Miami Heat vs San Antonio Spurs Match Player Stats
The miami heat vs san antonio spurs match player stats from October 9, 2025, provide a detailed look at a competitive NBA preseason game in which the San Antonio Spurs defeated the Miami Heat 112-107 at the Kaseya Center in Miami, Florida. The five-point victory came after both teams scored 33 points in the opening quarter, setting the stage for a closely contested matchup. San Antonio created separation in the second and third quarters, while Miami attempted to recover during the final period. Kel’el Ware delivered an impressive individual performance for Miami with 29 points and 12 rebounds, while Jaime Jaquez Jr. added 19 points. Davion Mitchell contributed 10 assists, demonstrating his ability to create opportunities for teammates. For San Antonio, Luke Kornet recorded nine points and 11 rebounds, helping the Spurs maintain an advantage on the boards. The game offers several useful insights into scoring efficiency, rebounding, ball movement, turnovers, and the different ways teams can influence a close basketball contest.
Miami Heat vs San Antonio Spurs Match Player Stats: Game Overview
The October 9 meeting was a preseason contest, meaning the primary context for evaluating the performance is preparation for the regular season rather than the immediate impact on the NBA standings.
Although preseason results do not carry the same competitive weight as regular-season victories, individual performances can still reveal useful information about player development, offensive responsibilities, defensive execution, and lineup combinations.
Match Details
| Match Detail | Information |
| Game | Miami Heat vs. San Antonio Spurs |
| Date | October 9, 2025 |
| Competition | NBA preseason |
| Venue | Kaseya Center |
| Location | Miami, Florida |
| Attendance | 19,600 |
| Final Score | San Antonio Spurs 112, Miami Heat 107 |
| Winning Team | San Antonio Spurs |
| Losing Team | Miami Heat |
| Winning Margin | 5 points |
| Broadcast Listings | NBA TV, CWSA, FanDuel Sports Network Sun |
San Antonio finished with 112 points, while Miami scored 107. The result reflected a game in which both offenses produced substantial scoring opportunities, but the Spurs finished with a meaningful advantage in total rebounds and three-point baskets.
The five-point margin also matters when interpreting the statistics. This was not a game in which one team dominated every major category. Miami remained competitive in field-goal percentage, assists, and free-throw accuracy, but San Antonio gained advantages in other areas.
Quarter-by-Quarter Score
| Quarter | San Antonio Spurs | Miami Heat |
| First Quarter | 33 | 33 |
| Second Quarter | 28 | 24 |
| Third Quarter | 25 | 23 |
| Fourth Quarter | 26 | 27 |
| Final Score | 112 | 107 |
The first quarter ended in a tie, with both teams scoring 33 points. San Antonio then outscored Miami in each of the next two quarters, establishing a six-point advantage over that stretch.
Miami responded in the fourth quarter, scoring 27 points to San Antonio’s 26. However, that late improvement was not enough to erase the deficit.
This scoring pattern illustrates an important aspect of basketball analysis: the final quarter cannot be evaluated independently of what happened earlier. Miami won the fourth-quarter scoring battle by one point, but San Antonio’s work in the middle periods proved more influential to the final result.
San Antonio Spurs Player Stats and Performance Analysis
San Antonio’s victory was supported by effective overall shooting, strong rebounding, and a balanced statistical contribution across several categories.
The available game data identifies Luke Kornet’s individual production, but it does not provide a complete player-by-player box score for the Spurs. Therefore, it would be misleading to assign unverified scoring totals to Victor Wembanyama, Devin Vassell, Keldon Johnson, or the team’s other players.
The team statistics nevertheless reveal how San Antonio approached the contest and where its advantages emerged.
San Antonio Spurs Team Statistics
| Statistical Category | Spurs |
| Points | 112 |
| Field Goals | 40 of 86 |
| Field-Goal Percentage | 47% |
| Three-Pointers | 13 of 36 |
| Three-Point Percentage | 36% |
| Free Throws | 19 of 27 |
| Free-Throw Percentage | 70% |
| Total Rebounds | 49 |
| Offensive Rebounds | 16 |
| Defensive Rebounds | 33 |
| Assists | 24 |
| Turnovers | 21 |
| Steals | 10 |
| Blocks | 5 |
| Personal Fouls | 28 |
San Antonio made 40 of its 86 field-goal attempts, giving the team a reported field-goal percentage of 47%.
Its three-point shooting was another important factor. The Spurs converted 13 of 36 attempts from beyond the arc, compared with Miami’s 10 made three-pointers.
That difference produced nine additional points from three-point baskets alone.
The Spurs also collected 49 rebounds, giving them a considerable advantage over Miami’s 36. This category deserves particular attention because rebounding affects both ends of the floor.
Offensive rebounds can create additional scoring opportunities after missed shots. Defensive rebounds help end an opponent’s possession and allow the defense to transition into offense.
San Antonio recorded 16 offensive rebounds, twice Miami’s total of eight. That advantage helped the Spurs generate more opportunities to score.
However, San Antonio also committed 21 turnovers. That figure indicates an area for improvement, especially because additional possessions can be particularly valuable in close games.
Luke Kornet Records Nine Points and 11 Rebounds
Luke Kornet recorded nine points and 11 rebounds, finishing with a double-digit rebounding total.
His performance is worth examining because rebounding contributions do not always receive the same attention as high-scoring performances.
A player can influence a game by securing missed shots, preventing opponents from creating second chances, and giving teammates more opportunities to run their offense.
Kornet’s 11 rebounds were particularly relevant in a contest where San Antonio finished with 13 more rebounds than Miami.
The available statistics do not establish how many of his rebounds were offensive or defensive. It is therefore not possible to determine precisely how much of the team’s rebounding advantage came directly from his individual performance.
Nevertheless, his recorded total demonstrates a meaningful contribution to the Spurs’ work on the glass.
His nine points also provided additional scoring support. Although this was not a particularly high scoring total, his combination of points and rebounds shows why individual player evaluation should consider several categories rather than scoring alone.
Victor Wembanyama and the Spurs’ Starting Lineup
Victor Wembanyama was listed among San Antonio’s starters alongside Harrison Barnes, Keldon Johnson, Julian Champagnie, and Devin Vassell.
The available data confirms his starting role but does not establish his individual points, rebounds, assists, blocks, steals, field-goal percentage, or minutes played in this particular game.
That distinction is important when discussing player statistics. A player’s reputation, previous performances, or usual role cannot substitute for the official numbers from a specific matchup.
Wembanyama’s presence in the starting lineup is relevant to understanding San Antonio’s personnel, but a reliable evaluation of his performance in this contest requires his individual box-score line.
The same principle applies to Barnes, Johnson, Champagnie, and Vassell. Their presence in the starting lineup does not automatically establish which player led San Antonio in scoring or contributed the most defensively.
San Antonio’s Bench Contributions
The listed Spurs bench included Lindy Waters III, Harrison Ingram, David Jones Garcia, Carter Bryant, Riley Minix, Bismack Biyombo, Luke Kornet, Micah Potter, Stanley Umude, and Adam Flagler.
Kornet’s nine points and 11 rebounds are specifically identified in the available game information.
Individual statistics for the other bench players are not provided, so their precise contributions cannot be ranked accurately.
When evaluating a preseason rotation, several questions are worth considering:
- Which bench players maintain offensive efficiency when the starters rest?
- Which reserves contribute to defensive rebounding?
- How effectively do the substitutes protect the ball?
- Which lineups produce quality shots without relying on one primary scorer?
- Do the team’s defensive rotations remain organized when substitutions occur?
These questions are more useful than assuming that a particular reserve performed well simply because the team won.
A team result reflects collective performance, while individual box scores help explain how that result was achieved.
Miami Heat Player Stats and Performance Analysis
Miami’s individual performances included a 29-point effort from Kel’el Ware, 19 points from Jaime Jaquez Jr., and 10 assists from Davion Mitchell.
These three contributions highlight different aspects of basketball production.
Ware supplied the largest identified scoring total and led Miami in rebounds. Jaquez provided another significant scoring contribution, while Mitchell’s assists reflected his role in creating opportunities for teammates.
Despite these performances, Miami finished five points behind San Antonio.
Miami Heat Team Statistics
| Statistical Category | Heat |
| Points | 107 |
| Field Goals | 37 of 81 |
| Field-Goal Percentage | 46% |
| Three-Pointers | 10 of 29 |
| Three-Point Percentage | 34% |
| Free Throws | 23 of 30 |
| Free-Throw Percentage | 77% |
| Total Rebounds | 36 |
| Offensive Rebounds | 8 |
| Defensive Rebounds | 28 |
| Assists | 24 |
| Turnovers | 19 |
| Steals | 8 |
| Blocks | 3 |
| Personal Fouls | 23 |
Miami converted 37 of 81 field-goal attempts, producing a reported field-goal percentage of 46%.
That result was close to San Antonio’s 47%. The one-percentage-point difference suggests that overall field-goal accuracy alone does not explain the final outcome.
Miami also performed better at the free-throw line, converting 23 of 30 attempts for a reported percentage of 77%.
San Antonio made 19 of 27 free throws at a reported 70%.
Miami’s eight-percentage-point advantage in free-throw accuracy did not translate into a victory because other categories favored the Spurs.
The Heat also recorded 24 assists, matching San Antonio’s total. This indicates that both teams recorded the same number of assists, although the statistic alone cannot establish whether their passing patterns, shot quality, or offensive systems were equally effective.
The clearest statistical disadvantage for Miami was rebounding. The Heat collected 36 rebounds compared with San Antonio’s 49.
That 13-rebound difference is substantial in a five-point game.
Kel’el Ware Scores 29 Points and Collects 12 Rebounds
Kel’el Ware delivered Miami’s standout statistical performance with 29 points and 12 rebounds.
His 29-point total made him the leading scorer identified in the available Heat statistics. His 12 rebounds also gave him a double-double, a term used when a player records at least 10 in two statistical categories, such as points and rebounds.
The combination of scoring and rebounding makes Ware’s performance particularly noteworthy.
A player who contributes heavily in both categories can influence offensive possessions while also helping the team control the glass.
Ware’s 29 points represented approximately 27.1% of Miami’s final total of 107 points.
This calculation illustrates the scale of his contribution, although it does not establish his shooting efficiency or the number of possessions he used to score.
To evaluate his scoring performance more completely, analysts would need additional information, including:
- Field goals attempted and made.
- Three-point attempts and makes.
- Free throws attempted and made.
- Minutes played.
- Turnovers committed.
- Offensive and defensive rebound totals.
- Points scored during different game situations.
These figures would help distinguish between scoring volume and scoring efficiency.
For example, two players can each score 29 points while using very different numbers of attempts. Their final point totals may be identical, but their efficiency can differ substantially.
The available information confirms Ware’s scoring and rebounding production without providing enough detail to calculate his individual shooting percentages.
Jaime Jaquez Jr. Adds 19 Points
Jaime Jaquez Jr. contributed 19 points for Miami.
His scoring provided another important source of offense alongside Ware’s 29-point performance.
Together, Ware and Jaquez accounted for 48 points, representing approximately 44.9% of Miami’s total scoring.
This calculation helps illustrate how much of the Heat’s offensive output came from these two identified contributors.
However, the figure should not be interpreted as evidence that Miami relied exclusively on them. Other players also contributed to the team’s 107 points, but their individual totals are not available in the supplied statistics.
A deeper assessment of Jaquez’s performance would require his field-goal attempts, shooting percentages, assists, rebounds, and minutes.
Without those figures, it is possible to identify his scoring contribution but not to determine whether he was Miami’s most efficient player or its strongest overall performer after Ware.
Davion Mitchell Records 10 Assists
Davion Mitchell recorded 10 assists, making his playmaking contribution one of the most notable elements of Miami’s performance.
An assist is credited when a player’s pass directly leads to a made basket under the applicable statistical rules.
Mitchell’s total therefore reflects his role in creating scoring opportunities for teammates.
His 10 assists are especially interesting because Miami recorded 24 assists as a team.
Based on those figures, Mitchell accounted for approximately 41.7% of the Heat’s recorded assists.
That is a substantial share of the team’s total playmaking output.
However, assists do not capture every aspect of creating offense. A pass can help initiate a scoring action without receiving an assist, while a high assist total does not necessarily establish how efficiently a player managed possessions.
A more complete evaluation would consider Mitchell’s turnovers, minutes, potential assists, shooting attempts, and the scoring efficiency of the players receiving his passes.
His 10 assists nevertheless provide clear evidence of a significant contribution to Miami’s offensive distribution.
Miami’s Starting Lineup and Bench
Miami’s listed starting lineup consisted of Andrew Wiggins, Nikola Jovic, Bam Adebayo, Norman Powell, and Dru Smith.
The listed bench included Myron Gardner, Keshad Johnson, Jaime Jaquez Jr., Kel’el Ware, Pelle Larsson, Kasparas Jakucionis, Simone Fontecchio, Precious Achiuwa, Dain Dainja, Vladislav Goldin, Davion Mitchell, Ethan Thompson, Trevor Keels, and Jahmir Young.
Ware, Jaquez, and Mitchell are the players with specific individual statistics identified in the supplied data.
Their performances show how scoring, rebounding, and playmaking can contribute to a team’s offensive output in different ways.
The remaining players’ individual totals are not specified, so their performances should not be characterized as strong or weak without further evidence.
The starting lineup also should not be confused with the closing lineup. A preseason starting designation does not establish which players finished the game or how playing time was distributed.
That distinction matters because a player’s influence can depend heavily on the lineups and game situations in which they appear.
Spurs vs Heat Box Score Comparison
The team comparison provides the clearest explanation of how San Antonio won despite Miami’s strong individual scoring performances.
Complete Team Statistical Comparison
| Category | San Antonio Spurs | Miami Heat |
| Points | 112 | 107 |
| Field Goals Made | 40 | 37 |
| Field Goals Attempted | 86 | 81 |
| Field-Goal Percentage | 47% | 46% |
| Three-Pointers Made | 13 | 10 |
| Three-Point Attempts | 36 | 29 |
| Three-Point Percentage | 36% | 34% |
| Free Throws Made | 19 | 23 |
| Free-Throw Attempts | 27 | 30 |
| Free-Throw Percentage | 70% | 77% |
| Total Rebounds | 49 | 36 |
| Offensive Rebounds | 16 | 8 |
| Defensive Rebounds | 33 | 28 |
| Assists | 24 | 24 |
| Turnovers | 21 | 19 |
| Steals | 10 | 8 |
| Blocks | 5 | 3 |
| Personal Fouls | 28 | 23 |
The table reveals that San Antonio did not lead every statistical category.
Miami made more free throws, committed fewer turnovers, and matched the Spurs in assists.
San Antonio, however, made more field goals and three-pointers while collecting significantly more rebounds.
The relationship between these statistics is important.
A basketball game is determined by the points scored, not by the number of categories a team wins. Different statistical advantages carry different scoring consequences.
For example, three additional three-pointers account for nine points. Thirteen additional rebounds do not automatically produce a fixed number of points, but they can create extra possessions and prevent opponents from getting second chances.
Consequently, the most useful analysis connects statistical differences to their possible effects on scoring rather than simply counting which team led each category.
Why the Spurs Won by Five Points
San Antonio’s victory can be understood through several measurable differences between the teams.
1. San Antonio Made More Three-Pointers
The Spurs made 13 three-pointers, while Miami made 10.
That gave San Antonio nine more points from three-point baskets.
The Spurs attempted 36 three-pointers, compared with Miami’s 29. San Antonio therefore took seven more shots from beyond the arc.
This difference matters because three-point baskets provide greater scoring value than two-point field goals.
A made three-pointer is worth three points, while a made two-pointer is worth two. As a result, teams can produce more points from a similar number of successful shots by converting a higher proportion of their attempts from beyond the arc.
However, three-point volume should not be evaluated without considering accuracy.
San Antonio’s reported three-point percentage was 36%, while Miami’s was 34%. The Spurs combined a higher number of attempts with a slightly higher conversion rate.
That combination contributed to their scoring advantage.
2. The Spurs Controlled the Rebounding Battle
San Antonio collected 49 rebounds, compared with Miami’s 36.
The 13-rebound difference was one of the most pronounced statistical gaps in the game.
The offensive rebounding figures were particularly striking. San Antonio collected 16 offensive rebounds, while Miami recorded eight.
This means the Spurs secured twice as many offensive rebounds.
An offensive rebound can extend a possession after a missed shot, giving the attacking team another opportunity to score.
Defensive rebounds can also be important because they prevent the opposition from extending possessions.
San Antonio’s advantage in total rebounds suggests that the team was more successful at controlling missed shots throughout the contest.
Nevertheless, total rebounding figures alone do not explain every possession. A complete analysis would also consider missed shots, contested rebounds, team rebounds, and the timing of those possessions.
3. Miami Was More Accurate at the Free-Throw Line
Miami converted 23 of 30 free throws, while San Antonio made 19 of 27.
The Heat therefore scored four more points from free throws.
Miami also had a higher reported free-throw percentage, 77% compared with San Antonio’s 70%.
This was an area in which the Heat performed better.
It also demonstrates why the game cannot be explained by a single statistic. Miami’s superior free-throw production helped offset some of San Antonio’s advantages elsewhere.
Despite that contribution, the Heat still finished five points behind.
4. San Antonio Recorded More Steals and Blocks
The Spurs recorded 10 steals and five blocks.
Miami finished with eight steals and three blocks.
San Antonio therefore recorded two more steals and two more blocks.
Steals can end an opponent’s possession immediately and may create opportunities for fast-break points. Blocks can prevent shots from going in, although a blocked shot does not always lead to a change of possession.
These defensive statistics suggest that San Antonio produced more recorded steals and blocks, but they do not independently establish which team played better overall defense.
Defensive performance also depends on factors such as shot quality allowed, defensive rotations, fouls, and the number of possessions opponents use.
5. Miami Committed Fewer Turnovers
Miami committed 19 turnovers, while San Antonio committed 21.
This was another category in which the Heat had the better result.
Turnovers are especially important because they end offensive possessions without guaranteeing a shot attempt.
A team that commits fewer turnovers generally has more opportunities to attempt shots, although the value of each possession depends on the circumstances.
The Spurs’ victory despite recording two more turnovers suggests that their advantages in shooting volume, three-point scoring, and rebounding helped compensate for their ball-security problems.
It would be inaccurate to suggest that San Antonio won because it protected the ball better. The supplied statistics show the opposite.
6. San Antonio Built Its Lead Before the Final Quarter
The quarter-by-quarter score offers another important explanation.
Both teams scored 33 points in the first quarter.
San Antonio then outscored Miami 28-24 in the second quarter and 25-23 in the third.
Those two periods produced a six-point advantage for the Spurs.
Miami scored 27 points in the fourth quarter, one more than San Antonio’s 26. The Heat therefore reduced the deficit slightly but did not recover the lead.
This illustrates the importance of sustained performance across all four quarters.
A team can finish strongly and still lose if its opponent builds a sufficient advantage earlier in the game.
Shooting Efficiency: What the Numbers Reveal
Shooting percentages provide useful information, but they must be interpreted carefully.
San Antonio made 40 of 86 field-goal attempts, while Miami made 37 of 81.
The reported field-goal percentages were 47% and 46%, respectively.
The percentages were close, but San Antonio attempted five more field goals and made three more.
Those differences contributed to the Spurs’ overall scoring advantage.
Effective Field-Goal Percentage
Effective field-goal percentage, commonly abbreviated as eFG%, adjusts ordinary field-goal percentage to account for the extra point awarded for a made three-pointer.
The formula is:
eFG% = (Field Goals Made + 0.5 × Three-Pointers Made) ÷ Field-Goal Attempts × 100
Using the supplied statistics:
San Antonio Spurs
- Field goals made: 40
- Three-pointers made: 13
- Field-goal attempts: 86
Calculation:
(40 + 0.5 × 13) ÷ 86 × 100
The Spurs’ effective field-goal percentage was approximately 52.9%.
Miami Heat
- Field goals made: 37
- Three-pointers made: 10
- Field-goal attempts: 81
Calculation:
(37 + 0.5 × 10) ÷ 81 × 100
The Heat’s effective field-goal percentage was approximately 51.9%.
San Antonio therefore held an effective field-goal percentage advantage of approximately one percentage point.
This measure helps explain why the teams’ ordinary field-goal percentages do not tell the complete story.
A three-pointer counts as one made field goal in ordinary field-goal percentage, just like a two-pointer. Effective field-goal percentage adjusts for the additional point available from three-point shooting.
The Spurs’ higher number of made three-pointers improved their performance under this measure.
True Shooting Percentage: An Important Limitation
True shooting percentage estimates scoring efficiency while accounting for two-point shots, three-point shots, and free throws.
A commonly used formula is:
TS% = Points ÷ [2 × (Field-Goal Attempts + 0.44 × Free-Throw Attempts)] × 100
Using the supplied team totals, the approximate figures are:
- San Antonio Spurs: 56.1%.
- Miami Heat: 57.2%.
These calculations are estimates based on the standard formula and the supplied totals.
Under this measure, Miami’s estimated true shooting percentage was slightly higher, largely reflecting its greater free-throw production.
This result is useful because it shows that the Spurs’ victory was not necessarily the product of superior efficiency under every available shooting measure.
Miami performed better on estimated true shooting percentage, yet San Antonio scored five more points.
That outcome reinforces the importance of shot volume, rebounding, turnovers, and total possessions.
Efficiency is important, but teams also need enough successful possessions to produce a winning score.
Rebounding Analysis: The Statistical Difference That Stands Out
Rebounding was one of the most significant differences between the teams.
San Antonio recorded 49 total rebounds, while Miami recorded 36.
The Spurs’ advantage was 13 rebounds, equivalent to approximately 36.1% more rebounds than Miami’s total.
Offensive Rebounding Comparison
| Team | Offensive Rebounds |
| San Antonio Spurs | 16 |
| Miami Heat | 8 |
| Difference | 8 |
San Antonio’s eight-rebound advantage on the offensive glass is particularly notable.
An offensive rebound can create a second scoring opportunity without requiring the attacking team to win possession through a steal or wait for an opponent to miss.
Repeated offensive rebounds can also force defenders to remain in the paint longer, potentially affecting defensive positioning and fatigue.
However, offensive rebounding is not automatically beneficial in every situation. Sending additional players toward the basket can leave a team more vulnerable to transition offense if the opponent secures the ball.
The value of offensive rebounding therefore depends on the quality of the possession and the defensive risks involved.
Defensive Rebounding Comparison
| Team | Defensive Rebounds |
| San Antonio Spurs | 33 |
| Miami Heat | 28 |
| Difference | 5 |
San Antonio also recorded five more defensive rebounds.
This suggests that the Spurs collected a greater share of the rebounds recorded in the supplied team totals.
The combination of offensive and defensive rebounding advantages gave San Antonio more control over the glass.
For Miami, improving defensive rebounding would be a logical area to examine when reviewing this game.
However, without detailed lineup and possession data, it would be premature to attribute the difference to one player, one defensive scheme, or one coaching decision.
Assists, Turnovers, and Ball Movement
Both teams recorded 24 assists, indicating that their overall assist totals were identical.
That does not mean their offensive processes were identical.
Assists measure passes that directly lead to made baskets, but they do not capture every important element of playmaking.
A player can create an advantage by drawing defenders, passing to an open teammate, or initiating an action that produces a later scoring opportunity.
Those contributions may not appear in the final assist count.
Team Ball Security
San Antonio committed 21 turnovers, compared with Miami’s 19.
The Spurs therefore committed two additional turnovers.
In a game decided by five points, that difference deserves attention, although it would be incorrect to assume that each turnover directly cost a team two points or that the turnover margin alone determined the result.
Turnovers vary in their consequences.
A live-ball turnover that creates a fast break may be more damaging than a dead-ball turnover that allows the defense to reset.
The available team totals do not identify the type, timing, or direct scoring consequences of each turnover.
Individual Playmaking
Mitchell’s 10 assists represented a significant contribution to Miami’s ball movement.
His total accounted for approximately 41.7% of the Heat’s 24 assists.
That concentration of assists raises useful analytical questions about the team’s offensive structure.
For example, analysts might examine whether Miami generated most of its scoring opportunities through Mitchell’s primary playmaking or whether several players shared the responsibility for initiating offense.
The supplied data does not answer those questions completely.
A full play-by-play review would help establish how Mitchell’s assists were distributed across teammates and game situations.
Defensive Statistics: Steals, Blocks, and Fouls
San Antonio recorded 10 steals and five blocks, while Miami recorded eight steals and three blocks.
These numbers show a modest advantage for the Spurs in both categories.
However, steals and blocks should not be treated as complete measures of defensive quality.
A defense may force difficult shots without recording a block. It may also contest a pass without earning a steal.
Similarly, a blocked shot can remain with the attacking team, so the defensive action does not always end the possession.
Personal Fouls
San Antonio committed 28 personal fouls, compared with Miami’s 23.
The five-foul difference is notable because fouls can affect free-throw opportunities, defensive aggression, and player availability.
Miami attempted 30 free throws, while San Antonio attempted 27.
The higher foul total for San Antonio does not, by itself, establish that those fouls directly caused Miami’s free-throw advantage.
Free-throw opportunities can arise from different types of shooting fouls, bonus situations, and other game circumstances.
A play-by-play breakdown would be needed to identify the exact causes.
Nevertheless, the combination of more Spurs fouls and more Miami free-throw attempts is consistent with Miami having a relative advantage in free-throw production.
What This Preseason Game Can Tell Us
Preseason statistics are useful, but they require a different interpretation from regular-season numbers.
Coaches may experiment with lineups, adjust player roles, manage minutes, and test different offensive or defensive approaches.
As a result, a single preseason game does not necessarily predict how a team will perform over an entire regular season.
The October 9 result is best treated as a snapshot of the two teams’ performances on that particular night.
Lessons for the San Antonio Spurs
The game provides several measurable areas for San Antonio to review.
First, the Spurs demonstrated a rebounding advantage.
Their 49 rebounds and 16 offensive rebounds were important statistical strengths.
Maintaining strong rebounding performance can help a team control possessions and reduce opponents’ opportunities for second-chance points.
Second, three-point production contributed to the win.
San Antonio made 13 three-pointers compared with Miami’s 10.
The difference helped offset Miami’s greater free-throw production.
Third, turnovers remain an area to monitor.
The Spurs committed 21 turnovers, two more than Miami.
Although they won the game, reducing unnecessary turnovers could help them preserve possessions in future contests.
Fourth, foul management deserves attention.
San Antonio recorded 28 personal fouls, five more than Miami.
A more detailed review would be needed to determine whether those fouls reflected aggressive defense, poor positioning, or ordinary preseason experimentation.
Lessons for the Miami Heat
Miami’s statistics also provide several useful observations.
First, individual scoring was a clear strength.
Ware scored 29 points, while Jaquez added 19.
Their combined 48 points accounted for nearly 45% of the Heat’s total.
Second, free-throw production helped keep the game close.
Miami made 23 free throws, four more than San Antonio.
The Heat also recorded the higher free-throw percentage.
Third, rebounding was the clearest statistical weakness.
Miami finished with 36 rebounds, 13 fewer than the Spurs.
The difference was particularly pronounced on the offensive glass, where San Antonio recorded twice as many rebounds.
Fourth, ball security was comparatively stronger.
Miami committed 19 turnovers, two fewer than San Antonio.
This advantage was not enough to secure the victory, but it remains a positive element of the statistical comparison.
These observations should be treated as game-specific findings rather than definitive conclusions about either team’s entire season.
How to Read NBA Player Statistics Correctly
For readers who want to understand a basketball box score beyond the final score, several basic principles make the numbers easier to interpret.
Points
Points measure a player’s direct scoring contribution.
A player can score through two-point field goals, three-point field goals, and free throws.
However, a high points total does not automatically mean that a player had the most efficient performance.
Rebounds
Rebounds are divided into offensive and defensive categories.
Offensive rebounds allow a team to recover possession after its own missed shot. Defensive rebounds generally secure possession after an opponent misses.
Total rebounds combine the two categories, subject to the applicable statistical treatment of team rebounds.
Assists
Assists measure passes that directly lead to made field goals.
They help describe playmaking but do not capture every contribution that creates a scoring opportunity.
Turnovers
Turnovers occur when a team or player loses possession in a way that ends its offensive opportunity.
They matter because they can eliminate scoring chances before a shot is attempted.
Shooting Percentages
Field-goal percentage measures made field goals relative to field-goal attempts.
Three-point percentage measures made three-pointers relative to three-point attempts.
Free-throw percentage measures made free throws relative to free-throw attempts.
These percentages should be considered alongside shot volume and shot value.
Plus-Minus
Plus-minus measures the difference between a team’s points scored and points allowed while a particular player is on the court.
For example, a plus-minus of +5 means the player’s team outscored its opponent by five points during that player’s time on the court.
A minus-five figure means the opponent outscored the player’s team by five points during that period.
Plus-minus is influenced by teammates, opponents, substitutions, and game circumstances. It should not be treated as a direct measure of an individual player’s quality.
The supplied statistics define plus-minus but do not provide individual plus-minus figures for this matchup.
Consequently, no player-specific plus-minus ranking can be established from the available data.
Frequently Asked Questions
1. Who won the Miami Heat vs San Antonio Spurs game on October 9, 2025?
The San Antonio Spurs defeated the Miami Heat 112-107 in an NBA preseason game at the Kaseya Center in Miami, Florida. San Antonio won by five points after outscoring Miami in the second and third quarters.
2. How many points did Kel’el Ware score against the Spurs?
Kel’el Ware scored 29 points and collected 12 rebounds for Miami. His scoring total was the highest individual figure identified in the supplied Heat statistics, and his points and rebounds gave him a double-double.
3. How many points did Jaime Jaquez Jr. score?
Jaime Jaquez Jr. scored 19 points for the Miami Heat. Combined with Ware’s 29 points, his contribution helped the two players account for 48 of Miami’s 107 points.
4. How many assists did Davion Mitchell record?
Davion Mitchell recorded 10 assists. Miami finished with 24 team assists, meaning Mitchell accounted for approximately 41.7% of the Heat’s recorded assists.
5. How many rebounds did the Spurs and Heat collect?
San Antonio recorded 49 total rebounds, while Miami collected 36. The Spurs held a 13-rebound advantage, including a significant eight-rebound advantage in offensive rebounds.
6. Why did the Spurs win despite Miami’s better free-throw percentage?
Miami converted 77% of its free throws, compared with San Antonio’s 70%, and made four more free throws overall. However, the Spurs made three additional three-pointers and collected 13 more rebounds. Those advantages helped San Antonio finish with a five-point victory.
Conclusion
The October 9, 2025, preseason meeting between the San Antonio Spurs and Miami Heat produced a competitive 112-107 result, with San Antonio securing the victory through a combination of three-point scoring and rebounding.
The most notable individual performance for Miami came from Kel’el Ware, who recorded 29 points and 12 rebounds. Jaime Jaquez Jr. added 19 points, while Davion Mitchell contributed 10 assists. For San Antonio, Luke Kornet recorded nine points and 11 rebounds.
The team comparison reveals why the final result cannot be explained by scoring alone. Miami made more free throws, recorded the same number of assists, and committed fewer turnovers. San Antonio, however, made more three-pointers and collected 13 additional rebounds.
The Spurs’ 16 offensive rebounds were particularly important, providing a measurable advantage in opportunities to recover missed shots. Their 13 made three-pointers also produced nine more points from beyond the arc than Miami’s 10 made three-pointers.
At the same time, San Antonio’s 21 turnovers and 28 personal fouls represent areas that deserve attention when evaluating the team’s performance.
The key lesson from this matchup is that basketball results emerge from the interaction of multiple statistical categories. Scoring, shooting efficiency, rebounding, ball security, and defensive activity all contribute to the final outcome, but their relative importance depends on how they influence possessions and points.
The available statistics establish a clear picture of the team-level contest and several individual highlights. A complete player-by-player comparison would require the full individual box score, including minutes, field-goal attempts, shooting percentages, turnovers, steals, blocks, and plus-minus figures for every player who participated.
