The san antonio spurs vs golden state warriors match player stats from February 12, 2026, tell the story of a San Antonio team that turned a competitive first half into a convincing 126-113 road victory at Chase Center in San Francisco. The Spurs combined efficient shooting inside the arc, strong free-throw conversion, excellent ball security, and balanced playmaking to overcome Golden State’s advantage from three-point range. De’Aaron Fox led San Antonio with 27 points and eight assists, while Victor Wembanyama added 26 points and nine rebounds. For the Warriors, De’Anthony Melton, Moses Moody, and Draymond Green each scored 17 points, but their team could not maintain its early offensive momentum.

The final score was 126-113, a 13-point win for San Antonio. Although Golden State made more three-pointers and recorded more assists, the Spurs were more effective at converting their opportunities into points. The fourth-quarter scoring difference was especially important: San Antonio scored 32 points in the final period, while the Warriors managed only 19.

This breakdown examines the final score, individual player performances, team statistics, quarter-by-quarter progression, and the tactical reasons behind the result. It also highlights an important distinction between the supplied box-score figures and conclusions that can reasonably be drawn from them.

Data note: The supplied ESPN information contains a date discrepancy. The page title references February 11, 2026, while the game information and matchup listing identify February 12, 2026. This article uses February 12, 2026, as the game date because it matches the supplied matchup details.

Game Overview: Spurs 126, Warriors 113

San Antonio Spurs

Road team

126

Golden State Warriors

Home team

113

Venue

Chase Center

Location

San Francisco, California

Attendance

18,064

Winning margin

13 points

The result reflects more than a difference in shooting percentage. Golden State made 16 three-pointers compared with San Antonio’s 10, and the Warriors recorded 37 assists against the Spurs’ 35. Nevertheless, San Antonio finished with 13 more points.

The key distinction was how each team scored. The Spurs made 46 of 93 field-goal attempts and 24 of 28 free throws. Golden State made 42 of 91 field goals and 13 of 17 free throws. San Antonio’s superior conversion rate at the line and its advantage in overall field-goal percentage helped offset the Warriors’ long-range production.

For readers researching the san antonio spurs vs golden state warriors match player stats, these figures provide the essential context for evaluating the leading scorers and the broader team performance.

San Antonio Spurs vs Golden State Warriors Match Player Stats: Quarter-by-Quarter Breakdown

The scoring progression reveals when the game changed and why the Spurs finished with a comfortable margin.

Quarter	San Antonio Spurs	Golden State Warriors
First quarter	31	38
Second quarter	32	29
Third quarter	31	27
Fourth quarter	32	19
Final score	126	113

First Quarter: Golden State Sets the Pace

Golden State opened the game with 38 points, seven more than San Antonio. The Warriors established an early offensive advantage and finished the period ahead 38-31.

Their 16 made three-pointers for the game suggest that perimeter shooting was an important part of their offensive production. However, the final team totals do not establish how many of those three-pointers came in the opening quarter. It would be inaccurate to assign the entire early lead to outside shooting without quarter-specific shooting data.

The important takeaway is that San Antonio did not allow the opening deficit to dictate the rest of the game. The Spurs stayed within striking distance and responded with a more productive second quarter.

Second Quarter: San Antonio Responds

San Antonio scored 32 points in the second period, while Golden State added 29. That three-point advantage reduced the Warriors’ lead from seven points to four.

At halftime, the Spurs had scored 63 points and the Warriors had scored 67. The game remained competitive, but the direction of the scoring had changed.

This period matters because it shows how a team can recover without immediately taking control of the scoreboard. San Antonio did not need to erase the deficit in one quarter. It needed to keep scoring efficiently and prevent Golden State from extending its advantage.

Third Quarter: The Spurs Take Control

The third quarter produced another important shift. San Antonio scored 31 points, compared with 27 for Golden State.

The four-point advantage moved the Spurs from four points behind at halftime to three points ahead entering the fourth quarter.

That change created a different situation for both teams. San Antonio could enter the final period with a narrow lead, while Golden State needed a stronger closing performance to regain control.

The supplied team totals support the conclusion that the Spurs sustained their scoring across the middle periods. They scored at least 31 points in each of the first three quarters, avoiding the extended offensive slowdown that can allow an opponent to recover.

Fourth Quarter: San Antonio Creates Separation

The final period was the decisive stretch. San Antonio scored 32 points, matching its second-quarter total, while Golden State managed only 19.

The 13-point difference in the fourth quarter was also the final winning margin. In other words, the Spurs entered the period ahead by three and finished ahead by 13.

This is the clearest statistical explanation for the result. The Warriors had scored 67 points in the first half, but their offense did not maintain that level of production late in the game. San Antonio, meanwhile, kept scoring at a consistent rate.

The box score alone cannot identify every defensive rotation, missed assignment, or coaching adjustment that contributed to the final-quarter decline. It does establish that San Antonio won the fourth quarter by a substantial margin and converted a close contest into a double-digit victory.

Complete Team Statistics Comparison

The following table summarizes the supplied team totals and highlights the differences that mattered most.

Statistic	Spurs	Warriors
Points	126	113
Field goals made	46	42
Field goals attempted	93	91
Field-goal percentage	49%	46%
Three-pointers made	10	16
Three-pointers attempted	39	47
Three-point percentage	26%	34%
Free throws made	24	13
Free throws attempted	28	17
Free-throw percentage	86%	76%
Total rebounds	44	40
Assists	35	37
Turnovers	9	11
Steals	6	6
Blocks	5	1
Offensive rebounds	14	10
Defensive rebounds	30	30
Personal fouls	18	24

These numbers explain why the result cannot be understood by looking at three-point shooting alone.

Field-Goal Efficiency: San Antonio Converts More Attempts

The Spurs made 46 of 93 field-goal attempts, while the Warriors made 42 of 91. San Antonio therefore recorded four more made field goals despite taking only two additional attempts.

Using the rounded percentages supplied in the data, the Spurs shot 49% from the field and Golden State shot 46%.

A three-percentage-point difference may appear modest, but it becomes meaningful when combined with the number of attempts. San Antonio converted more of its opportunities into successful shots and gained a useful advantage in overall scoring efficiency.

Field-goal percentage includes both two-point and three-point shots. It is therefore a useful starting point, but it should not be confused with effective field-goal percentage, which gives additional weight to three-pointers.

Three-Point Shooting: Golden State Wins the Long-Range Battle

The Warriors made 16 of 47 attempts from beyond the arc, compared with 10 of 39 for San Antonio.

That gave Golden State six more made three-pointers and 18 more points from three-point shots.

The Warriors also attempted eight more threes. Their 34% conversion rate was higher than San Antonio’s 26%, confirming a clear perimeter-shooting advantage.

However, the value of those shots must be considered alongside the rest of the offense. Golden State’s advantage from three-point range did not compensate for the Spurs’ superior overall field-goal production and larger free-throw total.

This is an important lesson when interpreting NBA statistics: winning one category does not automatically mean winning the game.

Free Throws: A Major Difference in the Final Score

San Antonio made 24 of 28 free throws, while Golden State made 13 of 17.

That represents an 11-point advantage in made free throws for the Spurs. San Antonio also converted approximately 86% of its attempts, compared with 76% for the Warriors.

Free throws can have an outsized effect on close games because they provide scoring opportunities without requiring a made field goal. They can also punish defensive mistakes that lead to shooting fouls.

The supplied statistics show that San Antonio was both more productive and more accurate at the line. They do not reveal the exact number of shooting fouls drawn by each individual player, so it would be premature to credit one player with the entire difference.

Still, the team-level figures establish free-throw scoring as one of the clearest advantages in this matchup.

Rebounding: San Antonio Controls the Margins

The Spurs finished with 44 rebounds, four more than Golden State’s 40.

San Antonio collected 14 offensive rebounds, while the Warriors collected 10. Both teams recorded 30 defensive rebounds.

The offensive-rebounding difference is particularly useful because offensive boards can create second-chance scoring opportunities. A team that misses a shot but recovers the ball can extend the possession and attempt to score again.

San Antonio’s four-rebound advantage does not prove that every additional offensive rebound became a basket. However, it indicates that the Spurs generated more opportunities to recover their own misses.

The defensive-rebounding totals were identical, so the overall rebounding difference came from the offensive glass rather than a gap in defensive rebounds.

Ball Movement and Turnovers: Small Differences, Real Consequences

Golden State recorded 37 assists, two more than San Antonio’s 35. This indicates that the Warriors generated slightly more assisted baskets according to the supplied team totals.

The Spurs, however, committed nine turnovers compared with 11 for Golden State.

Turnovers are important because they end possessions without a field-goal attempt. Fewer turnovers generally give a team more opportunities to score during the same amount of playing time.

The difference was not enormous, but it favored San Antonio. The Spurs combined their lower turnover total with stronger field-goal and free-throw conversion, allowing them to make effective use of their possessions.

The assist totals also illustrate why assists alone are not enough to evaluate offensive quality. A team can move the ball well and still lose if it misses more shots, gives away possessions, or struggles to score at the line.

Defensive Production: Blocks and Fouls Tell Different Stories

Both teams recorded six steals, so neither had an advantage in that category.

San Antonio registered five blocks, compared with one for Golden State. The four-block difference points to greater shot-blocking production by the Spurs during this game.

Blocks can change the outcome of possessions, discourage attempts near the basket, and force opponents to adjust their finishing angles. However, a block total alone does not measure overall defensive quality. Positioning, contesting shots without fouling, and defensive communication also matter.

Personal fouls provide another important distinction. Golden State committed 24 fouls, while San Antonio committed 18.

The Warriors’ higher foul total, combined with the Spurs’ 28 free-throw attempts, is consistent with a game in which San Antonio benefited more from opportunities at the line. The supplied totals do not establish that every foul resulted in free throws, so the two categories should be interpreted together rather than treated as directly interchangeable.

Key Player Performances: San Antonio Spurs

The individual scoring figures identify two leading contributors for San Antonio: De’Aaron Fox and Victor Wembanyama. Their different strengths gave the Spurs multiple ways to generate offense.

De’Aaron Fox: 27 Points and 8 Assists

De’Aaron Fox

27 points · 8 assists

Fox was San Antonio’s leading scorer in the supplied game data.

Fox finished with 27 points, the highest individual total reported for either team in the supplied summary. He also recorded eight assists, making him one of San Antonio’s most important offensive contributors.

His scoring production gave the Spurs a dependable source of points, while his assists reflected his role in creating opportunities for teammates.

The combination matters more than either figure in isolation. A player who scores efficiently while setting up teammates can put pressure on a defense in several ways. Opponents must account for his own scoring threat while also guarding the players who benefit from his passing.

The supplied data does not include Fox’s complete field-goal breakdown, minutes played, or turnovers. It is therefore not possible to calculate his individual shooting efficiency or determine how many of his assists led directly to three-pointers.

Even with those limitations, the 27-point, eight-assist performance stands out as a central part of San Antonio’s winning effort.

Victor Wembanyama: 26 Points and 9 Rebounds

Victor Wembanyama

26 points · 9 rebounds

Wembanyama supplied scoring and rebounding on both ends of the floor.

Wembanyama scored 26 points, just one fewer than Fox, and collected nine rebounds. His production gave San Antonio a second high-volume scoring option and helped the team maintain pressure throughout the game.

The rebounding total is especially relevant when considered alongside San Antonio’s 44 team rebounds and 14 offensive rebounds. Wembanyama’s nine boards formed part of the team’s overall work on the glass, although the supplied summary does not identify how many were offensive or defensive.

His scoring also reduced the pressure on Fox to carry the offense alone. When two players can produce high point totals, opposing defenses face a more complicated allocation problem. Concentrating too heavily on one scorer can create opportunities for the other.

The data supports the conclusion that Wembanyama was a major contributor. It does not provide enough information to quantify his defensive impact, blocks, shooting efficiency, or matchup-specific assignments in this particular game.

Harrison Barnes: The Highest Reported Plus-Minus

Harrison Barnes recorded a team-high plus-minus of +29 for San Antonio, according to the supplied statistics.

Plus-minus measures the difference between a team’s points scored and points allowed while a player is on the court. A +29 figure means the Spurs outscored Golden State by 29 points during Barnes’s reported court time.

That figure is notable because it exceeds the final winning margin of 13 points. It suggests that the Spurs performed especially well during the minutes associated with Barnes’s appearance.

However, plus-minus is a team-context statistic. It does not mean Barnes personally scored 29 points or that he was solely responsible for the team’s advantage. Teammates, opponents, substitutions, and the timing of his minutes all influence the number.

His figure should therefore be viewed as an indicator of how the team performed during his court time, not as a complete individual performance grade.

Stephon Castle and Devin Vassell

Stephon Castle and Devin Vassell were listed among San Antonio’s starters, alongside Fox, Wembanyama, and Julian Champagnie.

Their starting roles are part of the supplied lineup information, but individual scoring totals and complete box-score lines for Castle and Vassell were not included in the data summary.

For that reason, assigning them specific points, rebounds, assists, or shooting percentages would risk introducing unsupported statistics.

A complete player-by-player analysis should use the official box score to verify each starter’s minutes, field goals, three-pointers, free throws, rebounds, assists, steals, blocks, turnovers, and plus-minus. Those details would make it possible to distinguish high-volume scorers from players who contributed primarily through defense, spacing, or ball movement.

The same caution applies to Julian Champagnie and the Spurs’ bench players. Their names and lineup status are available, but the supplied figures do not provide enough individual detail to produce a reliable statistical ranking for every player.

Key Player Performances: Golden State Warriors

Golden State had three players tied as its leading scorers in the supplied summary. De’Anthony Melton, Moses Moody, and Draymond Green each scored 17 points.

Although none matched Fox’s 27-point total or Wembanyama’s 26 points, the Warriors received scoring contributions from multiple players. Their challenge was turning those individual efforts into a stronger collective finish.

De’Anthony Melton: 17 Points and a Positive Plus-Minus

De’Anthony Melton

17 points · +12 plus-minus

Melton led the Warriors’ reported plus-minus figures.

Melton finished with 17 points and a team-high plus-minus of +12 for Golden State. His scoring tied him with Moody and Green for the Warriors’ leading individual total.

The positive plus-minus is an interesting detail because Golden State lost the game by 13 points. It indicates that the Warriors outscored San Antonio by 12 points during Melton’s court time, even though the team was outscored overall.

There is no contradiction here. A player’s plus-minus covers only the minutes he spends on the court. A team can win those minutes and still lose the game if the opponent performs much better during other stretches.

Melton’s figure should not be treated as proof that he had the best overall performance on the Warriors. It does, however, show why player evaluation needs more than the final score or individual points.

Moses Moody: 17 Points

Moses Moody

17 points

Moody shared the team’s highest reported scoring total.

Moody scored 17 points, matching Melton and Green. His contribution helped Golden State maintain three players at the top of its scoring list.

The available summary does not provide Moody’s individual shooting splits or minutes. As a result, it is not possible to determine whether his points came mainly from three-pointers, two-point shots, free throws, or a combination of all three.

That distinction matters when assessing a scoring performance. Seventeen points on efficient shooting can have a different impact from the same total produced through many missed attempts.

The reliable conclusion is straightforward: Moody was one of Golden State’s leading scorers, but a more detailed assessment requires his complete player line.

Draymond Green: 17 Points, 12 Rebounds and 8 Assists

Draymond Green

17 points · 12 rebounds · 8 assists

Green recorded the most complete reported statistical line for Golden State.

Green’s 17 points were only part of his contribution. He also recorded 12 rebounds and eight assists, giving him the highest reported rebound total for Golden State and matching Fox’s eight assists.

This combination makes Green an important player to examine when evaluating the Warriors’ performance. He contributed as a scorer, rebounder, and passer rather than relying on a single statistical category.

His 12 rebounds also help explain how Golden State reached 40 team rebounds despite losing the overall battle on the glass. A strong individual rebounding total can support a team’s possession game, although it does not automatically guarantee an advantage in offensive rebounds or second-chance points.

Green’s eight assists show that he was involved in creating scoring opportunities. The Warriors actually finished with two more assists than San Antonio, so their defeat cannot simply be explained by a lack of passing or ball movement.

Instead, the broader numbers point toward a combination of missed scoring opportunities, the free-throw gap, and the Spurs’ much stronger fourth quarter.

The Warriors’ Starting Lineup and Bench

The supplied lineup lists Draymond Green, Gui Santos, De’Anthony Melton, Moses Moody, and Pat Spencer as Golden State’s starters.

The listed bench players were Al Horford, Quinten Post, Gary Payton II, Brandin Podziemski, Kristaps Porzingis, and Will Richard.

Two player-status details require attention:

• Kristaps Porzingis was listed as a DNP because of a left Achilles tendon issue.
• Will Richard was listed as a DNP because of a right knee contusion.

DNP means “did not play.” The designation does not mean a player recorded zero points after participating in the game. It means the player did not appear in the game, and the supplied notes identify an injury-related reason for these two absences.

The remaining bench names should not automatically be assumed to have played simply because they appeared on the roster list. The supplied information does not include complete participation details for every reserve.

This distinction is important for readers comparing box scores. A roster list, a starting lineup, and the list of players who actually entered the game are three different things.

Spurs vs Warriors Player Stats at a Glance

The following table brings together the principal individual figures supplied for this matchup.

Team	Player	Points	Rebounds	Assists	Other reported detail
Spurs	De’Aaron Fox	27	Not supplied	8	Team’s leading scorer
Spurs	Victor Wembanyama	26	9	Not supplied	Second-highest scorer
Spurs	Harrison Barnes	Not supplied	Not supplied	Not supplied	Team-high +29 plus-minus
Warriors	De’Anthony Melton	17	Not supplied	Not supplied	Team-high +12 plus-minus
Warriors	Moses Moody	17	Not supplied	Not supplied	Tied for team scoring lead
Warriors	Draymond Green	17	12	8	Team-high reported rebounds

“Not supplied” means the corresponding individual figure was not included in the data provided for this article. It should not be interpreted as zero.

For the complete individual box score, consult the official ESPN game box score. It is the appropriate reference for checking player participation and detailed statistics before publishing any additional individual figures.

Why the Spurs Won: Five Statistical Takeaways

The result becomes clearer when the most important numbers are considered together rather than separately.

1. San Antonio Made Better Use of Its Field-Goal Attempts

The Spurs made 46 field goals, four more than the Warriors. They also finished with a higher overall field-goal percentage.

This gave San Antonio an advantage even though Golden State was more productive from three-point range. The Warriors’ long-range accuracy was a genuine strength, but the Spurs found more success across their overall field-goal attempts.

The distinction is useful when analyzing future games. A team that makes more three-pointers can still lose if its opponent is more efficient across other scoring areas.

2. Free Throws Helped Offset the Warriors’ Three-Pointers

Golden State made six more three-pointers than San Antonio, which created an 18-point advantage in three-point scoring.

However, San Antonio made 11 more free throws. Those additional made free throws represented an 11-point advantage at the line.

The Spurs also made four more field goals overall. Together, these figures show how San Antonio compensated for its weaker three-point shooting.

A complete scoring breakdown must account for every scoring method, not simply the most visually striking category.

3. Turnovers Favored San Antonio

The Spurs committed nine turnovers, while Golden State committed 11.

Two turnovers may appear insignificant, but every lost possession removes an opportunity to score. The effect can be particularly important when a game is close or when an opponent is building momentum.

The figures do not reveal whether the turnovers resulted from steals, passing mistakes, offensive fouls, or other causes. They nevertheless show that San Antonio finished with better ball security according to the team totals.

4. Offensive Rebounds Gave the Spurs Additional Opportunities

San Antonio recorded 14 offensive rebounds compared with 10 for Golden State.

Those four additional offensive boards represent a meaningful difference in possession recovery. When a team regains the ball after a missed shot, it has an opportunity to continue the possession rather than immediately defend a transition attack.

Offensive rebounds do not guarantee points, but they can increase the number of scoring chances available to a team. In this game, the Spurs combined their advantage on the offensive glass with stronger overall field-goal conversion.

5. The Fourth Quarter Separated the Teams

The most decisive difference was the final period. San Antonio scored 32 points, while Golden State scored 19.

The Spurs maintained their offensive production throughout the game, recording 31, 32, 31, and 32 points across the four quarters. Golden State’s output declined from 38 points in the first quarter to 19 in the fourth.

This scoring pattern explains how the game moved from a close contest to a 13-point Spurs victory.

It is not possible to identify every tactical reason for the decline without possession-level and video evidence. However, the quarter scores establish that the Warriors could not match San Antonio’s closing production.

How to Read the Match Statistics Correctly

A useful game analysis should distinguish verified numbers from interpretations. The supplied figures support several conclusions, but some details require additional context before they can be used to make stronger claims.

Field-Goal Percentage Versus Effective Field-Goal Percentage

Field-goal percentage measures made field goals divided by attempted field goals. It treats a two-point basket and a three-point basket as one made field goal each.

Effective field-goal percentage accounts for the extra point awarded to a three-pointer. Its formula is:

\[ eFG\%=\frac{FGM+0.5(3PM)}{FGA}\times100 \]

Using the supplied totals, San Antonio’s effective field-goal percentage was approximately 54.0%, while Golden State’s was approximately 54.9%.

This is a useful finding. Although the Spurs had a higher conventional field-goal percentage, the Warriors’ additional three-pointers gave them a slight advantage in effective field-goal percentage.

The difference reinforces the importance of considering several statistics together. San Antonio’s victory was not simply a case of superior shooting from every area. Its advantages in free throws, rebounding, turnovers, and fourth-quarter scoring helped overcome Golden State’s perimeter production.

What the Plus-Minus Figures Can and Cannot Tell Us

Plus-minus measures the team’s scoring margin while a particular player is on the floor.

Harrison Barnes recorded +29 for San Antonio, while De’Anthony Melton recorded +12 for Golden State, according to the supplied figures.

These statistics can identify stretches in which a team performed well with a particular player on the court. They cannot independently establish who was the most skilled player, who played the best defense, or who contributed the most to winning.

For a stronger individual evaluation, plus-minus should be considered alongside minutes, shooting efficiency, turnovers, defensive assignments, and the quality of the opposing lineup.

A Note on the Season Series

The supplied ESPN matchup summary contains a separate inconsistency in its season-series information. It lists Golden State as leading the series 2-1, while the individual matchup listings show:

• November 13: Warriors 120, Spurs 125.
• November 15: Warriors 108, Spurs 109.
• February 12: Spurs 126, Warriors 113.
• April 2: Spurs 127, Warriors 113.

These listed results show San Antonio winning all four games. They do not agree with the accompanying statement that Golden State led the series 2-1.

The February game result and its supplied team statistics are the focus of this article. The season-series discrepancy should be checked against the complete official records before publishing a definitive season-series total.

This is an important editorial practice: when a source contains conflicting information, the conflict should be disclosed instead of silently choosing whichever figure appears most convenient.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Who won the San Antonio Spurs vs Golden State Warriors game on February 12, 2026?

The San Antonio Spurs defeated the Golden State Warriors 126-113 at Chase Center in San Francisco, California. San Antonio won by 13 points.

2. Who was the leading scorer in the matchup?

De’Aaron Fox led all players in the supplied summary with 27 points for San Antonio. Victor Wembanyama followed with 26 points. De’Anthony Melton, Moses Moody, and Draymond Green each scored 17 points for Golden State.

3. How many points and rebounds did Victor Wembanyama record?

Victor Wembanyama scored 26 points and collected nine rebounds, according to the supplied game data.

4. Which team made more three-pointers?

Golden State made 16 of 47 three-point attempts, while San Antonio made 10 of 39. The Warriors made six more three-pointers and had the higher three-point percentage.

5. What was the biggest difference in the fourth quarter?

San Antonio scored 32 points in the fourth quarter, compared with Golden State’s 19. The 13-point difference in the final period matched the final margin of victory.

6. Where can readers find the complete individual box score?

The official ESPN box score linked above is the appropriate reference for checking individual points, rebounds, assists, shooting statistics, minutes, turnovers, and player participation.

Conclusion

The San Antonio Spurs’ 126-113 victory over the Golden State Warriors was built on a combination of scoring efficiency, free-throw production, offensive rebounding, and a strong finish. De’Aaron Fox led the Spurs with 27 points and eight assists, while Victor Wembanyama added 26 points and nine rebounds. Harrison Barnes recorded the highest reported plus-minus for San Antonio at +29.

Golden State had its own strengths. The Warriors made 16 three-pointers, recorded 37 assists, and received 17 points apiece from De’Anthony Melton, Moses Moody, and Draymond Green. Green also contributed 12 rebounds and eight assists. However, the Warriors’ 19-point fourth quarter left them unable to protect their early advantage.

The most important lesson from the san antonio spurs vs golden state warriors match player stats is that no single statistic explains the entire result. Golden State won the three-point battle, but San Antonio made more field goals, converted more free throws, collected more rebounds, and committed fewer turnovers. Those advantages, combined with the decisive fourth quarter, explain the 13-point final margin.

The supplied game information contains inconsistencies in the date and season-series summary, so those details should be verified before being used in other reporting. The central game result and the team and player figures discussed here reflect the supplied ESPN data.