Timberwolves vs Denver Nuggets Match Player Stats
The timberwolves vs denver nuggets match player stats from April 26, 2026, highlight Minnesota’s 112-96 victory over Denver in Game 4 of the Western Conference first round. Minnesota overturned a narrow halftime deficit with a strong second half, winning the final two quarters by a combined 20 points. Ayo Dosunmu led the Timberwolves with 43 points, while Jamal Murray scored 30 for the Nuggets. Rudy Gobert and Nikola Jokic each collected 15 rebounds, making rebounding one of the game’s most important statistical battles.
The game took place at Target Center in Minneapolis, where 18,978 spectators attended. The result gave Minnesota a 3-1 lead in the series according to the supplied game record. The Timberwolves finished with 50 rebounds, shot 44% from the field, and made 36% of their three-point attempts. Denver struggled from long range, converting only 6 of 28 attempts. These differences help explain how Minnesota built a 16-point winning margin despite Denver’s strong free-throw shooting and seven blocked shots.
This statistical breakdown examines the final score, individual performances, team efficiency, quarter-by-quarter scoring, and the factors that shaped the result. All game figures below are based on the supplied ESPN-derived data. The supplied record contains a potential inconsistency in its series timeline, so the Game 4 statistics are treated separately from the later results listed in that record.
Game Overview: Minnesota Timberwolves vs Denver Nuggets
The fourth game of the series featured two teams with different strengths. Denver relied on its leading scorers and interior play, while Minnesota gained a decisive advantage through rebounding, shooting efficiency, and second-half scoring.
Minnesota Timberwolves
Home team
112 – 96
Minnesota won
Denver Nuggets
Away team
Date
April 26, 2026
Competition
NBA Playoffs
Venue
Target Center
Attendance
18,978
Game number
Western Conference First Round, Game 4
Series score in supplied record
Minnesota led 3-1
Final score and team records
| Match detail | Minnesota | Denver |
| Final score | 112 | 96 |
| Overall regular-season record | 49-33 | 54-28 |
| Home or away record | 26-15 at home | 26-15 away |
| Field goals made | 39 | 33 |
| Three-pointers made | 9 | 6 |
| Free throws made | 25 | 24 |
| Total rebounds | 50 | 38 |
| Total assists | 22 | 21 |
The final score shows Minnesota’s 16-point advantage, but the shooting and rebounding figures reveal more about the performance. The Timberwolves made six more field goals and collected 12 additional rebounds. Denver stayed competitive at the free-throw line, but that advantage did not offset Minnesota’s stronger overall shooting.
The most striking individual contribution came from Dosunmu, who scored 43 points. His total exceeded Murray’s 30-point performance by 13 points. Gobert’s 15 rebounds also matched Jokic’s total, although the teams’ combined rebounding figures strongly favored Minnesota.
Timberwolves vs Denver Nuggets Match Player Stats: Quarter-by-Quarter Breakdown
The scoring pattern explains why Minnesota emerged with a comfortable victory. Denver led after the first two quarters, but Minnesota changed the game’s direction after halftime. The Timberwolves’ defensive pressure and more efficient offense helped them take control during the final 24 minutes.
| Quarter | Denver Nuggets | Minnesota Timberwolves | Quarter winner |
| First quarter | 23 | 22 | Denver |
| Second quarter | 31 | 28 | Denver |
| Third quarter | 24 | 32 | Minnesota |
| Fourth quarter | 18 | 30 | Minnesota |
| Final score | 96 | 112 | Minnesota |
First quarter: Denver takes a narrow lead
Denver scored 23 points in the opening quarter, one more than Minnesota’s 22. Neither team created a meaningful separation during this period. The one-point difference suggested a closely contested game, with both sides still working to establish their preferred offensive rhythm.
Minnesota stayed within reach despite trailing. That mattered because the Timberwolves did not need to recover a large early deficit. Instead, they needed to improve their execution and sustain their scoring over the remaining three quarters.
Denver’s narrow advantage provided an early foundation, but it did not guarantee control of the game.
Second quarter: Denver extends its advantage
Denver scored 31 points in the second quarter, while Minnesota added 28. The Nuggets therefore won the period by three points and went into halftime with a 54-50 lead.
The four-point halftime margin was small enough for Minnesota to overcome without needing an extraordinary run. However, the Timberwolves needed to address the difference in scoring pace. Denver had produced 54 points in the first half, while Minnesota had scored 50.
At this stage, the game remained open. Denver had the lead, but Minnesota’s later response showed that the halftime score was not a reliable indication of how the contest would finish.
Third quarter: Minnesota changes the momentum
Minnesota scored 32 points in the third quarter, compared with Denver’s 24. That eight-point advantage erased Denver’s four-point halftime lead and gave the Timberwolves a 82-78 lead entering the final period.
This was the game’s first major statistical turning point.
The Timberwolves’ offense became more productive, and their advantage in overall shooting efficiency was consistent with the change in scoring. Minnesota finished the game shooting 44% from the field, compared with Denver’s 38%.
The third-quarter result also changed the pressure on Denver. Instead of protecting a lead, the Nuggets entered the fourth quarter needing to respond to Minnesota’s improved performance.
Fourth quarter: The Timberwolves pull away
Minnesota outscored Denver 30-18 in the final quarter. The 12-point difference expanded a four-point lead into a 16-point victory.
Denver’s scoring fell to 18 points, its lowest total in any quarter of the game. Minnesota, meanwhile, maintained a strong offensive output with another 30-point period.
This combination was more important than either team’s performance in isolation. Minnesota continued scoring while limiting Denver’s production. The Timberwolves did not merely protect their lead; they increased it substantially.
The quarter-by-quarter figures therefore reveal a clear pattern: Denver controlled the first half, but Minnesota dominated the second half.
Individual Player Performance Analysis
The individual numbers provide a closer look at the performances behind the final score. Dosunmu’s 43 points were the standout scoring contribution, while Murray’s 30 points kept Denver’s offense competitive. The two centers, Gobert and Jokic, also recorded 15 rebounds apiece.
The supplied data identifies these leaders, but it does not provide a complete player-by-player box score with every player’s minutes, field goals, assists, and turnovers. The analysis below distinguishes confirmed figures in the supplied record from broader tactical interpretation.
Ayo Dosunmu leads Minnesota with 43 points
Ayo Dosunmu finished as Minnesota’s leading scorer with 43 points. That total was the highest individual scoring figure listed in the supplied game data and was central to the Timberwolves’ offensive success.
A 43-point performance can influence a game in several ways. It gives a team a major source of scoring, forces the opposition to account for that player more carefully, and can create opportunities for teammates when defensive attention shifts.
However, points alone do not establish how efficiently a player scored. Without Dosunmu’s individual shooting attempts, minutes, free-throw attempts, and turnovers, it is not possible to calculate his true shooting percentage or determine exactly how much of his production came from three-point shots, drives, or free throws.
What the available figures do establish is that Minnesota received an exceptional scoring contribution. Dosunmu’s 43 points were 13 more than Murray’s 30, giving the Timberwolves a clear advantage in the matchup between the two leading scorers.
Jamal Murray scores 30 points for Denver
Jamal Murray led Denver with 30 points. His scoring output was substantial, particularly in a game where Denver finished with 96 points as a team.
Murray’s 30 points accounted for a significant portion of the Nuggets’ total offense. Yet basketball is a team game, and an individual scoring performance cannot compensate for every weakness in team efficiency.
Denver shot 38% from the field and 21% from three-point range. Those figures indicate that the team struggled to convert its overall shot attempts, even though its leading scorer reached 30 points.
It would be inaccurate to conclude from the team figures alone that Murray personally shot poorly. Individual shooting splits are needed to evaluate his efficiency. The defensible conclusion is that his scoring was not enough to overcome Minnesota’s stronger team-level performance.
Rudy Gobert records 15 rebounds
Rudy Gobert collected 15 rebounds for Minnesota, matching Jokic’s total. His contribution was particularly relevant because the Timberwolves finished with 50 rebounds, compared with Denver’s 38.
Rebounding matters because it determines which team gains possession after missed shots. Defensive rebounds end an opponent’s possession, while offensive rebounds can create additional scoring opportunities.
Minnesota recorded 16 offensive rebounds and 34 defensive rebounds. Denver collected 12 offensive rebounds and 26 defensive rebounds. These figures show that the Timberwolves gained an advantage on both sides of the rebounding battle.
Gobert’s 15 rebounds were a major individual contribution within that team advantage. However, the supplied data does not separate his offensive rebounds from his defensive rebounds, so those individual totals should not be assumed.
Nikola Jokic contributes 15 rebounds and 9 assists
Nikola Jokic led Denver in both rebounds and assists, recording 15 rebounds and nine assists according to the supplied figures.
His nine assists indicate that he contributed to Denver’s scoring beyond his own points. Assists measure passes that directly lead to made baskets, although they do not capture every important pass or decision that creates an advantage.
Jokic’s 15 rebounds also placed him level with Gobert. His individual rebounding output was strong, but Denver still finished 12 rebounds behind Minnesota as a team.
That difference illustrates an important point about individual basketball statistics: a player can perform well in one category while his team loses the broader statistical contest. Jokic’s reported rebounding and playmaking did not erase Minnesota’s advantage in team shooting and possession recovery.
Bones Hyland leads Minnesota in assists
Bones Hyland recorded seven assists, making him Minnesota’s leading assist provider in the supplied record.
Assists help show how scoring opportunities are distributed. A team with several players contributing to ball movement can create different types of offensive opportunities instead of depending on one scorer to generate every basket.
Minnesota finished with 22 assists, one more than Denver’s 21. The difference was small, so assists alone do not explain the result. The more important distinction is that Minnesota combined slightly higher assist production with better shooting percentages and more rebounds.
Hyland’s seven assists were therefore one part of a broader team performance rather than an isolated explanation for the win.
Key Player Statistics at a Glance
The following table summarizes the leading individual performances explicitly identified in the supplied game data.
| Team | Player | Statistical category | Recorded total |
| Minnesota Timberwolves | Ayo Dosunmu | Points | 43 |
| Minnesota Timberwolves | Rudy Gobert | Rebounds | 15 |
| Minnesota Timberwolves | Bones Hyland | Assists | 7 |
| Denver Nuggets | Jamal Murray | Points | 30 |
| Denver Nuggets | Nikola Jokic | Rebounds | 15 |
| Denver Nuggets | Nikola Jokic | Assists | 9 |
These are category-leading figures, not complete player stat lines. A complete individual box score would also include each player’s minutes, field goals made and attempted, three-pointers, free throws, offensive and defensive rebounds, steals, blocks, turnovers, and personal fouls.
For a detailed official-style record, readers can consult the ESPN box score, which is the supplied reference for this matchup. Individual statistics should be checked against the original box score when exact player-by-player figures are required.
Team Shooting Comparison: Why Minnesota Was More Efficient
Shooting efficiency was one of the clearest differences between the teams. Minnesota made more field goals, converted a higher percentage of its attempts, and hit more three-pointers despite attempting fewer shots from beyond the arc.
| Shooting category | Minnesota Timberwolves | Denver Nuggets |
| Field goals | 39/89 | 33/87 |
| Field-goal percentage | 44% | 38% |
| Three-pointers | 9/25 | 6/28 |
| Three-point percentage | 36% | 21% |
| Free throws | 25/26 | 24/28 |
| Free-throw percentage | 96% | 86% |
| Total points | 112 | 96 |
Field-goal percentage favors Minnesota
Minnesota converted 39 of 89 field-goal attempts, while Denver made 33 of 87. The Timberwolves therefore made six additional field goals despite taking only two more attempts.
The difference in field-goal percentage was six percentage points based on the rounded figures provided. Minnesota’s 44% conversion rate exceeded Denver’s 38%.
Field-goal percentage includes both two-point and three-point baskets. It is useful for evaluating overall shot conversion, but it does not assign additional value to a three-pointer compared with a two-pointer. That is why three-point and free-throw figures should also be considered.
The combined numbers show that Minnesota converted its opportunities more effectively across the game.
Three-point shooting creates a meaningful gap
Minnesota made nine three-pointers from 25 attempts, giving it a 36% success rate. Denver made six from 28 attempts, converting 21%.
The Timberwolves therefore made three more three-pointers while attempting three fewer shots from long range.
That difference produced nine additional points from three-point baskets. In a game decided by 16 points, the three-point gap was meaningful, although it did not account for the entire margin.
Denver’s 21% success rate also meant that its long-range attempts produced fewer points than Minnesota’s. A team can generate reasonable-looking shot volume but still struggle to keep pace if those attempts do not convert.
The available figures do not identify the exact shooters responsible for the missed attempts. It would therefore be inappropriate to attribute Denver’s three-point performance to a particular player without individual shooting data.
Free throws provide another Minnesota advantage
Denver made 24 of 28 free throws, while Minnesota converted 25 of 26. Both teams scored close to 25 points from the line, but Minnesota was more accurate.
The Timberwolves made approximately 96% of their free throws, compared with Denver’s 86%. Their 25 makes also came from two fewer attempts.
Free throws can be particularly important in close playoff games because they provide scoring opportunities without requiring a field-goal attempt. In this matchup, Minnesota’s near-perfect performance at the line helped maintain its scoring advantage.
The difference was not as large as the rebounding gap or the difference in three-point shooting, but it contributed to the overall result.
Rebounding and Possession Control
Minnesota’s 50-38 rebounding advantage was one of the strongest indicators of its control over the game. The Timberwolves collected 12 more rebounds than Denver, creating a substantial difference in the number of missed-shot possessions each team recovered.
| Rebounding category | Minnesota | Denver | Difference |
| Total rebounds | 50 | 38 | Minnesota +12 |
| Offensive rebounds | 16 | 12 | Minnesota +4 |
| Defensive rebounds | 34 | 26 | Minnesota +8 |
Offensive rebounds create second chances
Minnesota collected 16 offensive rebounds, compared with Denver’s 12. These additional recoveries gave the Timberwolves more opportunities to continue possessions after missed shots.
An offensive rebound does not automatically result in points. The attacking team still needs to create and convert another scoring opportunity. However, offensive rebounds can extend possessions, increase pressure on the defense, and prevent opponents from ending a possession cleanly.
Minnesota’s four-rebound advantage on the offensive glass was especially useful alongside its higher shooting percentage. The team converted a greater share of its field-goal attempts and also recovered more of its own misses.
That combination can create a difficult defensive situation. Opponents must defend the initial attempt and remain prepared to contest a second attempt if the shot misses.
Defensive rebounds help end possessions
Minnesota recorded 34 defensive rebounds, while Denver collected 26. The eight-rebound difference suggests that the Timberwolves were more successful at securing possession after Denver missed.
A defensive rebound prevents the opposition from immediately extending its attack with an offensive rebound. It can also allow the rebounding team to begin its own possession.
Denver still collected 26 defensive rebounds, so the Nuggets were not entirely ineffective in this area. Nevertheless, Minnesota’s larger total contributed to the 12-rebound overall advantage.
What the rebounding numbers do not prove
The figures support the conclusion that Minnesota won the rebounding battle. They do not establish exactly how many fast-break points, second-chance points, or points off turnovers either team scored.
Those categories require additional play-by-play or box-score information. Keeping that distinction clear makes the statistical analysis more reliable and prevents team totals from being used to invent events that the data does not document.
Assists, Turnovers, Steals, and Blocks
Shooting and rebounding were important, but the other team statistics help explain the balance of play.
| Category | Minnesota | Denver | Statistical leader |
| Assists | 22 | 21 | Minnesota |
| Turnovers | 12 | 10 | Denver |
| Steals | 6 | 7 | Denver |
| Blocks | 5 | 7 | Denver |
| Personal fouls | 22 | 22 | Tied |
Assists show similar team playmaking totals
Minnesota recorded 22 assists, compared with Denver’s 21. The one-assist difference was small and does not suggest a major separation in recorded playmaking.
This is important because Minnesota’s victory was not built on a large advantage in assists. Instead, its main statistical advantages appeared in shooting efficiency, rebounding, and free-throw accuracy.
Denver’s 21 assists also indicate that the Nuggets generated assisted baskets throughout the game. The final result should not be interpreted as proof that Denver’s offense lacked all effective ball movement.
Turnovers favor Denver
Denver committed 10 turnovers, while Minnesota committed 12. The Nuggets therefore protected possession slightly better in this category.
Turnovers matter because they end offensive possessions without a field-goal attempt or a successful trip to the free-throw line in many situations. They can also create transition opportunities for the opposing team.
Minnesota won despite committing two additional turnovers. This shows why a single statistic rarely explains a basketball result. The Timberwolves compensated for their turnover disadvantage with stronger shooting and rebounding.
The available data does not specify how many points either team scored directly from turnovers. As a result, the two-turnover difference should not be converted into an assumed points advantage.
Denver records more steals and blocks
Denver recorded seven steals and seven blocks, compared with Minnesota’s six steals and five blocks.
Steals indicate that a defender gained possession from an opponent, while blocks record shots rejected by defenders. Both categories can reflect defensive activity, but neither fully measures defensive quality.
Denver’s seven blocks were notable because the Nuggets still lost by 16 points. The figures demonstrate that the team produced defensive stops in certain situations, yet it struggled to convert its overall offensive opportunities efficiently enough to win.
Minnesota’s five blocks and six steals were lower totals, but the Timberwolves’ overall result was stronger. Their defensive contribution also included limiting Denver to 96 points and holding the Nuggets to 18 in the fourth quarter.
Personal fouls were even
Both teams were charged with 22 personal fouls. The equal totals mean that neither side had a numerical advantage in this category.
However, equal foul counts do not necessarily indicate equal defensive discipline. The timing, location, and consequences of fouls can differ substantially. For example, a foul during a shooting attempt may result in free throws, while another foul may simply stop play.
The available summary does not provide enough detail to compare the exact impact of individual fouls. The more reliable conclusion is that the total foul count was identical, while Minnesota converted its free throws more efficiently.
Starting Lineups and Bench Contributions
The supplied data lists the following starters and bench players for the matchup. These lists identify the reported team personnel, but they do not provide a complete individual statistical line for every player.
| Minnesota Timberwolves | Denver Nuggets |
| Julius Randle | Aaron Gordon |
| Jaden McDaniels | Cameron Johnson |
| Rudy Gobert | Nikola Jokic |
| Donte DiVincenzo | Jamal Murray |
| Anthony Edwards | Christian Braun |
The reported Minnesota bench included Kyle Anderson, Naz Reid, Mike Conley, Ayo Dosunmu, Terrence Shannon Jr., Bones Hyland, Joe Ingles, Julian Phillips, Joan Beringer, and Jaylen Clark.
Denver’s listed bench included DaRon Holmes II, Spencer Jones, Tim Hardaway Jr., Bruce Brown, Jalen Pickett, Zeke Nnaji, Jonas Valanciunas, Tyus Jones, and Julian Strawther.
Why bench production matters in playoff basketball
Bench players can influence a playoff game by maintaining scoring while starters rest, defending opposing playmakers, recovering rebounds, and keeping the team’s pace consistent.
Dosunmu’s reported 43 points make his performance the most notable individual scoring figure in the supplied Minnesota data. Hyland’s seven assists also identify him as a major playmaking contributor according to the record.
However, the available information does not include each player’s minutes or a full set of individual statistics. It would be misleading to assign exact bench scoring totals or claim that a particular lineup won its minutes without those figures.
The same caution applies to Denver. The supplied data identifies the team’s personnel, but it does not establish how many points each reserve scored or which combinations were most effective.
A complete lineup analysis would compare points scored and allowed during each player’s minutes, alongside shooting efficiency, rebounds, and turnovers. Those details would help distinguish individual production from the effect of playing alongside stronger teammates.
What the Statistics Reveal About Minnesota’s Victory
The numbers point to three major factors: Minnesota’s second-half scoring, superior rebounding, and better shooting efficiency.
1. Minnesota won the second half decisively
Denver led 54-50 at halftime. Minnesota then outscored the Nuggets 32-24 in the third quarter and 30-18 in the fourth.
Across the second half, Minnesota scored 62 points while Denver scored 42. That 20-point second-half advantage was enough to transform a four-point deficit into a 16-point win.
This is the clearest explanation of the game’s progression. Minnesota did not control every quarter, but it performed much better during the periods that ultimately determined the result.
2. The Timberwolves converted shots more effectively
Minnesota shot 44% from the field, while Denver shot 38%. From three-point range, Minnesota converted 36% of its attempts, compared with Denver’s 21%.
These figures suggest that the Timberwolves obtained more value from their shooting opportunities. They also show why simply comparing the number of attempts is not enough to assess an offense.
Denver attempted 87 field goals, only two fewer than Minnesota. Yet the Nuggets made six fewer shots from the field. The difference was therefore not primarily a matter of overall field-goal volume.
3. Rebounding strengthened Minnesota’s possession advantage
Minnesota finished with 50 rebounds to Denver’s 38. Its 16 offensive rebounds also exceeded Denver’s 12.
These totals show that Minnesota recovered more missed shots and secured more defensive rebounds. The advantage likely helped the Timberwolves maintain pressure across possessions, although the exact second-chance scoring figures are not available in the supplied data.
4. Denver’s strengths were not enough to overcome its weaknesses
Denver had advantages in turnovers, steals, and blocks. It committed two fewer turnovers, recorded one additional steal, and blocked two more shots.
Those are meaningful categories, but they did not outweigh Minnesota’s shooting and rebounding advantages. The final score reflects the combined effect of many possessions rather than a victory in every statistical category.
This is a useful lesson when reviewing playoff box scores: a team does not need to lead every category to win. It needs to perform better in the areas that have the greatest effect on scoring and possession outcomes.
Historical Context: The Timberwolves vs Denver Nuggets Playoff Series
The supplied series results show a competitive matchup, with both teams producing strong offensive performances at different stages.
| Game | Date | Denver Nuggets | Minnesota Timberwolves | Winner |
| Game 1 | April 19, 2026 | 116 | 105 | Denver |
| Game 2 | April 21, 2026 | 114 | 119 | Minnesota |
| Game 3 | April 24, 2026 | 96 | 113 | Minnesota |
| Game 4 | April 26, 2026 | 96 | 112 | Minnesota |
| Game 5 | April 28, 2026 | 125 | 113 | Denver |
| Game 6 | May 1, 2026 | 98 | 110 | Minnesota |
Data note: The supplied record labels Game 4 as a 3-1 series lead for Minnesota, but its later results show Denver winning Game 5 and Minnesota winning Game 6. These results would produce a different series timeline from the initial Game 4 label. The individual game figures are presented as supplied, but the complete series chronology should be independently verified before publication.
What the series results suggest
The listed results show that Denver could produce high-scoring performances, including its 116-point Game 1 win and 125-point Game 5 victory. Minnesota, however, recorded several convincing wins, including the 113-96 result listed for Game 3 and the 112-96 result for Game 4.
The pattern suggests that the teams’ ability to control scoring efficiency and defensive possessions varied from game to game. A single box score cannot establish which team had the better overall strategy throughout the series.
For a complete series analysis, each game’s shooting percentages, rebounds, turnovers, and player performances should be compared separately. This approach avoids treating one result as proof of a broader trend.
How to Read Basketball Player Statistics Correctly
Understanding the numbers is just as important as knowing the final score. Several basic principles help readers interpret NBA box scores accurately.
Points
Points measure a player’s direct scoring contribution. They include two-point field goals, three-point field goals, and free throws.
Dosunmu’s 43 points were the highest individual scoring total identified in the supplied data. However, evaluating a scorer fully also requires shooting attempts, minutes played, and turnovers.
Rebounds
Rebounds measure a player’s recovery of the ball after a missed shot. Offensive rebounds extend the attacking team’s possession, while defensive rebounds generally end the opponent’s possession.
Gobert and Jokic each recorded 15 rebounds. Their equal individual totals should be considered alongside Minnesota’s 50-38 team rebounding advantage.
Assists
Assists record passes that directly lead to made field goals. They help describe team playmaking, although they do not capture every pass that creates an advantage.
Hyland recorded seven assists for Minnesota, while Jokic led Denver with nine.
Shooting percentages
Field-goal percentage measures made field goals divided by attempted field goals. Three-point percentage applies the same calculation to shots from beyond the three-point line.
A player or team can score many points while still shooting inefficiently if it takes many attempts. That is why percentages provide useful context beyond the final scoring total.
Turnovers and defensive statistics
Turnovers indicate lost possessions, while steals and blocks record particular defensive actions. They help explain how possessions change hands, but they do not measure every aspect of defense.
In this matchup, Denver’s lower turnover total and higher steals and blocks did not translate into a win. Minnesota’s stronger shooting and rebounding proved more consequential in the overall result.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. What was the final score of Timberwolves vs Denver Nuggets on April 26, 2026?
The Minnesota Timberwolves defeated the Denver Nuggets 112-96 on April 26, 2026, according to the supplied game data. Minnesota won by 16 points at Target Center in Minneapolis.
2. Who was the leading scorer in the game?
Ayo Dosunmu led Minnesota with 43 points. Jamal Murray was Denver’s leading scorer with 30 points, giving Dosunmu a 13-point advantage in the reported individual scoring totals.
3. How many rebounds did Rudy Gobert and Nikola Jokic record?
Rudy Gobert and Nikola Jokic each recorded 15 rebounds. Minnesota nevertheless won the overall rebounding battle, collecting 50 rebounds compared with Denver’s 38.
4. Which team shot better from three-point range?
Minnesota shot 36% from three-point range, making nine of 25 attempts. Denver made six of 28 attempts, shooting 21%. Minnesota therefore made three more three-pointers despite taking fewer attempts.
5. What was the biggest statistical difference between the teams?
Rebounding was one of the clearest differences. Minnesota collected 50 total rebounds, 12 more than Denver’s 38. The Timberwolves also shot better from the field and from three-point range.
6. Where can readers find the complete player box score?
Readers can consult ESPN’s box score for the recorded game. A complete player comparison should include minutes, field goals, three-pointers, free throws, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, and turnovers. The supplied summary does not include every player’s individual statistics.
Conclusion
The April 26, 2026, matchup demonstrates how shooting efficiency, rebounding, and second-half execution can determine an NBA playoff game. Minnesota defeated Denver 112-96 after trailing 54-50 at halftime. The Timberwolves outscored the Nuggets 62-42 in the second half, creating the separation needed to secure a 16-point victory.
Ayo Dosunmu’s 43 points led Minnesota’s scoring, while Jamal Murray contributed 30 points for Denver. Gobert and Jokic each collected 15 rebounds, and Jokic recorded nine assists. At the team level, Minnesota made 44% of its field goals, converted 36% of its three-point attempts, and won the rebounding battle 50-38.
Denver still recorded more steals and blocks and committed fewer turnovers. However, those advantages were not enough to offset Minnesota’s stronger shooting and possession recovery.
The key takeaway from the timberwolves vs denver nuggets match player stats is that individual scoring performances matter most when they support efficient team play. Minnesota combined a standout scoring contribution with better shooting percentages and more rebounds. Together, those advantages explain the result more convincingly than any single statistic.
