The Portland Trail Blazers vs Lakers match player stats game on January 21, 2024, was more than just another NBA fixture—it was a showcase of star talent, strategy, and momentum. With both teams seeking to climb the conference rankings, the game held playoff implications and was a must-watch for fans and analysts alike.
Table of Contents
Beyond the scoreline, player stats help us understand how the game unfolded on a deeper level. From D’Angelo Russell’s explosive offense to Malcolm Brogdon’s playmaking, this game offered clear insights into individual impact and team dynamics. Fans wanted to see how each player contributed, and this breakdown delivers exactly that.
| Detail | Info |
|---|---|
| 🗓️ Date | January 21, 2024 |
| 🏟️ Venue | Crypto.com Arena, Los Angeles |
| 🧠 Final Score | Lakers 134 – Trail Blazers 110 |
| ⭐ MVP | D’Angelo Russell (34 pts, 8 ast) |
Portland Trail Blazers vs Lakers Match Player Stats
| Team | Player | Points | Rebounds | Assists | FG% |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lakers | D’Angelo Russell | 34 | 2 | 8 | 66.7% |
| Lakers | LeBron James | 28 | 5 | 4 | 61.5% |
| Lakers | Anthony Davis | 14 | 14 | 2 | 50.0% |
| Lakers | Austin Reaves | 15 | 3 | 2 | 55.6% |
| Trail Blazers | Malcolm Brogdon | 23 | 4 | 9 | 53.8% |
| Trail Blazers | Anfernee Simons | 19 | 3 | 4 | 39.1% |
| Trail Blazers | Jerami Grant | 17 | 5 | 3 | 45.0% |
| Trail Blazers | Shaedon Sharpe | 10 | 2 | 1 | 41.2% |
Game Overview: Final Score and Key Moments
The highly anticipated Portland Trail Blazers vs Lakers match ended with a decisive victory for the Los Angeles Lakers, who scored 134 points over the Trail Blazers’ 110. From the tip-off, the Lakers showed control over pace and momentum, thanks to their fast transition game and efficient shooting from the perimeter. This wasn’t just a win — it was a statement.
Key moments included a dominant 4th quarter where D’Angelo Russell dropped multiple threes, shifting the momentum fully in LA’s favor. The Trail Blazers tried to respond with Malcolm Brogdon’s sharp playmaking, but the defensive gaps and lack of bench scoring made it difficult to close the gap. The Lakers’ offensive rhythm, led by LeBron James and Russell, left the Trail Blazers struggling to keep up.
Quarter-by-Quarter Breakdown
The match started evenly in the first quarter with both teams trading baskets, but the Lakers began pulling away in the second quarter. They led by 10 at halftime, and their dominance grew in the third quarter where they put up 36 points. By the fourth, the game became unbalanced as the Lakers increased their fast-break plays and forced turnovers.
Here’s a summary table:
| Quarter | Trail Blazers | Lakers |
|---|---|---|
| Q1 | 28 | 30 |
| Q2 | 27 | 35 |
| Q3 | 25 | 36 |
| Q4 | 30 | 33 |
| Total | 110 | 134 |
The third quarter was the real game-changer. The Lakers’ defense intensified, and their shots began falling more consistently. They out-rebounded Portland and converted turnovers into quick points, showing how they controlled both ends of the court.
Los Angeles Lakers Player Stats
The Lakers delivered a collective performance, but three players stood out with exceptional numbers. Their high shooting percentage and solid ball movement allowed them to dominate.
D’Angelo Russell’s Standout Performance
D’Angelo Russell was the star of the night. He scored 34 points and dished out 8 assists, shooting an efficient 14-of-21 from the field. His confidence from beyond the arc was unshakable, especially during a fourth-quarter stretch where he hit back-to-back threes that buried any hopes of a Blazers comeback.
Russell not only scored, but also controlled the tempo. He ran pick-and-rolls with precision and created space for shooters like Austin Reaves. His ability to heat up quickly made him the most valuable player of this game.
LeBron James’ Contribution
Even in his 21st NBA season, LeBron James showed no signs of slowing down. He recorded 28 points, 5 rebounds, and 4 assists, and played fewer minutes due to the large lead. His leadership on the court kept the team organized and efficient.
What stood out was his versatility—scoring in transition, setting screens, and playing post-defense when needed. LeBron’s presence lifted the intensity level for the entire Lakers roster.
Other Notable Lakers Performances
Besides Russell and LeBron, the Lakers had excellent contributions from their supporting cast. Anthony Davis posted a double-double with 14 points and 14 rebounds, dominating the paint on both ends. Austin Reaves came off the bench with 15 points, showing great shooting form and hustle.
Here’s a quick stat table:
| Player | Points | Rebounds | Assists | FG% |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| D’Angelo Russell | 34 | 2 | 8 | 66.7% |
| LeBron James | 28 | 5 | 4 | 61.5% |
| Anthony Davis | 14 | 14 | 2 | 50.0% |
| Austin Reaves | 15 | 3 | 2 | 55.6% |
This game displayed how depth and team chemistry are now strengths of the Lakers’ roster.
Portland Trail Blazers Player Stats
While the Trail Blazers didn’t get the win, a few individual performances stood out. Despite the tough defensive matchup, players like Malcolm Brogdon and Anfernee Simons kept the scoreboard moving.
Malcolm Brogdon’s Efforts
Brogdon led the Trail Blazers in both scoring and playmaking with 23 points and 9 assists. His calm under pressure helped keep the offense organized even as the Lakers pushed the pace. He attacked the rim effectively and knocked down free throws consistently.
However, Brogdon lacked the support he needed. When he sat, the offense stagnated, and turnovers increased. His +/- was still better than most, showing his impact despite the loss.
Anfernee Simons and Jerami Grant
Anfernee Simons scored 19 points, showing his scoring versatility from mid-range and behind the arc. But he struggled with efficiency, shooting under 40%. Meanwhile, Jerami Grant added 17 points, mostly from strong drives and transition buckets.
While both players were aggressive, they faced challenges against the Lakers’ switching defense. Their scoring came in bursts but couldn’t maintain momentum in crucial stretches.
Bench Contributions
The Trail Blazers’ bench lacked the firepower to keep up with the Lakers. No bench player scored more than 10 points, and the unit struggled on defense, especially in transition. The lack of depth became more noticeable as the game progressed and the starters fatigued.
Team Statistics Comparison
Here’s how the Portland Trail Blazers vs Lakers match player stats stack up side-by-side:
| Category | Trail Blazers | Lakers |
|---|---|---|
| Field Goal % | 46.7% | 54.7% |
| 3-Point % | 31.0% | 39.4% |
| Free Throw % | 85.0% | 93.1% |
| Total Rebounds | 35 | 45 |
| Assists | 24 | 28 |
| Turnovers | 14 | 14 |
| Fast Break Points | 8 | 35 |
| Points in the Paint | 58 | 60 |
The Lakers were more efficient, moved the ball better, and capitalized on fast-break chances. Their superior shooting made a key difference.
Fast Break and Paint Points Analysis
One major reason for the Lakers’ success was their dominance in fast break points, outscoring Portland 35–8. Their defense generated steals and blocks, leading to quick transitions and easy layups. This consistent pressure broke Portland’s rhythm.
Paint scoring was also close, with the Lakers having a slight edge (60 vs 58), thanks to Anthony Davis and LeBron’s ability to finish near the basket. While Portland also attacked the rim, they struggled to finish through contact, missing several inside attempts.
Historical Context: Lakers vs Trail Blazers Rivalry
The Lakers and Trail Blazers share a deep and competitive rivalry in the Western Conference. Over decades, they’ve met in thrilling playoff series and iconic regular season games. As of this game, the Lakers lead the all-time head-to-head with 133 wins to 115 losses.
Recent seasons have seen the Lakers hold the upper hand, especially after acquiring players like Anthony Davis. However, Portland has occasionally pulled off upsets, particularly during Damian Lillard’s prime years. This rivalry continues to be one to watch, even as both teams rebuild in different directions.
Implications for Season Standings
This win helped the Lakers solidify their position in the Pacific Division, pushing them closer to a playoff seed. With teams like the Warriors and Suns also in the mix, every win is crucial.
For the Trail Blazers, this loss highlights the challenges they face in the Northwest Division. With younger players and inconsistent defense, Portland may be looking more toward a rebuild or lottery placement in the 2024–25 draft.
Expert Analysis and Commentary
After the game, Lakers coach Darvin Ham praised his team’s ball movement and tempo, saying:
“When we play unselfishly and push the ball, we’re very hard to stop.”
Analysts on ESPN noted the impact of bench scoring and the Lakers’ depth. Meanwhile, Portland coach Chauncey Billups emphasized the need for defensive focus:
“We have to get stops to stay in these games. Simple as that.”
The general consensus? The Lakers are peaking at the right time, while Portland needs to tighten up rotations and find more scoring off the bench.
Conclusion: Key Takeaways from the Match
This Trail Blazers vs Lakers match was a great display of offensive firepower, smart rotations, and momentum control — mostly by the Lakers. D’Angelo Russell’s shooting, LeBron’s leadership, and Davis’ presence in the paint gave LA the edge.
Portland had some bright spots, especially Malcolm Brogdon’s play, but lacked defensive structure and consistent bench production. If they want to bounce back, they’ll need more cohesion and better three-point shooting in future games.
Read More Anylysis: Dallas Mavericks vs Denver Nuggets Timeline
FAQs About Trail Blazers vs Lakers Player Stats
Q1: Who was the top scorer in the Blazers vs Lakers game?
A: D’Angelo Russell with 34 points for the Lakers.
Q2: What was the final score of the game?
A: Lakers 134 – Trail Blazers 110.
Q3: How did LeBron James perform?
A: He scored 28 points and had 5 rebounds and 4 assists.
Q4: Which team had better shooting stats?
A: The Lakers, with 54.7% from the field and 39.4% from three.
Q5: What’s the all-time record between the two teams?
A: The Lakers lead the all-time series 133–115.