⏱️How it unfolded
The score against the pace we expected, quarter by quarter.
The score, against the pace we expected
The Kings got 11 points ahead of the pace we expected in the second quarter and stayed there. A much higher scoring game than we expected.
Where it moved
▲ SAC better than we expected
▼ UTAH better than we expected
The second quarter was where it moved most, 10 points better than our numbers for the Kings.
⚖️What decided it
Why the Kings won, and why the Jazz did not.
From the game
Nothing out of the ordinary in the numbers.
Key battles
🏀Good plays, bad plays
The plays that went each side's way, and the ones each side did to itself.
Kings
Good plays
- 11-0 run
A 11-0 run stretched a 2-point lead to 13
Q2 10:42 · SAC 46-33 UTAH
- 10-0 run
A 10-0 run stretched a 9-point lead to 19
Q4 10:00 · SAC 99-80 UTAH
Bad plays
- Technical
Thomas Robinson technical foul(1st technical foul)
Q2 6:48 · SAC 46-37 UTAH
- Technical
Francisco Garcia technical foul(1st technical foul)
Q4 1:16 · SAC 114-99 UTAH
Jazz
Good plays
- 10-0 run
A 10-0 run cut a 11-point deficit to 1
Q2 5:31 · SAC 49-48 UTAH
Bad plays
Nothing costly of their own making.
📊The numbers
| SAC | UTAH | |
|---|---|---|
| 52% | Shooting from the field | 49% |
| 8 | Threes made | 4 |
| 42% | Three-point accuracy | 27% |
| 24 | Free throws made | 25 |
| 53 | Rebounds | 42 |
| 16 | Offensive rebounds | 11 |
| 27 | Assists | 23 |
| 48 | Points in the paint | 50 |
| 25 | Fast break points | 15 |
| 23 | Points off turnovers | 35 |
| 17 | Turnovers | 18 |
| 11 | Steals | 8 |
| 6 | Blocks | 7 |
