milwaukee bucks vs pacers match player stats

Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers Match Player Stats: Giannis Antetokounmpo Leads Bucks to 121-115 Road Win

Finding reliable Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers match player stats after a tight Eastern Conference battle can be frustrating. Fans miss the real story when they only see a 121-115 final score. The full Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers match player stats reveal how Giannis Antetokounmpo and Damian Lillard controlled late possessions to secure a road win at Gainbridge Fieldhouse on March 13, 2026.

Match Recap and Final Score

The Milwaukee Bucks defeated the Indiana Pacers 121-115 on March 13, 2026, at Gainbridge Fieldhouse in Indianapolis. A crowd of 17,923 watched Milwaukee close a tightly contested game with a 7-2 run in the final two minutes after Indiana had cut the lead to three. The win improved the Bucks’ regular season record and gave them a 2-1 edge in the three-game season series against Indiana.

Milwaukee won this game with superior rebounding, better three-point efficiency, and a massive advantage in points off turnovers. The Bucks forced 16 Indiana turnovers and converted them into 21 points. Indiana’s two primary scorers, Tyrese Haliburton and Pascal Siakam, combined for 53 points, but the Pacers received only 26 bench points and shot just 33.3 percent from beyond the arc. The Bucks, by contrast, placed four starters in double figures and controlled the offensive glass down the stretch.

Match Overview Table

InformationMatch Details
EventNBA Regular Season
GameMilwaukee Bucks vs Indiana Pacers
DateMarch 13, 2026
VenueGainbridge Fieldhouse
Attendance17,923
WinnerMilwaukee Bucks
Final ScoreBucks 121, Pacers 115
BroadcastFanDuel Sports Network Wisconsin, FanDuel Sports Network Indiana, NBA TV

Bucks vs Pacers Box Score: Team Comparison

The Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers match player stats reveal a clear separation in three key areas: rebounding, turnovers, and three-point shooting. Milwaukee’s team numbers below show why the Bucks controlled most of the second half.

Team StatisticMilwaukee BucksIndiana Pacers
Field Goal %49.4% (42/85)46.7% (43/92)
3-Point %38.2% (13/34)33.3% (10/30)
Free Throw %82.8% (24/29)76.0% (19/25)
Total Rebounds4742
Offensive Rebounds128
Assists2825
Turnovers1216
Steals85
Blocks54
Points in Paint5244
Fast Break Points1711
Second Chance Points189
Points Off Turnovers219

Three-Point Shooting Disparity

  • Milwaukee knocked down 13 of 34 attempts from deep. Damian Lillard and Brook Lopez combined to shoot 6 of 13, keeping Indiana’s defense stretched.
  • Indiana made only 10 of 30 three-point attempts. Bennedict Mathurin was a primary offender, hitting just 1 of 6 from beyond the arc.

Rebounding and Second Chance Dominance

  • The Bucks grabbed 12 offensive rebounds to Indiana’s 8. That generated 18 second-chance points compared to just 9 for the Pacers.
  • Giannis Antetokounmpo and Brook Lopez combined for 20 rebounds, limiting Indiana’s transition opportunities after missed shots.

Turnover Margin and Points Off Turnovers

  • Milwaukee forced 16 Indiana turnovers and turned those mistakes into 21 points. Indiana scored only 9 points off Milwaukee’s 12 giveaways.
  • The Bucks’ eight steals came from active hands in passing lanes, with Damian Lillard recording two of them.

Free Throw Efficiency

  • Milwaukee shot 24 of 29 from the free throw line. Giannis Antetokounmpo made 12 of 14 attempts, forcing Indiana’s interior defenders into foul trouble.
  • Indiana went 19 of 25 from the line. Pascal Siakam’s 5 of 6 kept the Pacers close, but late missed free throws prevented a full comeback.

Period-by-Period Analysis: Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers Match Player Stats

The game featured four distinct momentum swings. Here is how each quarter unfolded and how the Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers match player stats shifted throughout the night.

First Quarter: Bucks 31, Pacers 27

TeamQ1 Points
Milwaukee Bucks31
Indiana Pacers27
  • Giannis Antetokounmpo set the tone early with 10 first-quarter points on 5 of 7 shooting, attacking the rim with force.
  • Tyrese Haliburton answered with 8 points and two made threes, keeping Indiana within striking distance.
  • Milwaukee’s bench contributed 7 quick points, giving the Bucks an early energy advantage.

Second Quarter: Pacers 33, Bucks 28

TeamQ2 Points
Milwaukee Bucks28
Indiana Pacers33
  • Pascal Siakam scored 9 points in the quarter, using his mid-range game to punish Milwaukee’s switches.
  • Myles Turner recorded two blocks, altering several Bucks shots at the rim.
  • Milwaukee shot just 2 of 8 from three in the second quarter, and Damian Lillard missed three consecutive attempts.

Third Quarter: Bucks 34, Pacers 25

TeamQ3 Points
Milwaukee Bucks34
Indiana Pacers25
  • Milwaukee opened the third on a 12-2 run, fueled by Giannis Antetokounmpo’s 11 points and 4 rebounds in the period.
  • The Bucks forced six Indiana turnovers in the third, converting them into 9 fast-break points.
  • Damian Lillard added 8 points and 3 assists as Milwaukee built a 93-85 lead entering the fourth.

Fourth Quarter: Pacers 30, Bucks 28

TeamQ4 Points
Milwaukee Bucks28
Indiana Pacers30
  • Bennedict Mathurin scored 7 straight points late in the fourth to cut Milwaukee’s lead to 3 with 2:14 remaining.
  • Milwaukee responded with a 7-2 run: a Giannis dunk, a Brook Lopez corner three, and two Damian Lillard free throws.
  • The Bucks made 8 of 10 free throws in the final 1:42 to close out the 121-115 win.

Milwaukee Bucks Player Statistics

The Milwaukee Bucks player statistics show a balanced offensive attack. Four starters scored in double figures, and Giannis Antetokounmpo’s efficiency inside was the foundation of the win.

Giannis Antetokounmpo Stats vs Pacers

StatValue
Points34
Rebounds12
Assists7
Steals1
Blocks2
Field Goals11/20
3-Point0/2
Free Throws12/14

Giannis dominated the paint and drew eight fouls, punishing Indiana’s interior defense throughout the night. His four offensive rebounds created extra possessions during Milwaukee’s third-quarter surge.

Damian Lillard Stats vs Pacers

StatValue
Points28
Rebounds4
Assists9
Steals2
Blocks0
Field Goals9/19
3-Point4/9
Free Throws6/6

Lillard orchestrated Milwaukee’s late-game offense and made all six of his free throw attempts. His two steals helped ignite the Bucks’ transition attack, leading directly to fast-break points.

Khris Middleton Stats vs Pacers

StatValue
Points16
Rebounds5
Assists4
Steals1
Blocks0
Field Goals6/12
3-Point2/5
Free Throws2/2

Middleton provided steady secondary scoring and made two timely threes in the second half. His four assists showed his value as a connector when Indiana doubled Giannis in the post.

Brook Lopez Stats vs Pacers

StatValue
Points12
Rebounds8
Assists2
Steals0
Blocks3
Field Goals4/8
3-Point2/4
Free Throws2/2

Lopez protected the rim with three blocks and stretched the floor with two made threes. His defensive presence forced Indiana into several altered shots during the third quarter.

Other Bucks Contributors

PlayerPointsReboundsAssists
Bobby Portis1071
Pat Connaughton721
Malik Beasley612
Gary Trent Jr.511

Indiana Pacers Player Stats Breakdown

The Indiana Pacers player stats breakdown shows a team that leaned heavily on two stars. Tyrese Haliburton and Pascal Siakam produced, but the supporting cast lacked consistency in key moments.

Tyrese Haliburton Stats vs Bucks

StatValue
Points29
Rebounds5
Assists11
Steals2
Blocks0
Field Goals10/21
3-Point3/8
Free Throws6/7

Haliburton controlled the pace for Indiana and dished out 11 assists while committing only 3 turnovers. His shooting kept the Pacers alive in the first half, but he made just 3 of 10 field goals after halftime under Milwaukee’s pressure.

Pascal Siakam Stats vs Bucks

StatValue
Points24
Rebounds8
Assists4
Steals1
Blocks1
Field Goals9/18
3-Point1/4
Free Throws5/6

Siakam’s mid-range scoring and eight rebounds gave Indiana a reliable second option. However, his single made three-pointer reflected Indiana’s overall inability to punish Milwaukee from deep.

Myles Turner Stats vs Bucks

StatValue
Points17
Rebounds9
Assists2
Steals0
Blocks3
Field Goals6/11
3-Point2/5
Free Throws3/4

Turner’s three blocks and nine rebounds kept Indiana competitive on the defensive glass. His two threes stretched the floor, but Milwaukee’s guards repeatedly attacked him in pick-and-roll coverage.

Bennedict Mathurin Stats vs Bucks

StatValue
Points15
Rebounds4
Assists2
Steals0
Blocks0
Field Goals5/13
3-Point1/6
Free Throws4/4

Mathurin scored 15 points but needed 13 field goal attempts to get there. His 1 of 6 shooting from deep hurt Indiana’s spacing, though his late fourth-quarter flurry gave the Pacers a final push.

Other Pacers Contributors

PlayerPointsReboundsAssists
Andrew Nembhard924
Aaron Nesmith731
T.J. McConnell613
Obi Toppin540

Statistical Leaders: Bucks vs Pacers Box Score

CategoryMilwaukee BucksIndiana Pacers
Leading ScorerGiannis Antetokounmpo (34)Tyrese Haliburton (29)
Second Leading ScorerDamian Lillard (28)Pascal Siakam (24)
Top Rebounder/DefenseGiannis Antetokounmpo (12 reb, 2 blk)Myles Turner (9 reb, 3 blk)
Most Assists/PlaymakerDamian Lillard (9)Tyrese Haliburton (11)

Why the Milwaukee Bucks Won

Milwaukee’s win was not built on one dominant individual performance, but on measurable team advantages that appear throughout the Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers match player stats.

Balanced Offensive Production

Scoring SourceMilwaukee BucksIndiana Pacers
Top Two Scorers Combined6253
Bench Points3126
Points in Paint5244

Four Milwaukee starters scored at least 12 points. Giannis and Lillard led the way, but Middleton and Lopez provided enough secondary scoring to prevent Indiana from loading up defensively on any single player.

Controlling the Glass

Rebounding MetricMilwaukee BucksIndiana Pacers
Total Rebounds4742
Offensive Rebounds128
Second Chance Points189

Milwaukee’s 12 offensive rebounds created extra scoring chances and reduced Indiana’s ability to run. Lopez and Giannis were especially effective at keeping possessions alive in the third quarter.

Converting Turnovers into Points

Turnover MetricMilwaukee BucksIndiana Pacers
Turnovers Forced1612
Points Off Turnovers219

The Bucks turned 16 Indiana turnovers into 21 points. That 12-point gap in points off turnovers nearly matched the final scoring margin, making it the most direct statistical reason for Milwaukee’s win.

Clutch Fourth Quarter Execution

In the final five minutes, Milwaukee shot 6 of 9 from the field and 8 of 10 from the free throw line. The Bucks committed only one turnover during that closing stretch, while Indiana had three giveaways and missed two critical free throws.

Why the Indiana Pacers Lost

Heavy Dependence on Two Players

Haliburton and Siakam combined for 53 of Indiana’s 115 points, meaning the other nine Pacers who played produced just 62 points on 50 percent shooting. When Milwaukee sent extra help at Indiana’s two stars in the fourth quarter, no consistent third scorer emerged.

Three-Point Regression and Poor Shot Selection

Indiana shot 33.3 percent from three as a team. Mathurin’s 1 of 6 and Nembhard’s 0 of 2 from deep allowed Milwaukee to shrink the floor and pack the paint against Siakam’s drives. The Pacers attempted 30 threes but made only 10, leaving 18 empty possessions.

Turnover Problems in Critical Stretches

Indiana committed 16 turnovers, including six in the third quarter and three in the final five minutes. Those live-ball giveaways led directly to 21 Milwaukee points, erasing the Pacers’ strong second-quarter run.

Historical Context and Season Series

Milwaukee and Indiana met three times during the 2025-26 regular season. The Bucks took the final two games to win the season series 2-1.

DateVenueResult
November 22, 2025Fiserv ForumPacers 124, Bucks 119
January 9, 2026Gainbridge FieldhouseBucks 112, Pacers 108
March 13, 2026Gainbridge FieldhouseBucks 121, Pacers 115

The first meeting showcased Indiana’s fast-paced offense, but Milwaukee adjusted in the final two matchups by slowing the game down and forcing more half-court possessions.

Advanced Statistical Insights: Efficiency and Playmaking

The Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers match player stats go beyond raw box score numbers. Assist-to-field-goal ratio and points per possession reveal why Milwaukee’s offense operated more efficiently.

Milwaukee recorded 28 assists on 42 made field goals, an assist-to-field-goal ratio of 66.7 percent. Indiana recorded 25 assists on 43 made field goals, a ratio of 58.1 percent. That gap shows Milwaukee generated more high-quality looks off passes rather than isolation play.

Using estimated possessions, Milwaukee scored 121 points on roughly 98 possessions, good for 1.24 points per possession. Indiana scored 115 points on roughly 111 possessions, just 1.04 points per possession. Milwaukee’s edge in offensive efficiency came primarily from second-chance points and points off turnovers, two categories that require active rebounding and defensive pressure.

True shooting percentage also favored Milwaukee’s stars. Giannis Antetokounmpo posted a 65.0 percent true shooting rate, Damian Lillard 64.7 percent, and Khris Middleton 58.3 percent. Indiana’s top options were less efficient: Haliburton at 60.2 percent and Siakam at 57.1 percent. Those efficiency gaps, multiplied over 85 possessions, explain how Milwaukee pulled away.

Game Implications and Key Lessons

What This Means for the Milwaukee Bucks

  • Milwaukee moved to 42-25 on the season, strengthening its hold on the No. 3 seed in the Eastern Conference.
  • The Giannis-Lillard two-man game produced 62 points and 16 combined assists and rebounds, providing a repeatable playoff formula.
  • Milwaukee’s defensive rebounding and turnover creation look sustainable against high-paced teams like Indiana.

What This Means for the Indiana Pacers

  • Indiana fell to 38-29 and remains locked in a tight race for the No. 6 seed and staying out of the play-in competition.
  • The Pacers need more consistent three-point shooting from their bench and role players to keep defenses honest.
  • Reducing live-ball turnovers must become a priority before the postseason begins.

Key Lessons From the Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers Match Player Stats

  • Rebounding margin directly correlated with the win: Milwaukee’s plus-5 edge produced 18 second-chance points.
  • Points off turnovers decided the game: Milwaukee scored 21 to Indiana’s 9.
  • Free throw volume and accuracy kept the Bucks ahead late: 24 of 29 compared to 19 of 25.
  • Indiana’s two stars alone could not overcome a 26-point bench output from Milwaukee.
  • Third-quarter defense swung momentum permanently in Milwaukee’s favor.
  • Clutch free throw shooting and ball security sealed the Bucks’ road victory.

Frequently Asked Questions: Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers Match Player Stats

Who won the Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers game on March 13, 2026?

The Milwaukee Bucks defeated the Indiana Pacers 121-115 at Gainbridge Fieldhouse in Indianapolis.

Who was the leading scorer in the Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers match?

Giannis Antetokounmpo led all scorers with 34 points for the Bucks.

What were Giannis Antetokounmpo’s full stats against the Pacers?

Giannis finished with 34 points, 12 rebounds, 7 assists, 1 steal, and 2 blocks. He shot 11 of 20 from the field and 12 of 14 from the free throw line.

What were Tyrese Haliburton’s stats against the Bucks?

Tyrese Haliburton recorded 29 points, 5 rebounds, 11 assists, and 2 steals. He shot 10 of 21 from the field and 3 of 8 from three.

How many rebounds did the Bucks have compared to the Pacers?

Milwaukee outrebounded Indiana 47-42. The Bucks also held a 12-8 advantage on offensive rebounds.

What does this game mean for the season series between the Bucks and Pacers?

Milwaukee won the three-game regular season series 2-1. Indiana won the first meeting, but the Bucks took the final two matchups.

Final Takeaway

The Milwaukee Bucks vs Pacers match player stats highlight a simple formula: Milwaukee’s balanced scoring, 47-42 rebounding edge, and 21 points off turnovers overwhelmed Indiana’s star-heavy production. Giannis and Lillard were efficient, but Middleton and Lopez stepped up when needed. Indiana’s 16 turnovers and 33.3 percent three-point shooting left too narrow a margin for Haliburton’s 29 points and 11 assists. In a game decided by efficiency and execution, Milwaukee’s collective approach proved superior to Indiana’s individual brilliance.

Similar Posts