Celtics vs Atlanta Hawks Match Player Stats

The celtics vs atlanta hawks match player stats from this matchup tell a much deeper story than the final 132-106 score. Boston overwhelmed Atlanta with a huge second quarter, efficient three-point shooting, 55 rebounds, and standout performances from Jaylen Brown, Sam Hauser, and Derrick White. The game was played at State Farm Arena in Atlanta, and the official NBA record lists the matchup as Saturday, January 17, 2026, with the game information timestamp extending into January 18.

For readers searching for the celtics vs atlanta hawks match player stats, the most important numbers are not simply the scoring totals. Boston shot 51% from the field and 42% from three-point range, while Atlanta made only 37% of its field-goal attempts. Boston also built a 43-point lead and scored 52 points in the second quarter alone.

This article breaks down the complete statistical picture, the leading individual performances, the team-level differences, and what the numbers reveal about how the game developed.

Celtics vs Atlanta Hawks Match Player Stats

The celtics vs atlanta hawks match player stats show Boston winning across several of the most important efficiency categories.

Category	Boston Celtics	Atlanta Hawks
Final Score	132	106
Field Goals	46-91	38-102
Field Goal %	51%	37%
Three-Pointers	22-52	15-46
Three-Point %	42%	33%
Free Throws	18-22	15-17
Free Throw %	82%	88%
Rebounds	55	47
Assists	27	29
Turnovers	16	11
Steals	9	10
Blocks	8	4
Points in Paint	40	42
Fast-Break Points	21	22
Largest Lead	43	2

One important detail is that Atlanta actually recorded more assists and fewer turnovers in the statistical summary. That means Boston’s advantage was not simply about ball movement or avoiding mistakes. The decisive difference came largely from shot-making, three-point production, rebounding, and the Celtics’ extraordinary second quarter.

Game Summary and Final Score

Boston defeated Atlanta 132-106 after turning a relatively competitive opening quarter into a one-sided game before halftime.

The quarter-by-quarter scoring was:

• First quarter: Boston 30, Atlanta 23
• Second quarter: Boston 52, Atlanta 28
• Third quarter: Boston 35, Atlanta 23
• Fourth quarter: Boston 15, Atlanta 32

The second quarter was the defining stretch. Boston scored 52 points while allowing just 28, creating a 31-point halftime advantage at 82-51.

That shooting burst changed the nature of the contest.

Atlanta did win the fourth quarter 32-15, but by then the game was already effectively decided. Boston had previously built a maximum advantage of 43 points.

The attendance at State Farm Arena was listed as 17,489.

Jaylen Brown’s 41-Point Performance

Jaylen Brown was the headline scorer for Boston, finishing with 41 points.

His complete line was:

• 41 points
• 14-of-30 field goals
• 2-of-9 three-pointers
• 11-of-12 free throws
• 6 rebounds
• 2 assists
• 1 steal
• 1 block
• 1 turnover
• +36 plus/minus

Brown’s scoring was especially important because his production was not dependent on one type of shot. He attacked the basket, converted at the free-throw line, and also made two three-pointers.

His 11 made free throws were particularly valuable. Even though he shot only 22.2% from three, his ability to create pressure around the basket helped him produce 41 points.

Brown also had 29 points by halftime.

From an analytical perspective, this is an important distinction. A scorer does not need an elite three-point percentage to have a major offensive impact when he can consistently create high-value opportunities closer to the basket and reach the foul line.

Sam Hauser’s Three-Point Explosion

Sam Hauser delivered one of the most efficient shooting performances of the game.

He finished with:

• 30 points
• 10-of-21 field goals
• 10-of-21 from three-point range
• 6 rebounds
• 3 assists
• 1 steal
• 1 block
• +30 plus/minus

Hauser’s 10 made three-pointers tied his career high, while his 30 points represented a season best.

His second-quarter shooting was especially damaging. Hauser made all six of his three-point attempts during Boston’s 52-point explosion in the period.

This performance illustrates why three-point volume can completely change a basketball game. Hauser attempted 21 shots and all 21 came from behind the arc. He therefore stretched Atlanta’s defensive coverage while creating additional space for Boston’s other offensive players.

When a perimeter shooter is converting at that rate, the defense faces an uncomfortable choice. Staying attached to the shooter opens driving lanes, while helping toward the paint creates clean perimeter opportunities.

Derrick White Controls the Playmaking

Derrick White did not lead Boston in scoring, but his passing was central to the offensive structure.

White finished with:

• 7 points
• 3-of-4 field goals
• 1-of-2 from three
• 5 rebounds
• 12 assists
• 3 steals
• 1 block
• 1 turnover
• +36 plus/minus

His 12 assists were the highest total by any player in the game.

White’s performance is a useful reminder that traditional scoring totals do not fully describe offensive influence.

Boston had three players with at least 30 points or 12 assists between Brown, Hauser, and White’s contributions. White’s ability to create shots for teammates was especially valuable because Atlanta had to account for Boston’s perimeter shooting.

His 12 assists also helped explain how Boston produced 27 team assists despite scoring 132 points.

Boston’s Starting Lineup and Player Production

Boston’s starting lineup consisted of Sam Hauser, Neemias Queta, Derrick White, Jaylen Brown, and Baylor Scheierman.

Their individual production was:

Player	PTS	REB	AST	STL	BLK	+/-
Sam Hauser	30	6	3	1	1	+30
Neemias Queta	14	7	1	1	1	+39
Derrick White	7	5	12	3	1	+36
Jaylen Brown	41	6	2	1	1	+36
Baylor Scheierman	9	7	4	3	0	+2

These figures show that Boston’s starting group was not simply carried by Brown.

Hauser supplied perimeter scoring, White directed the offense, Queta provided interior production and rebounding, and Scheierman contributed across several categories. Queta’s +39 was actually the best plus/minus figure on the Celtics.

That matters because plus/minus is a lineup-context statistic. It should not be treated as a standalone measure of individual quality, but it can provide useful context when combined with minutes and other box-score information.

Boston’s Bench Contributions

Boston also received useful production from its reserves.

Notable bench performances included:

• Anfernee Simons: 14 points
• Josh Minott: 7 points and 8 rebounds
• Luka Garza: 4 points and 4 rebounds
• Amari Williams: 3 points and 4 rebounds
• Ron Harper Jr.: 3 points
• Jordan Walsh: 0 points and 2 rebounds

Simons shot 5-of-10 from the field and 4-of-8 from three-point range. Minott led Boston with 8 rebounds.

The depth became increasingly relevant after Boston built its massive advantage. The Celtics were able to distribute minutes while keeping their offensive production high enough to maintain control.

Atlanta Hawks Player Stats

Atlanta’s individual statistics were led by Onyeka Okongwu.

The Hawks’ starting group consisted of Onyeka Okongwu, Jalen Johnson, CJ McCollum, Nickeil Alexander-Walker, and Vit Krejci.

Their numbers were:

Player	PTS	REB	AST	STL	BLK	+/-
Onyeka Okongwu	21	7	3	1	0	-25
Jalen Johnson	12	8	5	1	0	-30
CJ McCollum	11	7	4	0	2	-26
Nickeil Alexander-Walker	18	2	6	1	1	-35
Vit Krejci	3	1	0	1	0	-25

Atlanta did receive meaningful scoring from its bench.

Corey Kispert scored 16 points, while Asa Newell added 10 points in only nine minutes. Mouhamed Gueye recorded 5 points and 7 rebounds.

The problem for Atlanta was that these individual contributions were not enough to compensate for the team’s poor shooting night.

Onyeka Okongwu Leads Atlanta

Okongwu finished as Atlanta’s leading scorer with 21 points.

His line included:

• 21 points
• 8-of-14 field goals
• 3-of-6 three-pointers
• 2-of-2 free throws
• 7 rebounds
• 3 assists
• 1 steal

He was one of Atlanta’s most efficient offensive players, finishing at 57.1% from the field.

The contrast between Okongwu’s efficiency and Atlanta’s overall 37% shooting is revealing. One productive player cannot solve an entire team’s shooting problem when the rest of the offense struggles to convert consistently.

Nickeil Alexander-Walker’s Playmaking

Nickeil Alexander-Walker provided Atlanta with 18 points and a team-high six assists.

He shot 6-of-16 overall and 4-of-9 from three-point range.

His six assists tied an important team need because Atlanta finished with 29 assists overall, two more than Boston.

This is one of the clearest examples of why raw assists alone cannot explain the final score. Atlanta moved the ball reasonably well, but the team struggled to turn possessions into efficient field goals.

Atlanta’s Bench Production

The Hawks received several useful contributions from their reserves.

Corey Kispert scored 16 points on 5-of-11 shooting and made two three-pointers. Asa Newell added 10 points on 4-of-7 shooting. Mouhamed Gueye contributed 7 rebounds in 19 minutes.

These performances helped Atlanta win the fourth quarter, but they arrived after Boston had already established a huge advantage.

The timing of production matters in a game like this. A team can have strong individual stretches while still losing decisively because the opponent’s most productive period occurred earlier and created an insurmountable margin.

Why the Second Quarter Decided the Game

The second quarter deserves special attention because it explains the final score better than almost any other statistic.

Boston scored 52 points in the second period.

Atlanta scored 28.

That produced a 24-point quarter advantage for Boston.

The Celtics went from leading 30-23 after the first quarter to leading 82-51 at halftime. Boston made 19 of 25 shots in the second quarter, including 11 of 15 from three-point range.

This was not simply a case of Atlanta missing a few shots.

Boston simultaneously generated an extremely efficient offensive stretch and converted at a remarkable rate from outside.

Hauser’s six three-pointers in the quarter and Brown’s aggressive scoring gave Atlanta two different problems to solve.

Three-Point Shooting Was the Major Statistical Difference

Boston made 22 of 52 three-point attempts, while Atlanta made 15 of 46.

That created:

• Boston: 66 points from three-pointers
• Atlanta: 45 points from three-pointers
• Difference: 21 points

Boston therefore gained a substantial scoring advantage from the perimeter.

The Celtics’ 42% three-point percentage was also nine percentage points higher than Atlanta’s 33%.

This is particularly important because Atlanta actually attempted only six fewer three-pointers than Boston. The difference was not primarily volume. It was conversion.

Boston made 42.3% of its three-point attempts, while Atlanta made 32.6%.

Field Goal Efficiency Created Another Gap

Boston made 46 of 91 field goals.

Atlanta made 38 of 102.

That means Boston converted 51% of its attempts, while Atlanta converted only 37%.

The difference was 14 percentage points.

Atlanta’s 102 field-goal attempts show that the Hawks generated a high number of shot attempts. However, the volume did not translate into enough points because too many attempts failed to fall.

This is an important lesson when analyzing celtics vs atlanta hawks match player stats. Looking only at total attempts can create a misleading impression. Efficiency must be considered alongside volume.

Rebounding Advantage Favored Boston

Boston won the rebounding battle 55-47.

The Celtics also collected 11 offensive rebounds, compared with 13 for Atlanta.

Although Atlanta actually had the offensive-rebounding edge, Boston’s overall rebounding advantage came from its 44 defensive rebounds compared with Atlanta’s 34.

This helped Boston limit second opportunities while creating a strong foundation for transition and half-court possessions.

Josh Minott led Boston with eight rebounds, while Queta and Scheierman each collected seven.

Assists Tell an Interesting Story

Atlanta finished with 29 assists.

Boston finished with 27.

At first glance, this might appear surprising because Boston won by 26 points.

But assists do not measure shooting efficiency. They measure credited passes leading directly to made baskets.

Boston converted 51% of its field-goal attempts, while Atlanta converted 37%. That meant Atlanta’s 29 assists were attached to a much less efficient shooting performance.

Derrick White’s 12 assists were particularly important because he created opportunities within Boston’s efficient offense.

Turnovers Were Not the Main Explanation

Atlanta had fewer turnovers in the official statistical summary.

Boston was charged with 16 turnovers, while Atlanta had 11.

This is another reason the game should not be reduced to a simple possession story.

Boston overcame its higher turnover total through superior shooting and rebounding. The Celtics also generated 19 points off Atlanta turnovers, while Atlanta scored 12 points off Boston turnovers.

So although Boston gave the ball away more often, the Celtics extracted more value when Atlanta made mistakes.

Defensive Impact Beyond the Score

Boston recorded:

• 9 steals
• 8 blocks
• 55 rebounds

Atlanta recorded:

• 10 steals
• 4 blocks
• 47 rebounds

Atlanta actually finished with one more steal, but Boston doubled the Hawks’ block total.

The defensive numbers suggest that Boston’s impact came from several areas rather than one dominant defensive statistic.

Boston also held Atlanta to 37% shooting overall. That figure is more revealing than the steal total because it directly reflects how difficult Atlanta found it to convert its offensive opportunities.

Points in the Paint and Fast-Break Scoring

Interestingly, Atlanta scored 42 points in the paint compared with Boston’s 40.

Atlanta also scored 22 fast-break points, one more than Boston’s 21.

These numbers reinforce the idea that Boston’s victory was not built on winning every category.

Instead, Boston dominated several high-impact areas, particularly shooting efficiency and three-point scoring.

A team can lose the points-in-the-paint battle and still win comfortably if it creates enough value elsewhere.

The Importance of Boston’s 43-Point Lead

Boston’s largest lead was 43 points, while Atlanta’s largest lead was only two.

That statistic captures the game’s control better than the final score alone.

The Celtics did not merely win during the closing minutes. They controlled almost the entire game after the opening period.

The game data shows Boston led for 97% of the game, while Atlanta led for only 2%.

That makes the fourth-quarter Atlanta comeback less meaningful in terms of the overall competitive structure of the contest.

What the Plus/Minus Numbers Reveal

Plus/minus should always be interpreted carefully, but the numbers provide useful context.

Boston’s highest plus/minus figures included:

• Neemias Queta: +39
• Derrick White: +36
• Jaylen Brown: +36
• Sam Hauser: +30

Atlanta’s best individual plus/minus was Asa Newell at +10, although he played only nine minutes.

The Celtics’ starting players were heavily positive because they were on the floor during the decisive portions of the game.

For Atlanta, several starters finished significantly negative because they played through Boston’s dominant second and third quarters.

How the Game Changed After Halftime

Boston continued its offensive dominance into the third quarter.

The Celtics scored 35 points while Atlanta scored 23.

That pushed the score to 117-74 entering the fourth quarter.

Only then did Atlanta win a quarter, outscoring Boston 32-15.

The late Atlanta run shows why final-period scoring should be placed in context. Boston’s reduced fourth-quarter output was consistent with a team protecting a massive lead rather than trying to maximize its final margin.

The game had already been decided before the final period began.

Celtics vs Hawks Statistical Takeaways

The most important lessons from the game can be summarized through several numbers.

Boston shot 51% from the field

The Celtics converted 46 of 91 attempts, compared with Atlanta’s 38 of 102.

Boston made 22 threes

The Celtics produced 66 points from three-point range.

Jaylen Brown scored 41

Brown led every player in the game in scoring.

Sam Hauser made 10 threes

Hauser’s 10 three-pointers tied his career high.

Derrick White recorded 12 assists

White was the game’s leading assist provider.

Boston grabbed 55 rebounds

The Celtics finished eight rebounds ahead of Atlanta.

Boston built a 43-point lead

The largest margin shows how thoroughly the game shifted after the first quarter.

What These Player Stats Say About Boston

Boston’s statistical profile in this game was unusually balanced.

Brown supplied high-volume scoring.

Hauser provided elite perimeter shooting.

White controlled distribution.

Queta contributed inside and on the glass.

Scheierman filled multiple categories.

The Celtics did not require one player to perform every offensive task.

That balance became particularly valuable once Atlanta attempted to adjust defensively. The Hawks could not simply focus all attention on Brown because Hauser was punishing open perimeter opportunities.

What These Player Stats Say About Atlanta

Atlanta’s numbers show a team that generated opportunities but struggled to convert them efficiently.

The Hawks had:

• More assists than Boston
• More steals than Boston
• More offensive rebounds than Boston
• More points in the paint
• Fewer turnovers

Yet Atlanta still lost by 26.

The main reason was shooting efficiency.

A 37% field-goal percentage and 33% three-point percentage made it extremely difficult for Atlanta to keep pace with a Celtics team shooting 51% overall and 42% from three.

How to Read a Box Score Like This

A useful way to study a game is to move through the statistics in layers.

First, look at the final score.

Then check shooting efficiency.

Next, examine three-point production.

After that, look at rebounds, turnovers, assists, free throws, and points in the paint.

Finally, study individual player lines and the quarter-by-quarter progression.

This approach prevents one unusual statistic from becoming the entire explanation for the game.

For this matchup, the clearest chain is:

Second-quarter explosion → elite shooting → large halftime lead → continued third-quarter control → comfortable finish.

That sequence explains the result more effectively than simply stating that Boston scored 132 points.

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the final score between the Celtics and Hawks?

Boston defeated Atlanta 132-106. The Celtics led 82-51 at halftime after scoring 52 points in the second quarter.

Who led the Celtics in scoring?

Jaylen Brown led Boston with 41 points. He shot 14-of-30 from the field and 11-of-12 from the free-throw line.

Who led the Hawks in scoring?

Onyeka Okongwu led Atlanta with 21 points. He also collected seven rebounds and shot 8-of-14 from the field.

How many three-pointers did Boston make?

Boston made 22 three-pointers on 52 attempts, finishing at 42% from beyond the arc.

Who had the most assists in the game?

Derrick White led all players with 12 assists. Atlanta’s Nickeil Alexander-Walker led the Hawks with six assists.

Why did Boston win by such a large margin?

The biggest statistical reasons were Boston’s 51% field-goal shooting, 42% three-point shooting, 55 rebounds, and dominant 52-point second quarter. Atlanta shot only 37% from the field.

Conclusion

The celtics vs atlanta hawks match player stats provide a clear picture of a game that changed dramatically during the second quarter.

Jaylen Brown’s 41 points gave Boston its primary scoring force, while Sam Hauser’s 10 three-pointers created a major perimeter advantage. Derrick White added 12 assists and helped organize an offense that finished with 132 points.

Atlanta had several productive individual performances. Onyeka Okongwu scored 21 points, Nickeil Alexander-Walker recorded 18 points and six assists, and Corey Kispert added 16 points from the bench. The Hawks also finished with more assists, more steals, and fewer turnovers than Boston.

The decisive difference was efficiency.

Boston shot 51% from the field and 42% from three, compared with Atlanta’s 37% and 33%. The Celtics also controlled the overall rebounding battle and built a 43-point lead before Atlanta’s fourth-quarter response.

For anyone studying the celtics vs atlanta hawks match player stats, the central lesson is that the box score needs to be read as a connected story. Individual scoring, shooting efficiency, three-point volume, rebounding, playmaking, and quarter-by-quarter performance all contributed to the final result.