The la clippers vs timberwolves match player stats from February 9, 2026, tell the story of a convincing 115-96 road victory for the Los Angeles Clippers at Target Center in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Kawhi Leonard led the Clippers with 41 points, eight rebounds, two assists, and four steals, delivering the standout individual performance of the game. Anthony Edwards led Minnesota with 23 points, four rebounds, two assists, and two steals, but the Timberwolves struggled to match Los Angeles from three-point range and committed 20 turnovers.

The final score shows a 19-point difference, but the underlying numbers explain how that margin developed. Los Angeles shot 51% from the field and 52% from beyond the arc, while Minnesota made 45% of its field-goal attempts and only 24% of its three-pointers. The Clippers also recorded 25 assists, 11 steals, and six blocks, combining efficient shooting with defensive pressure and better ball security.

This breakdown examines the complete team statistics, leading individual performances, starting lineups, quarter-by-quarter scoring, and the key factors that shaped the result. It also explains what the numbers reveal about each team’s offensive execution and defensive performance, helping readers understand more than the final score alone.

LA Clippers vs Timberwolves Match Player Stats: Final Score and Game Overview

The game took place on February 9, 2026, at Target Center, where an attendance of 18,978 watched the Clippers defeat the Timberwolves. Los Angeles scored at least 23 points in every quarter and finished with its strongest offensive period in the fourth quarter, scoring 35 points.

Minnesota also produced its highest-scoring quarter in the fourth, recording 37 points. However, that late offensive improvement could not erase the deficit created during the first three periods.

Official Game Information

Match Detail	Information
Matchup	Los Angeles Clippers vs Minnesota Timberwolves
Date	February 9, 2026
Competition	NBA regular season
Venue	Target Center
Location	Minneapolis, Minnesota
Attendance	18,978
Final Score	Clippers 115, Timberwolves 96
Winning Team	Los Angeles Clippers
Winning Margin	19 points
Game Status	Final
Clippers’ Field-Goal Percentage	51%
Timberwolves’ Field-Goal Percentage	45%
Clippers’ Three-Point Percentage	52%
Timberwolves’ Three-Point Percentage	24%

These figures establish the central statistical pattern of the contest. Minnesota collected more rebounds, but Los Angeles made better use of its shooting opportunities and protected possession more effectively.

A basketball box score is most useful when its statistics are considered together. Field-goal percentage indicates shooting efficiency, turnovers reveal lost possessions, assists help explain ball movement, and rebounds show how effectively teams recovered missed shots. No single number fully explains a result, but the combination of these measures provides a clearer picture of the game.

Quarter-by-Quarter Scoring Breakdown

The scoring progression shows how Los Angeles built its advantage and why Minnesota’s fourth-quarter response was not enough.

Quarter	LA Clippers	Minnesota Timberwolves
First Quarter	23	19
Second Quarter	31	23
Third Quarter	26	17
Fourth Quarter	35	37
Final Score	115	96

First Quarter: Los Angeles Establishes an Early Lead

The Clippers scored 23 points in the opening quarter, compared with Minnesota’s 19. The four-point difference gave Los Angeles an early advantage without creating an insurmountable deficit.

At this stage, the important factor was maintaining offensive discipline. A team that begins a game with a modest lead can protect it by limiting turnovers, taking high-quality shots, and preventing opponents from building momentum through easy transition baskets.

Minnesota remained within reach after the first 12 minutes, but the next two quarters proved much more damaging to its chances.

Second Quarter: Clippers Increase Their Advantage

Los Angeles scored 31 points in the second quarter while holding Minnesota to 23. The eight-point quarter differential increased the Clippers’ lead from four points to 12.

This period marked a meaningful change in the game’s direction. Los Angeles converted its possessions more efficiently, and the scoring difference gave the visitors additional room to manage the game.

Minnesota’s offense needed a stronger response before halftime. Instead, the Timberwolves entered the break trailing 54-42, leaving them with a substantial deficit to overcome.

Third Quarter: Defensive Pressure Extends the Gap

The Clippers scored 26 points in the third quarter, while Minnesota managed only 17. Los Angeles won the period by nine points and entered the final quarter with a 21-point lead.

The cumulative score after three quarters was 80-59.

This was a decisive stretch because the Timberwolves needed to reduce the deficit before the final 12 minutes. Instead, their scoring output declined again. The 17-point quarter was their lowest of the game, making the fourth quarter more about attempting a comeback than controlling the contest.

Fourth Quarter: Minnesota Scores More, but the Margin Remains Too Large

Minnesota scored 37 points in the final quarter, exceeding the Clippers’ 35. The Timberwolves showed improved scoring production, but the two-point advantage in the period was too small to reverse the overall result.

Los Angeles entered the fourth quarter ahead by 21 points and finished with a 19-point victory.

The final period demonstrates why quarter scores matter. Minnesota’s best scoring quarter came too late to compensate for the 21-point deficit accumulated during the first three quarters.

Complete Team Statistics: Clippers vs Timberwolves

The overall team numbers reveal three major differences: shooting efficiency, turnovers, and playmaking.

Team Statistic	LA Clippers	Minnesota Timberwolves
Points	115	96
Field Goals Made	39	37
Field-Goal Attempts	76	83
Field-Goal Percentage	51%	45%
Three-Pointers Made	14	8
Three-Point Attempts	27	33
Three-Point Percentage	52%	24%
Free Throws Made	23	14
Free-Throw Attempts	28	22
Free-Throw Percentage	82%	64%
Total Rebounds	37	41
Assists	25	17
Turnovers	13	20
Steals	11	8
Blocks	6	2

Percentages are reported using the supplied game data and may be rounded.

Shooting Efficiency: Los Angeles Makes More of Its Attempts

The Clippers made 39 of 76 field-goal attempts, while Minnesota converted 37 of 83. Los Angeles therefore made two more field goals despite taking seven fewer shots.

That difference matters because fewer attempts can still produce more points when a team consistently creates and converts better opportunities.

The Clippers’ reported 51% field-goal percentage exceeded Minnesota’s 45%. This six-percentage-point gap reflects a meaningful difference in overall shooting performance.

Los Angeles also scored 14 three-pointers on 27 attempts. Minnesota made eight on 33 attempts. The Clippers therefore connected on six more three-pointers while attempting six fewer.

Three-pointers are particularly important because each successful shot is worth three points rather than two. The difference between 14 and eight made threes represents 18 additional points from that category for Los Angeles.

This does not mean every missed three-pointer was a poor decision. Shot selection, defensive pressure, player positioning, and the timing of attempts all affect outcomes. However, the final numbers show that Minnesota did not receive the same scoring return from its perimeter attempts.

Three-Point Shooting: The Largest Statistical Difference

The Clippers shot a reported 52% from beyond the arc, compared with Minnesota’s 24%.

Three-Point Measure	Clippers	Timberwolves
Made	14	8
Attempted	27	33
Reported Percentage	52%	24%
Points From Made Threes	42	24

Los Angeles scored 18 more points from three-pointers. It also attempted fewer shots from long range, showing that its advantage came from conversion rather than simply taking more perimeter shots.

For Minnesota, this category is central to understanding the defeat. The Timberwolves attempted 33 three-pointers but converted only eight. Those misses limited the points available from their perimeter offense and contributed to the difficulty of closing the gap.

A high three-point attempt total can be useful when shots are generated by good ball movement and open looks. Yet volume alone does not guarantee efficient scoring. Teams must balance perimeter attempts with drives, interior opportunities, and free throws.

Free Throws: Another Important Scoring Advantage

The Clippers made 23 of 28 free throws, while the Timberwolves converted 14 of 22.

Los Angeles gained nine additional points from the free-throw line. Its reported 82% conversion rate also exceeded Minnesota’s 64%.

Free throws can be especially valuable in a game where perimeter shooting fluctuates. Unlike a contested field-goal attempt, a free throw provides a set scoring opportunity without a defender directly contesting the release.

Minnesota’s lower conversion rate meant that its trips to the line produced fewer points than the same number of opportunities might have generated at a higher percentage.

The free-throw difference and three-point difference together explain a substantial portion of the scoring gap. They should still be evaluated alongside field goals, turnovers, and the timing of each team’s scoring runs.

Rebounding: Minnesota Wins the Total

The Timberwolves recorded 41 rebounds, compared with 37 for the Clippers.

On the surface, this is one area where Minnesota held the advantage. Rebounding can create second-chance points, reduce an opponent’s opportunities, and help a team establish control of the paint.

However, winning the rebound count does not automatically mean a team controlled the game. Minnesota’s advantage of four rebounds did not offset its disadvantages in shooting efficiency, assists, and turnovers.

The available team totals do not separate offensive rebounds from defensive rebounds. Therefore, they cannot establish exactly how many extra scoring chances Minnesota created through offensive rebounding or how effectively either team secured defensive boards.

That distinction is important when interpreting rebounds. A complete assessment should examine offensive rebounds, defensive rebounds, and second-chance points separately rather than treating all rebounds as having the same impact.

Assists: Better Offensive Connection From the Clippers

Los Angeles recorded 25 assists, while Minnesota finished with 17.

An assist is credited when a pass directly leads to a made basket under the official statistical rules. Assist totals can therefore help explain how often scoring comes through passing rather than an individual creating a shot alone.

The Clippers’ eight-assist advantage suggests that more of their made baskets involved credited passing sequences. Combined with their superior shooting percentage, the figure supports the view that Los Angeles produced the more effective offensive performance.

However, assists do not capture every useful pass. A pass that forces a defensive rotation, creates an open shot that is missed, or initiates a successful sequence may not appear in the assist column.

For that reason, the assist total is best understood as one part of the offensive picture, not a complete measure of ball movement.

Turnovers: Minnesota Loses Valuable Possessions

The Clippers committed 13 turnovers, while Minnesota committed 20.

That seven-turnover difference is significant. A turnover ends a team’s possession without a shot being attempted, a free throw being awarded, or a made basket being recorded on that possession.

In a game decided by 19 points, giving away seven additional possessions can make it harder to keep pace with an efficient opponent.

The turnover numbers also fit the broader pattern. Los Angeles produced 25 assists with 13 turnovers, while Minnesota recorded 17 assists with 20 turnovers. The Clippers combined more credited playmaking with fewer lost possessions.

Turnovers can result from different problems, including inaccurate passes, offensive fouls, ball-handling mistakes, and defensive pressure. The aggregate totals do not identify which specific mistakes occurred, so a detailed play-by-play review would be needed to determine the exact causes.

Defensive Activity: Steals and Blocks

Los Angeles recorded 11 steals and six blocks. Minnesota finished with eight steals and two blocks.

The Clippers held advantages of three steals and four blocks. These statistics indicate that Los Angeles registered more credited defensive plays that directly disrupted or stopped opponents’ offensive attempts.

Steals can create immediate transition opportunities, while blocks can prevent shots from reaching the basket or alter an opponent’s decision to finish near the rim.

Still, neither statistic measures defense in full. A defender can force a difficult miss without earning a block, and a well-positioned defender can prevent a pass or drive without recording a steal.

The available numbers support the conclusion that Los Angeles generated more steals and blocks, but they do not establish every aspect of defensive quality.

Kawhi Leonard Player Stats: A 41-Point Performance

Kawhi Leonard led all scorers with 41 points, making him the central individual figure in the game.

His scoring total represented more than one-third of the Clippers’ 115 points. Leonard’s combination of field goals, three-pointers, and free throws allowed him to score through multiple methods rather than relying on a single type of shot.

Kawhi Leonard’s Complete Statistical Line

Statistic	Kawhi Leonard
Points	41
Rebounds	8
Assists	2
Steals	4
Field Goals Made	14
Field-Goal Attempts	30
Field-Goal Percentage	46.7%
Three-Pointers Made	5
Three-Point Attempts	11
Three-Point Percentage	45.5%
Free Throws Made	8
Free-Throw Attempts	10
Free-Throw Percentage	80%

Leonard’s listed shooting totals account for 41 points: 14 field goals include five three-pointers, leaving nine two-point field goals. Those baskets produce 33 points, and eight made free throws add another eight.

His individual line is consistent with the overall team pattern. Los Angeles benefited from productive three-point shooting, solid free-throw conversion, and an ability to turn scoring opportunities into points.

How Leonard Reached 41 Points

Leonard made 14 of 30 field-goal attempts, including five three-pointers. He also converted eight of 10 free throws.

His 30 field-goal attempts show that he carried a substantial scoring workload. That volume is important when evaluating a high-scoring performance because total points alone do not explain how efficiently those points were produced.

Leonard’s field-goal percentage was approximately 46.7%, while his three-point percentage was approximately 45.5%. His free-throw percentage was 80%.

The figures indicate that he contributed through perimeter shooting, two-point field goals, and free throws. This variety makes the scoring line more informative than a total based entirely on one shot type.

Leonard’s Eight Rebounds and Four Steals

Leonard added eight rebounds and four steals to his 41 points.

The rebound total shows that his contribution extended beyond scoring. The four steals also gave him a direct role in defensive disruption, although the team statistics do not identify how many of those steals led to transition points.

His two assists were a smaller part of his statistical contribution. That does not mean he had no influence on ball movement, because not every pass results in an officially credited assist.

Overall, Leonard’s combination of 41 points, eight rebounds, and four steals captures the broad scope of his performance. His scoring was the headline, but the defensive statistics add useful context.

Anthony Edwards Player Stats: Minnesota’s Leading Scorer

Anthony Edwards led Minnesota with 23 points. He also recorded four rebounds, two assists, and two steals.

Although Edwards finished as the Timberwolves’ top scorer, his 23 points were 18 fewer than Leonard’s total. The comparison reflects the difference between the leading scorers on the two teams, rather than a complete judgment of either player’s overall performance.

Anthony Edwards’ Complete Statistical Line

Statistic	Anthony Edwards
Points	23
Rebounds	4
Assists	2
Steals	2
Field Goals Made	7
Field-Goal Attempts	18
Field-Goal Percentage	38.9%
Three-Pointers Made	1
Three-Point Attempts	8
Three-Point Percentage	12.5%
Free Throws Made	8
Free-Throw Attempts	10
Free-Throw Percentage	80%

Edwards made seven of 18 field-goal attempts, including one of eight from three-point range. He also made eight of 10 free throws.

His 23 points were supported by free-throw production, but his perimeter shooting was less successful. The one made three-pointer accounted for three of his points, while the other 20 came from two-point field goals and free throws.

Edwards’ Three-Point Shooting

Edwards attempted eight three-pointers and made one, producing a 12.5% conversion rate.

This is a major detail in his individual statistical line because perimeter shots can quickly change the pace of a game. When a primary scorer does not convert from long range, the team may need additional production from teammates or more successful possessions inside the arc.

The figures do not establish whether Edwards’ attempts were open, contested, rushed, or taken late in the shot clock. Those details would require film or play-by-play evidence.

What the numbers do establish is that his three-point shooting did not generate much of Minnesota’s scoring. His free throws helped sustain his point total, but the limited perimeter conversion made it harder for him to match Leonard’s output.

Edwards’ Overall Contribution

Edwards contributed four rebounds and two steals in addition to his 23 points. Those numbers show involvement on both ends of the floor, although they do not fully capture his defensive assignments or off-ball work.

The broader team context matters here. Minnesota made eight three-pointers as a team and committed 20 turnovers. Edwards was part of an offense that struggled from the perimeter, but the team statistics alone cannot assign the collective shooting and turnover problems to one player.

A balanced reading of his performance recognizes his status as Minnesota’s leading scorer while also acknowledging the limitations shown by his shooting splits.

Other Key Players and Starting Lineups

The supplied starting lineups identify the players who opened the game for both teams. Individual statistics for the remaining starters are not included in the supplied data, so their exact points, rebounds, assists, and shooting percentages cannot be reported reliably here.

LA Clippers Starting Lineup

Player	Position in the Game Analysis
Kawhi Leonard	Leading scorer and primary statistical standout
John Collins	Starting frontcourt player
Derrick Jones Jr.	Starting wing
Brook Lopez	Starting center
Kris Dunn	Starting guard

Leonard’s performance is documented by his 41 points, eight rebounds, two assists, and four steals. The supplied information confirms the other four starters but does not provide their complete individual box-score lines.

Minnesota Timberwolves Starting Lineup

Player	Position in the Game Analysis
Julius Randle	Starting frontcourt player
Jaden McDaniels	Starting forward
Rudy Gobert	Starting center
Donte DiVincenzo	Starting guard
Anthony Edwards	Leading scorer

Edwards led Minnesota with 23 points, four rebounds, two assists, and two steals. The supplied data does not include complete individual lines for Randle, McDaniels, Gobert, or DiVincenzo.

These limitations matter because a starting lineup is not the same as a complete player-stat report. Bench players may also influence scoring runs, defensive matchups, rebounding, and turnover totals. A full player-by-player assessment requires the individual box score rather than the starting lineup alone.

Comparing the Two Leading Scorers

Leonard and Edwards led their respective teams, but their statistical lines show different scoring outcomes.

Category	Kawhi Leonard	Anthony Edwards
Points	41	23
Rebounds	8	4
Assists	2	2
Steals	4	2
Field Goals	14/30	7/18
Three-Pointers	5/11	1/8
Free Throws	8/10	8/10
Field-Goal Percentage	46.7%	38.9%
Three-Point Percentage	45.5%	12.5%

Scoring Volume and Shot Conversion

Leonard scored 18 more points than Edwards. He also made seven more field goals and four more three-pointers.

Both players converted eight of 10 free throws. Consequently, the main differences in their point totals came from field goals, particularly three-pointers.

Leonard’s five made threes produced 15 points from long range. Edwards’ one made three produced three. That 12-point difference from three-point baskets explains a meaningful part of the scoring gap between the two stars.

Rebounds, Assists, and Defensive Contributions

Leonard collected eight rebounds compared with Edwards’ four, and he recorded four steals compared with Edwards’ two.

Both players registered two assists.

These comparisons offer a useful summary, but they should not be treated as a complete player-efficiency ranking. A fuller evaluation would also consider playing time, defensive assignments, fouls, turnovers, screen assists, and the quality of each player’s shot opportunities.

Without those additional details, the most defensible conclusion is that Leonard produced the larger statistical line in this game, particularly in scoring and steals.

Why the Clippers Won: Five Statistical Factors

The final result can be explained through several connected categories rather than one isolated statistic.

1. More Efficient Overall Shooting

Los Angeles made 39 field goals on 76 attempts, while Minnesota made 37 on 83 attempts.

The Clippers converted a greater share of their attempts despite taking fewer shots. That efficiency helped them score 115 points without requiring the same volume of field-goal attempts as the Timberwolves.

2. A Clear Advantage From Three-Point Range

The Clippers made 14 threes, compared with Minnesota’s eight.

This produced an 18-point difference in scoring from beyond the arc. Minnesota actually attempted six more three-pointers, but the additional volume did not translate into additional points.

The lesson is not that teams should avoid three-point shots after a poor shooting night. It is that perimeter volume must be considered alongside conversion rates, shot quality, and alternative scoring opportunities.

3. Fewer Turnovers

Los Angeles committed 13 turnovers, while Minnesota committed 20.

The seven-turnover gap meant that Minnesota gave away more possessions. Against a team shooting efficiently, those lost opportunities can make a comeback increasingly difficult.

Turnovers also affect rhythm. A team that repeatedly loses possession may struggle to establish its half-court offense or maintain pressure on the defense.

4. More Assists and Defensive Events

The Clippers recorded 25 assists, 11 steals, and six blocks. Minnesota recorded 17 assists, eight steals, and two blocks.

These numbers show that Los Angeles finished with higher totals in credited playmaking and defensive disruption. They do not explain every possession, but they reinforce the pattern established by the shooting and turnover statistics.

5. A Stronger First Three Quarters

Los Angeles outscored Minnesota in each of the first three quarters.

The Clippers led 23-19 after the first, 54-42 at halftime, and 80-59 after the third. By the start of the fourth quarter, Minnesota faced a 21-point deficit.

The Timberwolves won the final period 37-35, but that was not enough to overcome the accumulated gap. The scoring timeline helps explain why a productive fourth quarter did not change the winner.

What the Statistics Reveal About Minnesota’s Performance

Minnesota’s 96 points were not the result of one problem alone. The team collected more rebounds than Los Angeles, but it struggled to convert three-point attempts, committed 20 turnovers, and recorded eight fewer assists.

The 41-37 rebounding advantage is an important qualification. It shows that the Timberwolves were not behind in every major statistical category. They recovered four more rebounds, yet those extra boards did not offset the difference in shooting and possession management.

The three-point numbers are especially revealing. Minnesota attempted 33 shots from beyond the arc and made eight. That left 25 missed three-point attempts, although the available figures do not identify how many resulted in offensive rebounds or other subsequent events.

The free-throw numbers also deserve attention. Minnesota made 14 of 22 attempts, leaving eight missed free throws. Better conversion would have added points, but even perfect free-throw shooting would have produced only eight additional points, not enough by itself to erase the 19-point final margin.

Turnovers presented another challenge. Minnesota’s 20 turnovers were seven more than Los Angeles’ total. Reducing that number could have preserved additional possessions, but the exact impact cannot be calculated without knowing what happened after each turnover.

The central takeaway is that Minnesota’s rebounding advantage was outweighed by several offensive disadvantages. Better perimeter conversion, stronger ball security, and more efficient possessions would have offered a clearer path to a closer result.

What the Statistics Reveal About the Clippers

Los Angeles combined efficient shooting with better possession management and a strong individual performance from Leonard.

The team made 51% of its field-goal attempts, converted 52% of its three-pointers according to the supplied game figures, and made 82% of its free throws. Those results gave the Clippers multiple ways to produce points.

Their 25 assists also suggest that a meaningful portion of their scoring came through credited passing plays. Meanwhile, 13 turnovers limited the number of possessions that ended without a scoring attempt.

Defensively, the Clippers recorded 11 steals and six blocks. The Timberwolves’ 20 turnovers and lower three-point percentage indicate that Minnesota did not consistently turn its offensive opportunities into efficient scoring.

The most useful lesson from Los Angeles’ performance is the value of balance. Leonard delivered the standout scoring performance, but the team also finished ahead in field-goal percentage, three-point conversion, free-throw percentage, assists, steals, and blocks.

That combination made the win more sustainable than a result based on one unusually productive scoring category alone.

Head-to-Head Context and Season Series

The supplied game information lists the season series as tied 1-1 at the time represented by the data. It also identifies an earlier meeting on December 7, 2025, when Minnesota defeated Los Angeles 109-106.

The February 9 result therefore represented a different outcome in the matchup, with the Clippers winning 115-96.

The supplied schedule also lists a February 27, 2026 meeting in which Minnesota scored 88 points and Los Angeles scored 94. A further listed meeting on March 12, 2026, ended with Minnesota winning 153-128.

These later results provide context for the season’s meetings, but they should be distinguished from the February 9 box score. Each game had its own scoring patterns and statistical outcomes.

The head-to-head record is most informative when it is paired with game-specific details. A season series can show which team won each meeting, while player statistics explain how a particular result developed.

How to Read NBA Player Statistics Correctly

For readers comparing box scores, a few simple principles make the numbers more useful.

Start With the Final Score, Then Examine Efficiency

The score identifies the outcome, but field-goal percentage and three-point percentage help explain how effectively a team scored.

In this game, Los Angeles won 115-96 and also held the advantage in both shooting categories. That consistency strengthens the explanation for the result.

Separate Shooting Volume From Shooting Accuracy

Attempts show how often a player or team took a shot. Makes show how many attempts resulted in baskets. Percentages measure the relationship between the two.

Minnesota attempted more field goals and more three-pointers than Los Angeles, yet made fewer field goals and fewer threes. Looking at attempts alone would miss this distinction.

Consider Possession Management

Turnovers represent possessions that end without a conventional scoring attempt. Assists provide a partial picture of how scoring opportunities are created through passing.

The Clippers’ 25 assists and 13 turnovers compare favorably with Minnesota’s 17 assists and 20 turnovers. Both measures are necessary to understand offensive organization.

Use Player Splits to Explain Individual Scoring

A player’s point total does not reveal the full method behind the performance.

Leonard scored 41 points with five made three-pointers and eight made free throws. Edwards scored 23 with one made three-pointer and eight made free throws.

These splits show that the players reached their totals through different field-goal outcomes, even though they made the same number of free throws.

Distinguish Verified Totals From Interpretation

A box score can establish points, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, and shooting results. It cannot independently establish every tactical cause behind those figures.

Claims about defensive assignments, coaching adjustments, shot quality, or specific momentum-changing possessions require additional evidence such as game footage, play-by-play records, or postgame reporting.

This distinction helps readers avoid confusing a reasonable statistical interpretation with a confirmed description of what happened on the court.

Official Box Score and Reliable Game Information

The supplied game record identifies ESPN’s box score, gamecast, and recap pages for the February 9 matchup. The box score is the most relevant starting point for checking individual player totals, shooting splits, and team statistics.

For the original game record, consult the ESPN box score for the Clippers vs Timberwolves game.

The box score should be treated as the primary reference when verifying exact player lines. If a full individual table is needed, it is important to check each player rather than infer missing statistics from the team’s totals.

This is particularly relevant for the starters whose individual numbers were not included in the supplied data. Reporting their points, rebounds, or assists without verification would risk presenting incorrect information as fact.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Who won the LA Clippers vs Minnesota Timberwolves game on February 9, 2026?

The Los Angeles Clippers defeated the Minnesota Timberwolves 115-96 at Target Center in Minneapolis. Los Angeles won by 19 points after leading through the first three quarters.

2. How many points did Kawhi Leonard score against the Timberwolves?

Kawhi Leonard scored 41 points. He added eight rebounds, two assists, and four steals while making 14 of 30 field-goal attempts, including five three-pointers.

3. How many points did Anthony Edwards score against the Clippers?

Anthony Edwards scored 23 points for Minnesota. He recorded four rebounds, two assists, and two steals, making seven of 18 field-goal attempts and one of eight three-pointers.

4. Which team shot better from three-point range?

The Clippers made 14 of 27 three-point attempts, while Minnesota made eight of 33. The supplied statistics report three-point percentages of 52% for Los Angeles and 24% for Minnesota.

5. Why did the Clippers win by 19 points?

Los Angeles combined better shooting percentages with 25 assists and 13 turnovers. Minnesota recorded 20 turnovers and made only eight three-pointers, while the Clippers built a 21-point lead through the first three quarters.

6. Where can readers check the complete player box score?

Readers can consult the official game listing and individual statistics on ESPN’s box-score page for the February 9, 2026 matchup. Individual figures should be checked directly rather than estimated from team totals.

Conclusion

The February 9, 2026 meeting between the LA Clippers and Minnesota Timberwolves ended with a 115-96 victory for Los Angeles. Kawhi Leonard led the game with 41 points, while Anthony Edwards paced Minnesota with 23.

The team statistics explain the 19-point margin. Los Angeles shot more efficiently, made six additional three-pointers, converted more free throws, recorded eight more assists, and committed seven fewer turnovers. Minnesota held a four-rebound advantage and outscored the Clippers in the fourth quarter, but those positives were not enough to overcome the deficit established earlier.

The most important insight from the la clippers vs timberwolves match player stats is that the outcome reflected several connected advantages rather than one isolated number. Leonard’s scoring stood out, but the Clippers’ perimeter accuracy, ball security, and defensive activity all contributed to the final result.

For a reliable understanding of this matchup, the final score should be read alongside the quarter-by-quarter progression, team shooting figures, turnover totals, and leading players’ individual lines. Together, these statistics provide a clearer account of how the game unfolded and why Los Angeles left Minneapolis with the win.

la clippers vs timberwolves match player stats: Explore Leonard’s 41 points, Edwards’ 23, shooting splits, and the 115-96 final score.