The Minnesota Vikings vs New York Giants Match Player Stats from the August 15, 2026, NFL preseason game reveal how Minnesota secured a narrow 13-10 victory through defensive pressure, timely scoring, and a more productive ground attack. The Minnesota Vikings defeated the New York Giants at home in a game that featured two interceptions by Minnesota’s defense, a receiving touchdown by Myles Price, and several useful performances from quarterbacks competing for opportunities. Although New York produced more receiving yards, Minnesota made better use of key defensive moments and finished with the three-point advantage.

The preseason matchup offered more than a final score. It provided an opportunity to examine quarterback efficiency, rushing production, receiving contributions, special teams, and the defensive plays that influenced the result. Minnesota finished with 111 rushing yards and two interceptions, while New York recorded 160 receiving yards but surrendered four sacks. Those differences help explain how a game with relatively modest scoring developed into a close contest.

This breakdown examines the individual player statistics, team totals, scoring progression, and tactical lessons from the matchup. It also separates measurable performance from broader conclusions, because preseason statistics can reveal promising trends without necessarily predicting regular-season results.

Minnesota Vikings vs New York Giants Match Player Stats: Game Overview

The game took place on August 15, 2026, during the NFL preseason. Minnesota entered the matchup against New York and came away with a 13-10 road victory.

NFL PRESEASON • AUGUST 15, 2026

Minnesota Vikings

13

Winner

New York Giants

10

Home team

Total offensive yards

238

Minnesota

Total offensive yards

201

New York

Team rushing yards

111

Team rushing yards

70

Interceptions recorded

2

Minnesota defense

Sacks recorded

4

Minnesota defense

Offensive yardage is calculated from the supplied passing and rushing totals. Team passing yardage excludes sack yardage, which is reported separately.

Final score by quarter

Quarter	Minnesota Vikings	New York Giants
First quarter	3	0
Second quarter	0	10
Third quarter	10	0
Fourth quarter	0	0
Final score	13	10

The scoring pattern explains the game’s central storyline. Minnesota opened with a field goal, but New York answered with 10 points in the second quarter to take a 10-3 lead. The Vikings then scored 10 unanswered points in the third quarter, turning a deficit into a three-point advantage.

Neither team added points in the fourth quarter. Minnesota’s third-quarter response ultimately proved decisive.

What the final score tells us

Three statistical themes stand out:

• Minnesota controlled the ground game. The Vikings produced 111 rushing yards compared with New York’s 70.
• The Vikings generated more disruptive defensive plays. Four sacks and two interceptions created problems for the Giants’ passing offense.
• New York was more productive per completed pass. The Giants averaged 10.0 yards per reception, compared with Minnesota’s 8.2, but their passing production did not translate into a win.

The result illustrates why yardage totals alone do not determine football outcomes. A team can generate explosive passing plays and still lose if sacks, interceptions, and unsuccessful drives undermine its overall efficiency.

Data note: The statistics and player totals in this article are based on the supplied ESPN box-score data for the August 15, 2026, preseason game.

Quarterback Stats and Passing Performance

Quarterback production was one of the most interesting parts of this contest. Minnesota used four listed passers, while New York used three. Their individual numbers show different approaches to moving the ball, protecting possessions, and creating scoring opportunities.

Minnesota Vikings passing statistics

Quarterback	Comp/Att	Pass Yards	Yards/Attempt	TD	INT	Rating
Carson Wentz	9/14	81	5.8	1	0	103.6
J.J. McCarthy	4/7	34	4.9	0	0	69.9
Kyler Murray	2/3	10	3.3	0	0	71.5
Max Brosmer	1/2	6	3.0	0	0	56.2
Team total	16/26	127	5.0	1	0	87.2

Source: Supplied ESPN box-score data.

Carson Wentz delivers Minnesota’s touchdown pass

Carson Wentz completed nine of 14 passes for 81 yards and one touchdown. He threw no interceptions and recorded a 103.6 passer rating.

His completion rate was approximately 64.3%, and his 5.8 yards per attempt indicated steady but not especially explosive passing production. The touchdown was particularly important because Minnesota finished with only 13 points.

Wentz’s statistical profile suggests three positive outcomes:

• He converted nine attempts into completions without giving the ball away through an interception.
• He produced Minnesota’s listed passing touchdown.
• He maintained a passer rating above 100 while operating within a relatively modest passing-yard total.

The distinction between efficiency and volume matters here. Wentz’s 81 yards were not a huge total, but his touchdown and lack of interceptions made his performance more valuable than the yardage figure alone might suggest.

However, a single preseason appearance cannot establish how a quarterback would perform against a full-strength regular-season defense. Snap counts, opponent personnel, play-calling, and the quality of protection all affect the interpretation.

J.J. McCarthy’s passing numbers

J.J. McCarthy completed four of seven passes for 34 yards. He recorded no passing touchdowns or interceptions and took one sack for four yards.

His completion percentage was approximately 57.1%, while his 4.9 yards per attempt showed limited downfield production in this statistical sample.

The most useful interpretation is not that McCarthy had a poor game based on a few attempts. Instead, the available numbers describe a short passing sample in which Minnesota did not produce a touchdown through his recorded completions.

For quarterback evaluation, the next questions would be whether he handled pressure correctly, identified coverage changes, converted third downs, and made sound decisions on difficult throws. Those details require play-by-play or film evidence rather than a box score alone.

Kyler Murray and Max Brosmer

Kyler Murray completed two of three passes for 10 yards, with no touchdowns or interceptions. Max Brosmer completed one of two attempts for six yards, also without a touchdown or interception.

Their numbers are too limited to support strong conclusions about their overall performance. Neither passer recorded a high volume of attempts, so their completion rates and yards per attempt can change substantially with just one additional throw.

For readers comparing quarterbacks, this is an important statistical principle: small samples create volatility. A passer who completes two of three attempts has a 66.7% completion rate, but that percentage alone does not reveal whether the throws were difficult, whether the offense moved the chains, or how the quarterback performed under pressure.

New York Giants passing statistics

Quarterback	Comp/Att	Pass Yards	Yards/Attempt	TD	INT	Rating
Jameis Winston	8/9	89	9.9	0	0	107.9
Brandon Allen	5/8	45	5.6	0	2	38.0
Jaxson Dart	3/4	26	6.5	1	0	131.2
Team total	16/21	131	7.6	1	2	73.6

Source: Supplied ESPN box-score data.

Jameis Winston shows strong short-sample efficiency

Winston completed eight of nine passes for 89 yards, averaging 9.9 yards per attempt. He threw no interceptions and posted a 107.9 passer rating.

An 88.9% completion rate is impressive, and his yards-per-attempt figure indicates that his completions generated meaningful yardage. The combination suggests that New York found opportunities to gain yards efficiently during his recorded passing work.

Yet his statistics must be viewed alongside the team’s final result. Winston did not record a passing touchdown in the supplied data, and the Giants finished with 10 points.

This does not mean his passing performance was ineffective. Rather, it shows that a quarterback can move the ball successfully without personally producing the touchdown that changes the scoreboard. Finishing drives depends on several factors, including field position, rushing execution, penalties, and red-zone decisions.

Jaxson Dart records New York’s passing touchdown

Jaxson Dart completed three of four attempts for 26 yards and one touchdown. He threw no interceptions and earned a 131.2 passer rating, the highest listed rating among the seven quarterbacks in the game.

Dart also took two sacks for a combined 15 yards. That detail adds important context to his otherwise strong passing line.

His touchdown demonstrates an ability to convert at least one passing opportunity into a scoring play. However, the sacks indicate that pressure affected his recorded possessions. Without detailed play-by-play evidence, it would be inappropriate to attribute every sack solely to the quarterback because protection breakdowns and defensive wins can also be responsible.

The four-attempt sample is too small to predict future success, but it gives readers a specific performance to monitor in subsequent games.

Brandon Allen’s two interceptions prove costly

Allen completed five of eight passes for 45 yards, but he threw two interceptions and posted a 38.0 passer rating. He also took one sack for 13 yards.

The interceptions are the most significant figures in his line. Turnovers can end promising drives, give the opposing team favorable field position, and force an offense to recover from mistakes rather than continue building momentum.

Allen’s 62.5% completion rate was not exceptionally low. The larger problem was that the completed passes did not offset the impact of the two interceptions in the overall efficiency calculation.

It is important not to assign both interceptions to the same cause without reviewing the plays. An interception may result from an inaccurate throw, a receiver’s mistake, a defensive read, or a tipped ball. The box score records the outcome, not the complete explanation.

Comparing the two quarterback groups

Minnesota completed 16 of 26 passes for 127 yards and one touchdown without an interception. New York completed 16 of 21 for 131 yards and one touchdown, but threw two interceptions.

Passing category	Minnesota	New York
Completions	16	16
Attempts	26	21
Passing yards	127	131
Completion rate	61.5%	76.2%
Yards per attempt	5.0	7.6
Passing touchdowns	1	1
Interceptions thrown	0	2
Sacks taken	1	4
Team passer rating	87.2	73.6

New York’s passing attack was more productive on a per-attempt basis, but the Giants also surrendered more sacks and threw two interceptions. Minnesota’s advantage was ball security and defensive disruption, not superior passing volume.

The comparison also highlights a useful distinction between quarterback passer rating and total team performance. A team rating combines the passing results of multiple quarterbacks, so it can be lower than the rating of its most efficient individual passer.

Rushing Stats: Which Team Controlled the Ground Game?

Minnesota’s rushing performance was one of the clearest statistical advantages in the matchup. The Vikings recorded 111 yards on 27 carries, averaging 4.1 yards per attempt. New York also ran the ball 27 times but managed only 70 yards, averaging 2.6 yards per carry.

That 41-yard difference came without a difference in rushing attempts. Minnesota gained more ground from the same number of recorded carries.

Minnesota Vikings rushing leaders

Player	Carries	Rushing Yards	Yards per Carry	Longest Run
Demond Claiborne	12	34	2.8	9
Dillon Bell	2	27	13.5	17
Aaron Jones Sr.	3	27	9.0	18
Jordan Mason	3	17	5.7	15
Zavier Scott	2	6	3.0	4
J.J. McCarthy	1	1	1.0	1
Jermar Jefferson	3	0	0.0	3
Carson Wentz	1	-1	-1.0	-1
Team total	27	111	4.1	18

Source: Supplied ESPN box-score data.

Demond Claiborne leads Minnesota in carries

Claiborne received 12 rushing attempts and gained 34 yards. He led the Vikings in carries and rushing yardage among the listed players, although his 2.8 yards per carry was below the team average.

His workload is worth separating from his efficiency. A running back with 12 attempts has a more substantial statistical sample than a player with only two or three carries. Claiborne’s line therefore gives a clearer view of his role in this game, even though it does not show the explosive gains recorded by some teammates.

The nine-yard longest run also indicates that his listed production came without a breakaway run longer than that distance.

Dillon Bell creates an explosive rushing contribution

Bell gained 27 yards on just two carries, averaging 13.5 yards per attempt. His longest run was 17 yards.

That average was the highest among Minnesota’s listed rushers. It demonstrates how a small number of successful carries can lift a team’s overall rushing efficiency.

However, two attempts are not enough to conclude that a running back will sustain that level of production over a larger workload. The result could reflect an effective blocking scheme, a defensive alignment that created space, a missed tackle, or a particularly favorable matchup.

The appropriate takeaway is that Bell produced two productive carries and added meaningful yardage to Minnesota’s ground total.

Aaron Jones Sr. and Jordan Mason add efficient runs

Aaron Jones Sr. gained 27 yards on three carries, averaging 9.0 yards per carry. His longest run went for 18 yards, the longest rushing gain recorded by a Minnesota player in the supplied statistics.

Jordan Mason added 17 yards on three attempts, averaging 5.7 yards per carry, with a longest run of 15 yards.

Together, their 44 rushing yards came on six carries. That contribution helped Minnesota create a ground attack that was more productive than New York’s despite Claiborne’s comparatively modest average.

These individual performances should not be confused with evidence of a permanent depth-chart change. Preseason rushing totals do not establish future workload distribution, and role decisions require broader information about player health, pass protection, receiving ability, and performance across practices and games.

New York Giants rushing statistics

Player	Carries	Rushing Yards	Yards per Carry	Longest Run
Eric Gray	8	20	2.5	4
Cam Skattebo	4	19	4.8	7
Dante Miller	5	14	2.8	6
Damon Bankston	3	6	2.0	4
Tyrone Tracy Jr.	2	5	2.5	5
Jameis Winston	2	3	1.5	2
Devin Singletary	3	3	1.0	9
Team total	27	70	2.6	9

Source: Supplied ESPN box-score data.

Cam Skattebo leads New York in rushing efficiency

Skattebo gained 19 yards on four carries, averaging 4.8 yards per attempt. That made him the most efficient of the listed Giants rushers by average yards per carry.

Although Gray led New York with 20 rushing yards, Skattebo needed half as many carries to finish just one yard behind him. This illustrates why volume and efficiency should be evaluated separately.

Skattebo’s contribution was a relative positive in a ground game that struggled to create consistent yardage. Still, four carries offer limited evidence about how he would fare with a larger workload or against different defensive personnel.

Why Minnesota’s rushing advantage mattered

The 111-to-70 rushing-yard difference gave Minnesota an advantage in offensive balance. The Vikings could supplement their passing game with productive runs, while the Giants gained fewer yards despite using the same number of rushing attempts.

A productive rushing attack can help an offense in several ways:

• It can keep the offense in manageable down-and-distance situations.
• It can make the defense account for runs as well as passes.
• It can help a team maintain possession and reduce the need for high-risk throws.
• It can create more options for play-action passing when the running threat is credible.

These are general football principles, not proof that each effect occurred on a specific play in this game. Confirming those details would require the full play-by-play record.

Receiving Stats: Minnesota’s Touchdown and New York’s Explosive Gains

The receiving numbers reveal an interesting contrast. Minnesota recorded 131 receiving yards and one touchdown, while New York produced 160 receiving yards and one touchdown.

The Giants gained 29 more receiving yards, but their advantage did not result in a victory. Minnesota’s leading receiver provided the game’s listed Vikings receiving touchdown, while New York had a particularly notable 40-yard catch by Devin Singletary.

Minnesota Vikings receiving leaders

Player	Receptions	Receiving Yards	Targets	TD	Longest Catch
Myles Price	4	51	4	1	28
Jeshaun Jones	1	17	4	0	17
Bryson Nesbit	2	13	2	0	7
Marshall Lang	1	12	4	0	12
Dontae Fleming	3	10	1*	0	7
Jordan Addison	1	8	4	0	8
Ben Yurosek	1	7	1	0	7
Zavier Scott	1	6	1	0	6
Tai Felton	1	5	2	0	5
Max Bredeson	1	2	2	0	2
Team total	16	131	26	1	28

Source: Supplied ESPN box-score data. The supplied target totals contain inconsistencies for some individual receivers, so those individual target figures should be checked against the original box score before being used for detailed target-share analysis. The team total is reproduced as provided.

Myles Price leads Minnesota’s receiving production

Myles Price caught four passes for 51 yards and one touchdown. His longest reception covered 28 yards.

He led Minnesota in receptions and receiving yardage among the listed players. More importantly, his touchdown gave the Vikings a direct scoring contribution through the passing game.

Price’s 12.8 yards per reception indicates that his catches generated more than short, minimal gains on average. His longest reception also accounted for a substantial portion of his total yardage, suggesting that at least one catch provided a meaningful chunk of field position.

That combination of volume, yardage, and a touchdown makes Price the clearest receiving standout in Minnesota’s supplied statistics.

Jeshaun Jones and Bryson Nesbit provide supporting production

Jones caught one pass for 17 yards, while Nesbit recorded two receptions for 13 yards.

Jones produced a longer gain on his single reception, whereas Nesbit provided two completed connections. These are different types of contributions: Jones’s line emphasizes the value of one productive play, while Nesbit’s shows repeated involvement in the passing game.

Neither player’s totals were large enough to dominate the receiving output, but both added useful yardage to a team passing total of 127 yards.

New York Giants receiving leaders

Player	Receptions	Receiving Yards	Targets	TD	Longest Catch
Devin Singletary	1	40	1	0	40
Malachi Fields	3	34	3	1	15
Dalen Cambre	1	20	1	0	20
Eric Gray	2	17	2	0	9
Ryan Miller	1	14	2	0	14
Isaiah Likely	2	11	2	0	6
Braxton Berrios	1	9	2	0	9
Theo Johnson	1	6	1	0	6
Odell Beckham Jr.	2	6	3	0	6
Isaiah Hodgins	1	2	1	0	2
Xavier Gipson	1	1	1	0	1
Team total	16	160	21	1	40

Source: Supplied ESPN box-score data.

Devin Singletary creates New York’s biggest receiving play

Singletary recorded one reception for 40 yards. That catch was the longest reception by either team in the supplied statistics.

A 40-yard gain can quickly change field position and create a scoring opportunity. It can also make a team’s overall receiving average appear unusually high when the rest of its catches produce shorter gains.

Singletary’s line is a good example of why the longest reception deserves attention alongside total yards. His single catch accounted for one-quarter of New York’s 160 receiving yards.

Nevertheless, one reception does not establish his overall effectiveness as a receiver. A larger sample would be necessary to assess route variety, consistency, separation, and performance against different coverages.

Malachi Fields scores for the Giants

Fields caught three passes for 34 yards and one touchdown. He led New York in receptions and recorded the team’s listed receiving score.

His 11.3 yards per reception reflects a combination of short-to-intermediate production and the value of his longest 15-yard catch. The touchdown was the most important element of his line because it directly contributed to New York’s 10-point scoring total.

Fields’ production also demonstrates that a receiver can make a meaningful contribution without recording the largest yardage total on the team. Touchdowns and drive context matter in addition to raw yardage.

Why New York’s receiving advantage was not enough

The Giants recorded 160 receiving yards to Minnesota’s 131. Yet Minnesota won 13-10.

There is no contradiction in those numbers. Receiving yards measure production through completed passes, but they do not capture the full impact of turnovers, sacks, rushing efficiency, or special teams.

Minnesota’s two interceptions and four sacks are especially relevant to this comparison. New York’s offense could produce explosive gains and still lose possessions through mistakes or fail to convert promising drives into additional points.

The broader lesson is that explosive plays can improve offensive efficiency, but teams also need to protect the football and finish drives.

Defensive Player Stats: The Difference-Making Unit

Minnesota’s defense was a major factor in the final result. The Vikings recorded four sacks, two interceptions, eight tackles for loss, and four quarterback hits. New York recorded one sack, no interceptions, four tackles for loss, and five quarterback hits.

The defensive numbers show that the Giants generated some pressure of their own, but Minnesota produced more disruptive plays and forced two interceptions.

Team defensive comparison

Defensive category	Minnesota Vikings	New York Giants
Total tackles	65	58
Solo tackles	42	38
Sacks	4	1
Tackles for loss	8	4
Passes defended	3	5
Quarterback hits	4	5
Interceptions	2	0
Defensive touchdowns	0	0

Source: Supplied ESPN box-score data.

Minnesota’s pass rush creates problems

Minnesota finished with four sacks for a combined 29 yards of sack yardage according to the Giants’ offensive passing totals. New York’s quarterbacks had to deal with more negative plays than Minnesota’s passers, who took one sack for four yards.

Sacks are important because they do more than reduce passing yardage. They can push an offense into longer third-down situations, make field-goal attempts more difficult, and force quarterbacks to adjust their decisions under pressure.

The difference between four sacks and one sack is significant in a game decided by three points. However, the available data does not establish how many of those sacks directly ended scoring drives, so their exact contribution to the result should not be overstated.

Jacob Roberts and Jacob Thomas record interceptions

Minnesota’s listed interception leaders were Jacob Roberts and Jacob Thomas.

Defender	Interceptions	Return Yards	Defensive TDs
Jacob Roberts	1	6	0
Jacob Thomas	1	0	0
Team total	2	6	0

Both players recorded one interception, giving Minnesota two takeaways through the passing game. Roberts returned his interception six yards, while Thomas recorded no return yardage.

An interception can change the course of a game even when it does not produce a defensive touchdown. It ends the opponent’s possession and gives the intercepting team an opportunity to begin an offensive drive.

Minnesota did not score a defensive touchdown according to the supplied data, but the interceptions still represent a clear advantage in possession-changing plays.

New York records more passes defended

The Giants recorded five passes defended, compared with three for Minnesota. They also registered five quarterback hits, one more than the Vikings’ four.

These figures show that New York’s defense was not entirely ineffective. The Giants disrupted some passing plays and affected opposing quarterbacks, even though their total sack production was lower.

Passes defended can indicate that defensive backs challenged throws successfully, but the statistic does not tell us whether the play resulted in an incompletion on an important down or a minor gain that had little impact on the drive.

Similarly, quarterback hits measure contact with the passer but do not always result in a sack or turnover. They are useful when considered with other defensive statistics rather than in isolation.

What the defensive comparison reveals

Minnesota had the stronger overall disruption profile. The Vikings doubled New York’s tackles for loss, recorded three more sacks, and produced two interceptions while the Giants recorded none.

That advantage offers a plausible statistical explanation for the result. The Vikings did not need to dominate passing yardage because their defense created more negative plays and won the turnover battle.

For a deeper assessment, defensive film would help establish which players created the pressure, how the interceptions developed, and whether the Giants’ protection issues came from individual matchups or broader scheme problems.

Special Teams Stats: Field Goals, Punting and Returns

Special teams were another important part of this close preseason contest. Both teams made every listed field-goal attempt and extra point, while their punting and return units contributed to field-position management.

Kicking statistics

Kicker	Field Goals	FG Accuracy	Longest FG	Extra Points	Total Points
Will Reichard, Minnesota	2/2	100%	54 yards	1/1	7
Ben Sauls, New York	1/1	100%	46 yards	1/1	4

Source: Supplied ESPN box-score data.

Will Reichard converts both field goals

Reichard made two field goals on two attempts, including a longest kick of 54 yards. He also converted his extra-point attempt and finished with seven kicking points.

His perfect field-goal record provided Minnesota with reliable scoring from the kicking unit. In a game that ended with a three-point margin, the ability to convert available field-goal opportunities was valuable.

The 54-yard kick also shows that Minnesota successfully converted from long range during this matchup. However, one game does not establish a kicker’s long-term accuracy, and field-goal difficulty depends on factors such as wind, field conditions, and the angle of the attempt.

Ben Sauls keeps New York’s kicking perfect

Sauls converted his only field-goal attempt, a 46-yard kick, and made his extra point. He finished with four points.

Like Reichard, Sauls did not miss a listed kick. New York’s defeat therefore cannot be explained by missed field goals or extra points in the supplied statistics.

The difference was that Minnesota recorded two successful field goals, while New York recorded one. The additional field goal contributed three points to the Vikings’ total and helped them finish with the winning score.

Punting comparison

Punter	Team	Punts	Total Yards	Average	Longest	Inside the 20
Brett Thorson	Minnesota	3	141	47.0	50	1
Johnny Hekker	Minnesota	3	113	37.7	44	2
Jordan Stout	New York	6	292	48.7	60	3

Minnesota used two listed punters, with Thorson averaging 47.0 yards and Hekker averaging 37.7 yards. Stout averaged 48.7 yards across six punts for New York.

The Giants’ longer average and 60-yard longest punt indicate that Stout produced strong raw distance. However, punt evaluation requires more than distance alone. Direction, hang time, return opportunities, and the resulting field position all influence the value of a punt.

Minnesota’s two punters combined for six punts, 254 yards, and three kicks inside the 20-yard line. New York also punted six times, recording 292 yards and three kicks inside the 20.

The equal number of punts and identical count inside the 20 suggest that neither team held an obvious advantage in those particular totals. The supplied statistics do not provide enough information to determine the average starting field position after punts.

Kick-return production

Player	Team	Returns	Return Yards	Average	Longest
Demond Claiborne	Minnesota	2	50	25.0	28
Dante Miller	New York	3	69	23.0	25
Deonte Banks	New York	1	27	27.0	27

Minnesota recorded 50 kick-return yards on two returns, averaging 25.0 yards. New York produced 96 yards on four returns, averaging 24.0 yards.

The Giants generated more total return yardage because they had twice as many returns. Minnesota had the slightly higher team average, while Banks recorded New York’s highest individual average with 27 yards on one return.

Neither team recorded a kick-return touchdown.

Punt-return production

Minnesota gained 35 yards on four punt returns, averaging 8.8 yards per return. New York recorded 40 yards on three returns, averaging 13.3 yards per return.

For Minnesota, Dontae Fleming recorded two returns for 27 yards, while Tai Felton recorded two for eight yards. New York’s listed punt returners were Braxton Berrios, with 30 yards on two returns, and Xavier Gipson, with 10 yards on one return.

The Giants had the higher punt-return average, while Minnesota had one additional return. These numbers suggest that New York gained more yardage per opportunity in this category, but the totals alone do not reveal whether either team consistently improved its starting field position.

Turnovers, Ball Security and Game-Changing Plays

Turnovers deserve their own analysis because they connect offensive decisions directly to defensive results.

Minnesota recorded two interceptions and no fumbles in the supplied statistics. New York recorded no interceptions but had two fumbles, neither of which was listed as lost.

Turnover category	Minnesota	New York
Interceptions thrown	0	2
Interceptions made	2	0
Fumbles recorded	0	2
Fumbles lost	0	0
Total turnovers lost	0	2

The team turnover totals above distinguish possession losses from fumbles that were recovered by the same team.

New York’s two interceptions were the most important recorded difference in turnover outcomes. Even without a defensive touchdown, an interception ends an offensive possession and can force a team to defend a new drive.

The Giants’ fumble figures require careful interpretation. The supplied data lists two team fumbles and zero lost, with two recoveries recorded across the listed players. That means the fumbles should not be treated as two additional turnovers lost.

Minnesota’s clean interception and fumble totals provide evidence of better ball security in this game. Still, preseason turnover numbers should not be treated as a reliable forecast of an entire regular season. Turnovers are influenced by individual decisions, defensive execution, tipped passes, and other events that vary from game to game.

Why turnovers matter more in a close game

A three-point final margin makes each possession especially important. An interception can remove a chance to score, while the opponent may gain favorable field position.

However, it would be inaccurate to claim that either interception directly produced Minnesota’s winning points without tracing the subsequent drives. The supplied totals establish the turnover difference, but a precise cause-and-effect explanation requires the play-by-play sequence.

Key Statistical Takeaways From the Matchup

The numbers provide several practical insights for readers comparing the teams and evaluating individual players.

1. Minnesota won through a more balanced offensive profile

The Vikings gained 127 passing yards and 111 rushing yards. The Giants gained 131 passing yards and 70 rushing yards.

That gave Minnesota 238 combined passing and rushing yards, compared with New York’s 201, using the supplied totals before accounting for sack yardage. Minnesota’s rushing advantage helped offset New York’s higher receiving production.

A balanced offense does not automatically guarantee a win, but it can reduce dependence on one route to moving the ball.

2. New York’s passing efficiency was higher, but its overall passing outcome was weaker

The Giants averaged 7.6 yards per attempt, compared with Minnesota’s 5.0. They also recorded the higher completion rate.

Yet New York’s team passer rating was 73.6, below Minnesota’s 87.2. The two interceptions and four sacks help explain why the Giants’ passing efficiency by yardage did not translate into a better overall statistical result.

This is a useful reminder that yards per attempt measures only one aspect of passing performance. It does not independently account for every costly mistake or negative play.

3. Myles Price was Minnesota’s leading receiver

Price’s four catches, 51 yards, and one touchdown gave him the strongest receiving line among the listed Vikings players.

His performance combined volume with scoring impact. While his numbers do not establish future regular-season production, they make him the most obvious Minnesota receiving standout from this box score.

4. Devin Singletary supplied New York’s biggest reception

Singletary’s 40-yard catch was the longest listed reception in the game. It contributed substantially to New York’s receiving-yard total.

The single-catch sample limits what can be concluded about his receiving role, but the play demonstrates the value of an explosive gain in moving the ball downfield.

5. Minnesota’s defense generated more negative plays

Four sacks and eight tackles for loss gave the Vikings a clear advantage in backfield disruption. New York managed one sack and four tackles for loss.

Those figures, combined with Minnesota’s two interceptions, provide the strongest defensive explanation for the result.

6. The kicking units converted their listed scoring chances

Both kickers were perfect on their recorded field-goal and extra-point attempts. Minnesota’s additional made field goal helped establish the final three-point difference.

Because the supplied score by quarter and kicking totals do not include every play’s full sequence, readers should consult the official play-by-play for a precise scoring chronology.

How to Read Preseason Player Statistics Correctly

Preseason football creates a special challenge for statistical analysis. Players may receive limited snaps, quarterbacks can work with different receiver groups, and coaches may focus on testing individual skills rather than using their regular-season game plans.

A useful evaluation method considers four areas.

First, examine opportunity. A player with 12 carries has a different workload from one with two. Raw totals are more meaningful when viewed alongside attempts, targets, and playing time.

Second, separate efficiency from volume. Bell’s 13.5 yards per carry came on two attempts, while Claiborne’s 34 yards came on 12. Neither figure should be used alone to determine who was the better all-around running back.

Third, account for mistakes and negative plays. A quarterback’s passing yards should be assessed alongside interceptions and sacks. Similarly, a receiver’s longest catch is useful but does not describe every route or target.

Fourth, avoid treating one game as a season-long forecast. A preseason performance is one piece of evidence. A stronger conclusion requires multiple games, role information, film, and context about the opposition.

For readers following NFL player development, these principles help distinguish what the box score proves from what it merely suggests.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Who won the Minnesota Vikings vs New York Giants preseason game on August 15, 2026?

The Minnesota Vikings defeated the New York Giants 13-10. Minnesota scored three points in the first quarter and 10 in the third, while New York scored all 10 of its points in the second quarter.

2. Which quarterback had the highest passer rating in the game?

Jaxson Dart recorded the highest individual passer rating among the listed quarterbacks, finishing with a 131.2 rating after completing three of four passes for 26 yards and one touchdown. Jameis Winston followed with a 107.9 rating.

3. Which player scored Minnesota’s receiving touchdown?

Myles Price led Minnesota’s receiving group with four catches for 51 yards and one touchdown. His 28-yard longest reception was also the team’s longest listed catch.

4. How many interceptions did the Vikings record against the Giants?

Minnesota recorded two interceptions. Jacob Roberts made one interception and returned it six yards, while Jacob Thomas recorded the other with no return yardage.

5. Which team had more rushing yards?

Minnesota finished with 111 rushing yards on 27 carries, averaging 4.1 yards per carry. New York recorded 70 rushing yards on the same number of attempts, averaging 2.6 yards per carry.

6. Where can readers find the official player statistics?

Readers can consult the official ESPN box score for the game’s recorded passing, rushing, receiving, defensive, and special teams statistics. The original source is the appropriate place to verify individual figures or review any discrepancies in extracted data.

Conclusion

The Minnesota Vikings defeated the New York Giants 13-10 in their August 15, 2026, preseason matchup by combining a productive rushing attack with effective defensive pressure and better ball security. Minnesota gained 111 rushing yards, recorded four sacks, and intercepted two passes. New York produced more receiving yards and averaged more yards per passing attempt, but those advantages were not enough to overcome the turnovers and defensive disruption.

Carson Wentz led Minnesota’s listed quarterbacks with 81 passing yards and one touchdown, while Jaxson Dart posted the highest individual passer rating among the quarterbacks. Myles Price was Minnesota’s leading receiver, and Devin Singletary supplied New York’s longest reception with a 40-yard catch. The kicking units were reliable, with both teams converting all listed field-goal and extra-point attempts.

The most important lesson from this matchup is that football performance cannot be measured by yardage alone. Minnesota’s ability to generate negative plays, protect the ball, and gain more on the ground helped determine the outcome despite New York’s stronger receiving totals.

These preseason statistics offer a useful snapshot of individual contributions and team execution. They should nevertheless be interpreted within the limits of a single game, with player roles, sample sizes, and play-by-play context considered before drawing broader conclusions.