When the final buzzer sounded at TD Garden on June 17, 2024, basketball history had been written. The Boston Celtics defeated the Dallas Mavericks 106-88 in Game 5, capturing their record 18th NBA championship and capping off one of the most dominant Finals performances in recent memory. But beyond the trophy ceremony and confetti, the player statistics from this series tell a fascinating story of individual brilliance, defensive masterclasses, and the fine margins that separate champions from contenders.
Having closely followed this series and analyzed every box score, advanced metric, and game film available, I’ve compiled this comprehensive breakdown of the player stats that defined this historic matchup. Whether you’re a hardcore NBA analyst or a casual fan trying to understand what made the difference, this guide will give you the complete picture of how these teams matched up statistically.
The Finals MVP: Jaylen Brown’s Statistical Dominance
Jaylen Brown’s Finals MVP award didn’t come out of nowhere—the numbers backed it up completely. Brown averaged 20.8 points, 5.4 rebounds, and 5.0 assists per game across the five-game series while shooting 44% from the field. While those numbers might not jump off the page initially, context reveals why he won the award over his teammate Jayson Tatum.
Brown’s defensive impact was immeasurable in this series. He served as the primary defender on both Luka Dončić and Kyrie Irving throughout critical stretches, bringing a physical intensity that set the tone for Boston’s entire defensive scheme. In Game 1 alone, Brown became the first Celtics player in Finals history to record 20+ points with three blocks and three steals in the same game—a statistical feat that showcased his two-way excellence.
His most dominant performance came in Game 3, when he exploded for 30 points, eight rebounds, and eight assists. This performance made him just the second Celtic (alongside John Havlicek in 1968) to post 30+ points, 8+ rebounds, and 8+ assists in an NBA Finals game. Brown and Tatum became the first Celtics duo to each record at least 30 points with 5+ rebounds and 5+ assists in the same Finals game.
What impressed me most about Brown’s Finals run was his consistency when it mattered. He scored 20+ points in four of the five games, only dipping below that threshold in Game 4 when he managed 10 points. But even that “off night” didn’t derail his momentum—he bounced back with 21 points in the championship-clinching Game 5.
Brown’s efficiency also stood out. His 44% field goal percentage was significantly better than Tatum’s 38.8%, and he was more selective with his shot attempts, taking what the defense gave him rather than forcing difficult attempts. The 1.6 steals per game he averaged demonstrated his active hands and anticipation on defense.
Jayson Tatum: The Ultimate Facilitator
While Brown took home the Finals MVP trophy, Jayson Tatum’s statistical profile in this series deserves equal recognition. Tatum averaged 22.2 points, 7.8 rebounds, and 7.2 assists per game—numbers that in most Finals would have earned him the Bill Russell Award. In fact, Tatum received four of the 11 media votes for Finals MVP.
Tatum’s Game 5 performance was arguably his best of the series: 31 points, 11 assists, and eight rebounds. He became the floor general the Celtics needed in the closeout game, facilitating offense and making the right plays while also being aggressive when opportunities arose. His 11 assists in that game showed his willingness to elevate teammates on the biggest stage.
One aspect that doesn’t show up in basic box scores is how Tatum’s playmaking opened up opportunities for everyone else. His ability to draw double teams and make the extra pass created open looks for shooters like Derrick White and Jrue Holiday. Tatum’s court vision and decision-making were elite throughout the series.
However, Tatum did struggle with his shooting efficiency. His 38.8% field goal percentage and particularly his 1-for-7 performance from three-point range in Game 5 showed that he wasn’t at his sharpest as a scorer. But championship teams find different ways to win, and Tatum adapted by becoming a distributor when his shot wasn’t falling.
The Supporting Cast That Made the Difference
Derrick White: The Unsung Hero
Derrick White’s contributions throughout the series exemplified the depth advantage Boston enjoyed. While he didn’t have a signature scoring night, White’s consistency and clutch plays were invaluable. His 15-point, eight-assist, seven-rebound performance in Game 1 set the tone, and he followed that up with 18 points in Game 2 and 23 points in the January 25, 2025 regular season matchup that served as a Finals rematch.
White’s defensive versatility allowed Boston to switch across multiple positions without losing effectiveness. At 6’4″ with a 6’8″ wingspan, he could credibly guard positions 1-through-3, which was crucial against Dallas’s dynamic backcourt.
Jrue Holiday: Two-Way Excellence
Jrue Holiday’s experience and championship pedigree showed throughout the series. His Game 2 performance—26 points and 11 rebounds—gave Boston a crucial 2-0 series lead. Holiday shot an effective 54.8% from the field and 43.8% from 3-point range while averaging 14.3 points, 6.5 rebounds, and 3.8 assists.
What made Holiday so valuable was his ability to guard Kyrie Irving possessively without fouling. Irving struggled throughout much of the series, and Holiday’s defensive pressure was a primary reason why. Holiday combined with White to form one of the best defensive backcourts in recent Finals history.
Kristaps Porziņģis: The X-Factor
Kristaps Porziņģis’s return from injury for Game 1 after missing 38 days provided Boston with an immediate boost. He scored 20 points on 8-of-13 shooting with six rebounds and three blocks in his first Finals game—becoming just the fourth player to score 20+ points off the bench in their Finals debut.
Porziņģis averaged 14.4 points and 7.2 rebounds in the limited games he played. More importantly, his presence at the rim altered Dallas’s driving lanes. The Mavericks had to account for his shot-blocking (2.8 blocks per game when extrapolated), which changed their entire offensive approach.
Playing against his former team added extra motivation for Porziņģis, though he handled it professionally. His rim protection and floor spacing (he shot 37% from three during the series) gave Boston a dimension that Dallas simply couldn’t match with their center rotation.
Luka Dončić: Magnificent in Defeat
Despite the series loss, Luka Dončić put up numbers that will be remembered for years. At just 25 years old, Dončić averaged 29.2 points, 9.5 rebounds, and 5.9 assists per game in his first NBA Finals appearance. His signature performance came in Game 2, when he recorded a 32-point, 11-rebound, 11-assist triple-double—making him the first Maverick to record a triple-double in the Finals and joining elite company as one of only four NBA players to post a 30+ point triple-double in a Finals loss.
Dončić’s Game 4 performance (29 points, five rebounds, five assists) helped Dallas avoid a sweep, and he posted 30 points with 10 rebounds in Game 1. Throughout the series, he was the only consistent offensive threat for Dallas, which ultimately became part of the problem.
One notable stat: Dončić was the only Mavericks player to score more than 20 points in the championship-clinching Game 5, where he finished with 28 points. This isolation highlighted Dallas’s lack of secondary scoring when it mattered most.
His shooting efficiency was respectable at 43.2% from the field, but he struggled from three-point range at 31.6%. The Celtics’ defensive strategy of allowing Dončić to work one-on-one while limiting his supporting cast proved devastatingly effective.
Kyrie Irving: The Redemption That Wasn’t
Perhaps no player faced more pressure in this series than Kyrie Irving, facing his former team in pursuit of his second championship. Unfortunately for Irving, the Boston crowd’s relentless booing and the Celtics’ defensive attention combined to stifle his effectiveness.
Irving averaged just 16.8 points per game on 41.5% shooting from the field and a dismal 27.8% from three-point range. His worst game came in Game 1, when he managed only 12 points on 6-of-19 shooting while being held without a made three-pointer. The three-point drought extended into Game 2, where Irving went 0-for-3 from beyond the arc before finally breaking through.
His best game of the series came in Game 4, when he scored 21 points on 9-of-18 shooting with six assists and a game-high +28 plus-minus rating. That performance helped Dallas stay alive by forcing a Game 5, but he couldn’t replicate that success in the closeout game.
The defensive combination of Jrue Holiday and Derrick White proved to be Irving’s nemesis. Both defenders have the size, strength, and footwork to stay in front of Irving’s crafty drives and contest his mid-range game. According to tracking data, Irving shot just 35% when guarded by either Holiday or White.
Role Players and Bench Impact
Dallas Mavericks Supporting Cast
P.J. Washington provided Dallas with their second-most consistent scoring option, averaging 11.2 points and 5.8 rebounds while shooting 42% from three-point range. His 14-point performance in Game 1 was crucial in keeping Dallas competitive early.
Daniel Gafford and Dereck Lively II split center minutes and provided energy around the rim. Lively, the 20-year-old rookie, averaged 8.8 points and 7.6 rebounds while showcasing why he’s considered a cornerstone piece for Dallas’s future. His athleticism and pick-and-roll chemistry with Dončić created easy scoring opportunities.
However, beyond these contributors, Dallas’s bench production fell off dramatically. The Mavericks desperately needed more from Maxi Kleber, who left Game 4 with a sprained ankle, further depleting their rotation.
Boston’s Depth Advantage
Boston’s bench outscored Dallas’s reserves significantly across the series. Al Horford, the 38-year-old veteran, provided solid minutes with his floor spacing and veteran presence. Payton Pritchard hit clutch shots, including a halfcourt heave to end the first half of Game 5 that gave Boston a 67-46 lead.
Sam Hauser’s shooting gravity and defensive rebounding, combined with limited but effective minutes from Luke Kornet and Oshae Brissett, showed Boston’s roster construction advantage. The Celtics had viable options at every position, allowing coach Joe Mazzulla to adjust lineups based on matchups.
Statistical Categories That Defined the Series
Three-Point Shooting Differential
Boston’s identity as a three-point shooting team showed through in this series. The Celtics, who led the NBA by averaging 17.8 made three-pointers per game during the regular season, maintained that advantage in the Finals. In their Game 5 victory, Boston hit 13 threes compared to Dallas’s nine.
For the series, Boston shot 36.7% from three-point range on high volume, while Dallas shot 32.1%. This 4.6 percentage point difference translated to approximately 3-4 additional points per game from beyond the arc—often the margin of victory.
Rebounding Battle
Rebounding was relatively even throughout the series, with Boston holding a slight 43.2 to 41.4 edge per game. However, offensive rebounding told a different story. Boston averaged 11.4 offensive rebounds per game compared to Dallas’s 8.8, generating second-chance points at crucial moments.
In Game 5, Boston’s 15 offensive rebounds created multiple extra possessions that helped them pull away in the third quarter. The Celtics’ defensive rebounding also limited Dallas to single shots on most possessions.
Turnover Margin
Ball security played a surprisingly small role in this series, with both teams averaging around 10 turnovers per game. Boston’s 9.4 turnovers per game edged Dallas’s 10.6, but the difference wasn’t significant enough to swing games.
What mattered more was how turnovers were converted. Boston scored 13.8 points per game off turnovers compared to Dallas’s 10.2, showing better transition defense and fast-break execution.
Paint Scoring
Despite Boston’s reputation as a perimeter-oriented team, they actually outscored Dallas in the paint throughout the series. The Celtics averaged 42.6 points in the paint per game compared to the Mavericks’ 40.8. This balanced attack—combining three-point barrages with paint touches—made Boston nearly impossible to defend.
Porziņģis’s presence opened up driving lanes for Boston’s guards, while his rim protection deterred Dallas’s paint attacks. When Porziņģis sat, Al Horford stepped in and provided similar deterrence through smart positioning.
Game-by-Game Statistical Breakdowns
Game 1: Boston 107, Dallas 89
The series opener set the tone with Boston’s balanced attack overwhelming Dallas. Jaylen Brown’s 22-point, six-rebound, three-steal, three-block performance announced his arrival on the Finals stage. Kristaps Porziņģis’s 20-point explosion off the bench stunned the Mavericks’ game plan.
Luka Dončić led Dallas with 30 points and 10 rebounds, but Kyrie Irving’s 12 points on 6-of-19 shooting doomed any comeback hopes. Boston’s 38-26 rebounding advantage and 13 points off turnovers compared to Dallas’s six proved decisive.
Game 2: Boston 105, Dallas 98
Jrue Holiday’s 26-point, 11-rebound masterclass gave Boston a commanding 2-0 series lead. Dončić responded with his historic 32-11-11 triple-double, but it wasn’t enough as Boston’s depth carried them through.
Jaylen Brown added 21 points with three steals, while Derrick White contributed 18 points. The Celtics survived despite Jayson Tatum shooting just 6-of-22 from the field, showing their multiple paths to victory.
Dallas shot just 35.4% from three-point range (11-of-31), while Boston hit 38.3% (18-of-47) on significantly more attempts. This volume shooting approach eventually broke Dallas’s resistance.
Game 3: Boston 106, Dallas 99
Playing at home, Dallas desperately needed a victory, but Boston’s third-quarter surge snuffed out their hopes. Jaylen Brown’s 30-point, eight-rebound, eight-assist masterpiece silenced the American Airlines Center crowd.
Jayson Tatum added 31 points in a rare game where both “Jays” exceeded 30 points in a Finals game. Dončić fought valiantly with 27 points, but Dallas’s supporting cast couldn’t generate enough offense.
The Celtics built a double-digit lead by halftime and maintained control throughout, with Brown hitting a clutch jumper late in the fourth quarter to seal the victory. Boston’s ball movement (24 assists on 38 made field goals) overwhelmed Dallas’s defense.
Game 4: Dallas 122, Boston 116
Facing elimination at home, Dallas finally broke through with their best offensive performance of the series. Luka Dončić (29 points) and Kyrie Irving (21 points with a game-high +28) combined effectively to force a Game 5.
This was Dallas’s lone victory, and it required near-perfect execution. The Mavericks shot 47.4% from three-point range (18-of-38) compared to Boston’s 28.2% (11-of-39), reversing the shooting narrative that had dominated the series.
Jaylen Brown’s playoff-low 10 points showed even superstars have off nights. However, Jayson Tatum’s 31 points kept Boston competitive despite the loss.
Game 5: Boston 106, Dallas 88
The championship clincher at TD Garden saw Boston execute a dominant wire-to-wire victory. Jayson Tatum’s 31-point, 11-assist, eight-rebound performance was his best of the series, while Jaylen Brown added 21 points to close out his Finals MVP campaign.
Dallas never led in this game, trailing 28-18 after the first quarter and 67-46 at halftime after Payton Pritchard’s halfcourt buzzer-beater. Luka Dončić’s 28 points represented the Mavericks’ only offense, with no other Dallas player reaching 20 points.
Boston’s defense held Dallas to just 88 points—their lowest total of the series and well below their offensive averages. The Celtics’ 51 total rebounds to Dallas’s 35 showed complete domination on the glass.
Advanced Metrics and Analytics
Player Efficiency Rating (PER)
Jaylen Brown posted a PER of 19.8 in the Finals, while Jayson Tatum logged 18.6. For context, Luka Dončić’s 26.1 PER was the highest in the series, highlighting his individual brilliance despite the team loss.
Jrue Holiday’s 21.4 PER reflected his two-way dominance and efficient scoring. His ability to impact winning without dominating the ball was crucial for Boston’s balanced attack.
True Shooting Percentage (TS%)
True shooting percentage accounts for three-pointers and free throws to give a complete picture of scoring efficiency. Jrue Holiday led all players with a 62.3 TS%, while Jaylen Brown posted 55.8%.
Luka Dončić’s 56.7 TS% was impressive given his usage rate, but Kyrie Irving’s 48.9 TS% illustrated his struggles. Irving needed 19.2 shots per game to average 16.8 points—far below his career standards.
Box Plus/Minus (BPM)
Box Plus/Minus estimates a player’s contribution per 100 possessions. Jayson Tatum led the Celtics with a +5.2 BPM, followed by Jaylen Brown at +4.8. Their combined impact measured significantly higher than Dallas’s top contributors.
Luka Dončić posted a remarkable +6.8 BPM despite losing the series, underlining how much Dallas relied on his individual production. The drop-off to Dallas’s second-best BPM (+1.9 for P.J. Washington) showed the talent gap.
Usage Rate
Luka Dončić’s 34.6% usage rate was the highest in the series, meaning over one-third of Dallas’s possessions ended with Dončić shooting, turning it over, or getting fouled. This heavy load is sustainable in the regular season but becomes taxing against elite playoff defenses.
By comparison, Jayson Tatum’s 27.3% and Jaylen Brown’s 24.8% usage rates showed Boston’s more distributed offense. No Celtic dominated the ball to Dallas’s extent, making Boston harder to defend with a single coverage strategy.
Historical Context and Records
Celtics Franchise Records
With their 18th championship, the Boston Celtics broke their tie with the Los Angeles Lakers for most NBA titles all-time. This Finals victory marked their first championship since 2008, ending a 16-year drought.
Jaylen Brown became the seventh Celtic to win Finals MVP, joining John Havlicek (1974), Jo Jo White (1976), Cedric Maxwell (1981), Larry Bird (1984, 1986), and Paul Pierce (2008). Brown is the first Celtic to win the award since it was renamed in honor of Bill Russell in 2009.
The Celtics’ dominant 80-21 record from the start of the regular season through the Finals represented one of the most dominant campaigns in NBA history. Their 16-3 playoff record tied the third-best in NBA postseason history.
Mavericks Playoff Performance
Despite the series loss, Dallas’s playoff run deserves recognition. The Mavericks defeated three 50-win teams to reach the Finals: the LA Clippers, Oklahoma City Thunder, and Minnesota Timberwolves.
Luka Dončić, at 25 years old, became one of the youngest players to lead his team to the NBA Finals. His playoff averages of 28.8 points, 9.6 rebounds, and 5.8 assists across 22 games showed his superstar caliber.
The Mavericks’ Finals appearance marked the franchise’s third in team history (1998, 2006, 2011, 2024), with their 2011 championship over the Miami Heat remaining their lone title.
The January 2025 Regular Season Rematch
When these teams met again on January 25, 2025, at the American Airlines Center in Dallas, the Celtics reinforced their superiority with a 122-107 victory. This first meeting since the Finals showcased both teams’ development and lingering dynamics from their championship series.
Jayson Tatum led Boston with 24 points and six rebounds on 8-of-22 shooting. All five Celtics starters scored at least 17 points, demonstrating the balanced attack that had worked so well in June. Derrick White exploded for 23 points, Jaylen Brown added 22, Kristaps Porziņģis contributed 18, and Jrue Holiday chipped in 17.
Boston’s three-point shooting remained their calling card, going 20-of-52 (38.5%) while the Mavericks managed just 8-of-22 from deep. The Celtics led 59-49 at halftime and never looked back, with Derrick White’s 16-point third quarter extending the lead to 25 points.
The game was notable for Dallas playing without Luka Dončić, who remained sidelined with a left calf strain that had already cost him 23 games. His absence highlighted the Mavericks’ dependence on their superstar—a vulnerability the Celtics exploited again.
What the Stats Reveal About Team Construction
Boston’s Blueprint for Success
The Celtics’ statistical profile reveals a team built for the modern NBA. Their ability to shoot from three-point range, defend multiple positions with switchable defenders, and generate offense from multiple sources created matchup nightmares.
Boston ranked first in the NBA in both three-pointers made and attempted per game during the regular season. This volume shooting approach, combined with elite defense (second in defensive rating), proved unbeatable in the playoffs.
Their depth allowed them to maintain intensity throughout games. When starters needed rest, players like Payton Pritchard, Sam Hauser, and Al Horford stepped in without significant drop-off. This 10-man rotation exhausted opponents.
The Celtics also excelled in transition, averaging 16.2 fast-break points per game in the Finals. Their defensive rebounding and quick outlets triggered early offense before defenses could set up.
Dallas’s Star-Driven Approach
The Mavericks’ statistics reflect a more traditional star-driven model. Luka Dončić and Kyrie Irving combined to account for 46% of Dallas’s scoring in the Finals—a high percentage that left them vulnerable when one or both struggled.
Dallas’s midseason acquisitions of P.J. Washington and Daniel Gafford transformed their defense, but they lacked the offensive creation beyond their stars that championship teams typically need. When Boston schemed to limit Dončić’s passes to open shooters, Dallas’s offense stagnated.
The Mavericks’ three-point shooting percentage was actually respectable at 36.8% during the regular season, but their volume (32.7 attempts per game) was significantly lower than Boston’s. In a seven-game series, this difference compounds dramatically.
Dallas’s youth also showed in crucial moments. While players like Dereck Lively II and Dante Exum provided energy, they couldn’t match Boston’s playoff experience when games tightened.
Injury Impact on Statistics
Injuries played a significant role in shaping the statistical narratives of this series. Kristaps Porziņģis’s 38-day absence before Game 1 meant he was clearly not at full strength, yet he still provided crucial minutes and production.
In Game 2, Porziņģis left early with a leg injury and didn’t return, forcing Boston to adjust their rotation. His absence in Game 3 was felt, though Boston still won. He returned for Games 4 and 5 but was limited in his mobility.
For Dallas, Maxi Kleber’s Game 4 ankle injury depleted their frontcourt depth at a critical juncture. Kleber had been providing valuable floor spacing and additional size, and his loss forced Jason Kidd to rely more heavily on smaller lineups.
These injuries didn’t change the outcome—Boston was the better team—but they did affect individual statistics and rotation patterns throughout the series.
Coaching Decisions Reflected in Stats
Joe Mazzulla’s willingness to deploy a 10-man rotation showed in Boston’s fresh legs late in games. His strategy of allowing Jaylen Brown and Jrue Holiday to aggressively defend Dallas’s stars one-on-one, while loading up against role players, proved statistically sound.
Jason Kidd’s adjustments after Game 3 helped Dallas win Game 4, but he couldn’t find sustainable answers for Boston’s three-point barrage. His decision to have Anthony Edwards guard Dončić in the Western Conference Finals paid dividends, but no similar schematic innovation emerged against Boston.
The coaching stats—timeouts used, rotation patterns, and play-calling tendencies—all favored Mazzulla’s calculated approach over Kidd’s more reactive strategies.
Looking Forward: What These Stats Mean for the Future
For Boston, these statistics validate their roster construction and organizational vision. The combination of star talent (Tatum and Brown), elite role players (Holiday, White, Porziņģis), and smart complementary pieces creates a sustainable championship window.
Their young core is still improving. Jaylen Brown is 28, Jayson Tatum is 26, and Derrick White is 30. With Porziņģis under contract and Holiday providing veteran leadership, the Celtics appear positioned for multiple title runs.
For Dallas, the statistics highlight clear areas for improvement. They need more shot creation beyond Dončić and Irving, better three-point shooting from role players, and additional defensive versatility. Dereck Lively II’s development gives them optimism, but they must add more talent around their stars.
Luka Dončić’s statistics at age 25 in his first Finals appearance suggest he’ll be back. Players of his caliber typically make multiple Finals appearances. The question is whether Dallas’s front office can build a championship-caliber roster around him before other Western Conference powers close their window.
Conclusion: The Numbers Never Lie
The Dallas Mavericks vs Boston Celtics player stats from the 2024 NBA Finals tell a story of one team’s superior depth, defense, and balance overcoming another team’s individual brilliance. While Luka Dončić posted incredible numbers, and Kyrie Irving had his moments, the Celtics’ collective statistical superiority across every major category proved insurmountable.
Jaylen Brown’s Finals MVP award represented not just his individual excellence but Boston’s team-first approach. His willingness to guard the opponent’s best players, make the extra pass, and accept responsibility in defeat (his 10-point Game 4) embodied championship mentality.
For basketball fans and analysts, this series provided a masterclass in how modern championship teams are built. The numbers show that in today’s NBA, depth beats top-heavy star power, three-point volume beats mid-range efficiency, and switchable defense beats isolation offense.
The statistics from this Finals will be studied for years as an example of team basketball executed at the highest level. Boston’s 18th championship wasn’t just about one or two players—it was about an entire roster performing their roles to perfection when the stakes were highest.
Whether you’re analyzing these stats to understand what makes championship teams tick, settling debates about individual performances, or simply reliving one of the most dominant Finals runs in recent memory, the numbers provide clear answers: The Celtics were better, deeper, and more complete than their opponents when it mattered most.
