2026-10-24 · 7:00 PM CT · Regular season
San Antonio Spurs62-20
Dallas Mavericks26-56ESPN standings data retrieved October 6, 2026. NBA comparisons use the completed 2025–26 regular season. Each upcoming fixture labels preseason or regular-season status.
San Antonio Spurs2025–26 regular season
| Measure | Season average | League rank |
|---|---|---|
| STANDARD STATS | ||
| Points / game | 119.8 | 3 / 30 |
| Rebounds / game | 47.0 | 2 / 30 |
| Assists / game | 28.1 | 9 / 30 |
| Turnovers / game | 12.6 | 4 / 30 |
| Steals / game | 7.5 | 25 / 30 |
| Blocks / game | 5.5 | 8 / 30 |
| FG% | 48.3% | 6 / 30 |
| 3PT% | 35.9% | 15 / 30 |
| FT% | 78.7% | 12 / 30 |
| THE LAB MEASURES | ||
| eFG% | 55.9% | 7 / 30 |
| Turnover rate | 11.2% | 4 / 30 |
| Offensive rebound rate | — | — |
| Free-throw pressure | 0.274 | 12 / 30 |
Dallas Mavericks2025–26 regular season
| Measure | Season average | League rank |
|---|---|---|
| STANDARD STATS | ||
| Points / game | 114.1 | 23 / 30 |
| Rebounds / game | 44.7 | 10 / 30 |
| Assists / game | 25.3 | 22 / 30 |
| Turnovers / game | 14.0 | 18 / 30 |
| Steals / game | 7.5 | 24 / 30 |
| Blocks / game | 5.2 | 10 / 30 |
| FG% | 46.6% | 19 / 30 |
| 3PT% | 34.4% | 26 / 30 |
| FT% | 75.5% | 28 / 30 |
| THE LAB MEASURES | ||
| eFG% | 52.7% | 28 / 30 |
| Turnover rate | 12.1% | 14 / 30 |
| Offensive rebound rate | — | — |
| Free-throw pressure | 0.287 | 6 / 30 |
ESPN team totals and game box scores checked October 6. NBA season averages and ranks use 2025–26; preseason game results are shown separately. Ranks are within the league, with ties sharing a rank; a lower turnover rate is better. Season offensive rebound rate needs opponent defensive-rebound totals, which this feed does not supply. A dash means unavailable. This game’s offensive rebound rate uses the opponent’s actual rebounds.
eFG% gives a made three its extra value. Turnover rate estimates the share of plays lost before a shot. Offensive rebound rate is the share of available offensive rebounds collected. Free-throw pressure is FTA/FGA. The calculations are (FGM + 0.5 × 3PM)/FGA; TOV/(FGA + 0.44 × FTA + TOV); OREB/(OREB + opponent DREB); and FTA/FGA.
San Antonio Spurs and Dallas Mavericks enter with scoring averages of 119.8 and 114.1. Start with the kinds of shots they get, not just how many points they score. A clean shot at the rim or an open three can matter more than another difficult jumper.
The shooting comparison is 55.9% eFG for San Antonio Spurs and 52.7% for Dallas Mavericks. That measure counts the extra value of a made three. If the defense takes away the first good look, watch whether the offense can create another without rushing.
Ball security is the next pressure point. San Antonio Spurs turn it over on an estimated 11.2% of plays; Dallas Mavericks are at 12.1%. Fewer wasted trips mean more chances to score and fewer easy chances going the other way.
After the shot, watch the rebound. Then watch which team earns free throws. Extra shots and trips to the line can keep an offense moving when the shooting cools. The season columns give the baseline; the game columns in our final breakdown will show which advantages actually held up.
Spreads and win probabilities are reserved for confirmed games within the next seven days. This game stays on the schedule; its forecast opens inside that window.
Last season 62-20 | 2nd in the West | Western champions, NBA Finals loss to New York
2025-26 efficiency 118.7 offense | 110.4 defense | +8.4 net per 100 possessions
San Antonio went from a developing team to a 62-win Western Conference champion, then lost the Finals to New York in five games. Its 118.7 offensive rating and 110.4 defensive rating show why the rise was credible. Victor Wembanyama changed both ends, and the guards supplied enough creation to make the team more than a collection of promising young players.
Brian Wright added Tobias Harris and retained the core, including an extension for Julian Champagnie. Harris gives the forward rotation another experienced scorer. The larger potential gains come from Stephon Castle and Dylan Harper. Castle's assists per 36 minutes increased from 5.5 to 8.9, while Harper's stronger playoff role supplied evidence that more responsibility can be productive.
The front office has chosen development as its main answer to the Finals defeat. That is a defensible choice, but it leaves the same important test. When opponents reduce easy rim chances, can the guards and Wembanyama create efficient shots without rushing the next possession? De'Aaron Fox's fit with a growing Harper also requires a clear closing lineup. Harris helps the rotation, but does not settle those decisions.
Projected finish is first in the West. The two-way baseline was already excellent, and the age of the core supports another step forward. We expect a close race with Oklahoma City rather than an automatic runaway. The playoff challenge is converting that progress into better late-game execution.
Last season 26-56 | 12th in the West | Missed postseason, Flagg won Rookie of the Year
2025-26 efficiency 110.3 offense | 115.5 defense | -5.2 net per 100 possessions
Dallas finished 12th at 26-56, but Cooper Flagg's Rookie of the Year season supplied a clear direction. The team ranked 27th offensively, and its transition success concealed the league's worst half-court efficiency. Running faster could produce good stretches. It could not solve the possessions that began against an organized defense.
Masai Ujiri took over the basketball operation and hired Dusty May. Santi Aldama, Zaccharie Risacher and Marcus Sasser give the roster younger supporting options, and Kyrie Irving returns after missing a season. Irving is the clearest route to improving half-court creation without asking Flagg to manufacture every advantage himself. Aldama can also help make the frontcourt easier to space.
The unresolved question is whether management is building a coherent team around Flagg's development or preserving several competing timelines. Irving helps immediately, but his role and long-term place matter. Risacher needs to become a useful rotation wing, not simply a former first pick with another chance. May also has to find combinations that avoid crowding Flagg's drives. More pace cannot replace spacing when the opponent gets back.
Projected finish is 11th in the West. We expect an offensive improvement and a second-year step from Flagg, without assuming an immediate star leap large enough to erase every roster weakness. Dallas is a reasonable Play-In challenger if Irving's return goes well. A meaningful season would establish which players make Flagg more effective and belong in the next version of the team.
A matching published game video is not available in the verified archive yet.
