost. The lesson is not that rebounding was unimportant; rather, rebounding must be paired with efficient shot-making and possession management to deliver its full benefit.
What Phoenix Could Improve Despite Winning
A six-point victory should not hide areas where the winning team can improve.
Reduce Turnovers
Phoenix committed 22 turnovers. That is a substantial number of lost possessions and helps explain why the game remained competitive despite the Suns’ shooting advantages.
Reducing careless passes and improving decisions against defensive pressure would give Phoenix more chances to score. It could also limit opportunities for opponents to attack before the defense gets organized.
Improve Shot Selection on Difficult Attempts
Brooks shot 2-for-13 from the field, while Booker made nine of 23 attempts. Those numbers should not be interpreted in isolation, but they show that not every shot attempt produced the same result.
Phoenix benefited from strong outside shooting elsewhere in the lineup. A more consistent balance between difficult attempts and opportunities created through ball movement could make the offense less dependent on timely perimeter success.
Protect the Interior Without Sacrificing Spacing
Philadelphia collected 49 rebounds, including 18 offensive boards. Phoenix’s seven-rebound deficit suggests room to improve its control of missed shots.
The challenge is that defensive rebounding often requires multiple players to help, while the same players may be needed to contest perimeter attempts. A team must balance protecting the paint with closing out on shooters.
The game demonstrates that Phoenix’s offense can overcome some defensive shortcomings, but better rebounding and fewer turnovers would reduce the need to rely on shooting advantages.
How to Read the Official Box Score
A box score is a useful record of what happened during a game, but understanding the abbreviations and categories helps prevent misleading conclusions.
| Statistic | Meaning | Why It Matters |
| MIN | Minutes played | Shows the player’s time on court |
| PTS | Points | Measures direct scoring output |
| REB | Rebounds | Tracks recovered missed shots |
| AST | Assists | Records passes leading directly to made baskets |
| FG | Field goals made and attempted | Shows overall field-goal conversion |
| 3PT | Three-pointers made and attempted | Measures perimeter shooting |
| FT | Free throws made and attempted | Shows conversion from the line |
| STL | Steals | Records defensive takeaways |
| BLK | Blocks | Records shots blocked by a defender |
| TOV | Turnovers | Tracks lost possessions |
| PF | Personal fouls | Records personal fouls committed |
| +/- | Plus/minus | Measures the team’s scoring margin while a player is on the court |
Understanding Plus/Minus
Plus/minus measures the difference between the points scored by a player’s team and the points scored by the opponent while that player is on the court.
A positive value means the player’s team outscored its opponent during those minutes. A negative value means the opponent outscored the player’s team.
It is useful, but it does not measure an individual player’s impact in isolation. Teammates, opposing lineups, substitutions, and game situations all influence the result.
A player can perform well individually while having a negative plus/minus, or record a positive figure without scoring many points. For that reason, plus/minus should be evaluated alongside shooting, passing, rebounding, and defensive statistics.
Why Minutes Played Matter
Raw totals can be misleading when players have different amounts of playing time.
Maxey’s 20 points came in approximately 43 minutes, while Goodwin also scored 16 points in approximately 20 minutes. Their roles were different, and so were their opportunities.
Comparing points per minute or points per 36 minutes can provide additional context, but those calculations do not automatically establish which player was better. They can overstate the expected output of a reserve if his role, shot selection, or efficiency changes with more playing time.
For readers comparing performances, minutes should be considered alongside the volume and efficiency of a player’s contributions.
Season Context and the Importance of the Result
The supplied game data listed Phoenix at 27-17 overall and 13-12 on the road, while Philadelphia stood at 23-19 overall and 11-12 at home.
Those records provide context for the matchup at the time of the game. They should not be treated as current standings or used to describe either team’s performance later in the season without checking updated records.
The supplied season-series notes also list a February 8 result in which Philadelphia defeated Phoenix 109-103. That later result is separate from the January contest discussed here.
Keeping individual game results distinct is important for accurate sports reporting. A season series may contain wins for both teams, and the outcome of one meeting does not determine the result of a later matchup.
For the January 20 game, the central facts remain straightforward: Phoenix won 116-110, Booker led the Suns with 27 points, Edgecombe led Philadelphia with 25, and the Suns’ three-point and free-throw performance helped them secure the win.
For the official game record, see the ESPN box score for Suns vs. 76ers.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Who won the Phoenix Suns vs. Philadelphia 76ers game on January 20, 2026?
The Phoenix Suns defeated the Philadelphia 76ers 116-110 at Xfinity Mobile Arena in Philadelphia. Phoenix’s decisive advantage came in the third quarter, when it scored 40 points.
2. Who was the top scorer in the Suns vs. 76ers game?
Devin Booker led Phoenix with 27 points. VJ Edgecombe was Philadelphia’s leading scorer with 25 points, followed by Kelly Oubre Jr. with 21 and Tyrese Maxey with 20.
3. How many points did Devin Booker score against the 76ers?
Booker scored 27 points in approximately 34 minutes. He made nine of 23 field-goal attempts, two of five three-pointers, and all seven free throws.
4. Which player recorded the most rebounds?
Andre Drummond led all players with 15 rebounds for Philadelphia. Mark Williams was Phoenix’s leading rebounder with nine, while Adem Bona collected 10 rebounds for the 76ers.
5. Why did the Suns win despite having fewer rebounds?
Phoenix made 16 three-pointers compared with Philadelphia’s 11 and converted all 20 free throws. The 76ers collected more rebounds and steals, but the Suns’ shooting advantages helped them finish six points ahead.
6. What was the biggest turning point in the game?
The third quarter was the biggest turning point. Phoenix outscored Philadelphia 40-31 to extend its halftime lead from four points to 13. Philadelphia won the fourth quarter but could not overcome the deficit.
Conclusion
The phoenix suns vs 76ers match player stats reveal a game decided by offensive efficiency, perimeter shooting, and the timing of key scoring runs. Phoenix secured a 116-110 victory even though Philadelphia recorded more rebounds, steals, and blocks.
Devin Booker led the Suns with 27 points, while Grayson Allen and Jordan Goodwin each added 16. Collin Gillespie, Oso Ighodaro, and Jalen Green contributed 12 points apiece, demonstrating the value of Phoenix’s supporting cast. For Philadelphia, VJ Edgecombe scored 25 points, Kelly Oubre Jr. added 21, and Tyrese Maxey finished with 20 points and seven assists.
The team statistics explain the final result. Phoenix made five more three-pointers and converted every free throw, while Philadelphia’s advantage on the glass could not offset its lower three-point percentage. The Suns also committed more turnovers, showing that their victory was not without weaknesses.
Ultimately, the third-quarter scoring surge proved decisive. Phoenix built a substantial lead, then held on as Philadelphia made a late push. The matchup demonstrates why individual points, shooting percentages, rebounds, assists, and turnovers must be considered together to understand an NBA result fully.
