Miami Heat vs Chicago Bulls Match Player Stats (February 1st, 2026)
Heat Turn Up the Heat — Bulls Had No Answer
Sunday night at Kaseya Center told a brutal story. The Miami Heat dismantled the Chicago Bulls 134–91, leaving no room for debate from the opening tip. This wasn’t a close game that slipped away — Miami heat controlled every quarter and every matchup. For anyone following Miami Heat vs Chicago Bulls match player stats, the numbers confirm what the scoreboard already screamed: the Heat were simply on another level.
The Bulls shot just 32.2% from the field while Miami connected at 50.5%, a gap that explains the 43-point margin. Miami’s starters and bench both showed up, making this one of the most complete team performances of the 2026 season so far.
Game Information: Miami Heat vs Chicago Bulls
| Detail | Info |
|---|---|
| Match | Miami Heat vs Chicago Bulls |
| Date | February 1st, 2026 |
| Day | Sunday |
| Start Time | 4:00 AM |
| Arena | Kaseya Center, Miami, FL |
| Officials | Karl Lane, Justin Van Duyne, JD Ralls |
| Attendance | 19,700 |
| Final Score | Heat 134 – Bulls 91 |
When One Team Shows Up and the Other Doesn’t
Miami Heat — A Masterclass from Start to Finish
Miami never let Chicago breathe. The Heat dropped 34 points in the first quarter alone, setting the tone before the Bulls could even settle in. Pelle Larsson and Bam Adebayo each shot above 70% from the field, giving Miami an inside-out threat that Chicago’s defense simply couldn’t contain. Davion Mitchell added efficient guard play, while the Heat’s collective 44 assists showed this wasn’t a one-man show — it was a team executing at a high level. For those who regularly dig into detailed NBA player stats and box score breakdowns, performances like this don’t come around every night.
Chicago Bulls — A Night to Forget
The Bulls struggled from the jump and never recovered. Coby White led the team with 16 points on 4-of-13 shooting — which tells you everything about Chicago’s offensive efficiency on this night. No Bull scored more than 16 points, and the team’s 32.2% field goal percentage was a season-low type of effort. Kevin Huerter and Tre Jones were both out due to injury, which hurt the rotation depth. Still, even at full strength, the margin would have been tough to close against a Heat squad this locked in.
Quarter-by-Quarter Score Breakdown: How Miami Built the Lead
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Final |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chicago Bulls | 13 | 27 | 22 | 29 | 91 |
| Miami Heat | 34 | 28 | 39 | 33 | 134 |
Individual Player Stats Breakdown — Heat Shine, Bulls Struggle
Both rosters put in their minutes, but the gap in efficiency and execution was clear across the board. Here’s a full look at how every player performed, straight from the official box score.
Miami Heat Player Stats
| Player | POS | PTS | MIN | FGM | FGA | FG% | 3PM | 3PA | 3P% | FTM | FTA | FT% | OREB | DREB | REB | AST | STL | BLK | TO | PF | +/- |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Davion Mitchell | G | 34 | 20:58 | 5 | 9 | 55.6 | 3 | 5 | 60.0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 2 | 2 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 34 |
| Pelle Larsson | G | 33 | 23:39 | 8 | 11 | 72.7 | 3 | 4 | 75.0 | 1 | 2 | 50.0 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 33 |
| Bam Adebayo | C | 20 | 22:15 | 8 | 11 | 72.7 | 2 | 3 | 66.7 | 2 | 4 | 50.0 | 2 | 7 | 9 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 26 |
| Kel’el Ware | F | 17 | 18:24 | 8 | 15 | 53.3 | 1 | 5 | 20.0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 25 |
| Andrew Wiggins | F | 14 | 24:29 | 5 | 12 | 41.7 | 1 | 4 | 25.0 | 3 | 3 | 100 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 31 |
| Dru Smith | G | 10 | 21:14 | 3 | 7 | 42.9 | 1 | 4 | 25.0 | 3 | 4 | 75.0 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 18 |
| Myron Gardner | F | 13 | 22:32 | 2 | 7 | 28.6 | 1 | 3 | 33.3 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 6 | 7 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 13 |
| Jaime Jaquez Jr. | F | 9 | 19:15 | 6 | 15 | 40.0 | 1 | 3 | 33.3 | 1 | 1 | 100 | 0 | 5 | 5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 14 |
| Keshad Johnson | G | 4 | 12:00 | 3 | 5 | 60.0 | 1 | 2 | 50.0 | 2 | 2 | 100 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 9 |
| Kasparas Jakučionis | G | 6 | 19:27 | 2 | 5 | 40.0 | 0 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Simone Fontecchio | F | 2 | 18:24 | 1 | 5 | 20.0 | 0 | 2 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 24 |
| Jahmir Young | G | 0 | 10:02 | 1 | 3 | 33.3 | 0 | 1 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 |
| Vladislav Goldin | C | 4 | 7:21 | 2 | 2 | 100 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 3 | -8 |
| TOTALS | 134 | 54 | 107 | 50.5 | 14 | 38 | 36.8 | 12 | 17 | 70.6 | 15 | 39 | 54 | 44 | 8 | 5 | 8 | 25 | 43 |
Heat Bench Output — Depth That Made It a Rout
Miami’s second unit didn’t just maintain the lead — they extended it. Players like Dru Smith, Kasparas Jakučionis, and Keshad Johnson collectively contributed across scoring, assists, and on-ball pressure, showing that the Heat’s roster depth is among the strongest in the league right now. The bench kept Chicago off rhythm every time momentum tried to shift.
Chicago Bulls Player Stats
| Player | POS | PTS | MIN | FGM | FGA | FG% | 3PM | 3PA | 3P% | FTM | FTA | FT% | OREB | DREB | REB | AST | STL | BLK | TO | PF | +/- |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coby White | G | 16 | 29:30 | 4 | 13 | 30.8 | 0 | 6 | 0.0 | 8 | 8 | 100 | 0 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 4 | 2 | -42 |
| Nikola Vučević | C | 12 | 22:10 | 5 | 12 | 41.7 | 0 | 3 | 0.0 | 2 | 2 | 100 | 2 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | -37 |
| Lachlan Olbrich | F | 9 | 11:01 | 2 | 5 | 40.0 | 1 | 2 | 50.0 | 4 | 6 | 66.7 | 2 | 2 | 4 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 1 |
| Isaac Okoro | F | 9 | 25:29 | 3 | 7 | 42.9 | 0 | 3 | 0.0 | 3 | 4 | 75.0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | -32 |
| Ayo Dosunmu | G | 10 | 26:15 | 3 | 9 | 33.3 | 1 | 4 | 25.0 | 3 | 3 | 100 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 1 | -46 |
| Dalen Terry | F | 8 | 27:35 | 3 | 7 | 42.9 | 2 | 3 | 66.7 | 0 | 1 | 0.0 | 2 | 4 | 6 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | -5 |
| Patrick Williams | F | 9 | 27:31 | 3 | 12 | 25.0 | 0 | 7 | 0.0 | 3 | 4 | 75.0 | 3 | 7 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | -8 |
| Julian Phillips | F | 10 | 22:31 | 3 | 11 | 27.3 | 2 | 5 | 40.0 | 2 | 2 | 100 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | -11 |
| Yuki Kawamura | G | 6 | 26:42 | 1 | 4 | 25.0 | 0 | 3 | 0.0 | 4 | 4 | 100 | 1 | 5 | 6 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Matas Buzelis | F | 2 | 21:16 | 1 | 7 | 14.3 | 0 | 5 | 0.0 | 0 | 0 | 0.0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2 | -37 |
| TOTALS | 91 | 28 | 87 | 32.2 | 6 | 41 | 14.6 | 29 | 34 | 85.3 | 15 | 32 | 47 | 18 | 5 | 6 | 18 | 16 | -43 |
Bulls Bench — Not Enough When It Mattered
Chicago’s bench role players like Lachlan Olbrich and Julian Phillips showed individual fight, but collectively the second unit couldn’t produce stops or momentum swings. Against a Miami team this sharp, the Bulls needed their bench to spark something — and it never happened.
Stay in the loop with Chicago Bulls: knicks vs Chicago Bulls Match Player Stats
Heat vs Bulls Head-to-Head — Team Stats That Tell the Full Story
Fans keeping tabs on [complete NBA team and player performance records for the 2026 season] (NBA Stats Category Page) will find this matchup to be one of the more lopsided box scores of the year. The numbers below make that very clear.
| Stat Category | Miami Heat | Chicago Bulls |
|---|---|---|
| Points | 134 | 91 |
| FGM / FGA | 54 / 107 | 28 / 87 |
| FG% | 50.5% | 32.2% |
| 3PM / 3PA | 14 / 38 | 6 / 41 |
| 3P% | 36.8% | 14.6% |
| FTM / FTA | 12 / 17 | 29 / 34 |
| FT% | 70.6% | 85.3% |
| Rebounds | 54 | 47 |
| Assists | 44 | 18 |
| Steals | 8 | 5 |
| Blocks | 5 | 6 |
| Turnovers | 8 | 18 |
Miami’s 44 assists compared to Chicago’s 18 is the stat that defines this game best. The Heat moved the ball like a well-oiled machine, while the Bulls forced shots and turned it over 18 times. That turnover gap alone swung momentum decisively — Chicago couldn’t string enough possessions together to make this contest feel competitive beyond the first half. The Heat’s frontcourt anchored by Adebayo and Kel’el Ware kept Chicago off the glass offensively too, limiting second-chance opportunities all night.
The Biggest Takeaways from This Dominant Miami Performance
- Miami’s 34-point first quarter immediately killed any hope of a competitive game — the Bulls spent the rest of the night chasing a deficit they never got close to cutting.
- Davion Mitchell led the Heat with 34 points on 55.6% shooting, a reminder of how dangerous Miami’s guard depth is when players are hitting their stride.
- Chicago’s 14.6% three-point shooting (6-of-41) was a critical failure — the Bulls took plenty of looks from beyond the arc but simply couldn’t convert, leaving easy points off the table.
- Miami’s 44 assists on 54 made field goals reflects an elite offensive system at work — nearly every bucket came from ball movement, not isolation.
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the final score of the Miami Heat vs Chicago Bulls game on February 1, 2026?
The Miami Heat won convincingly with a final score of 134–91, marking a 43-point blowout win at Kaseya Center in Miami, FL on Sunday, February 1st, 2026.
Who was the top scorer in the Heat vs Bulls game?
Davion Mitchell led all scorers with 34 points for Miami, shooting 55.6% from the field and 60.0% from three-point range in just under 21 minutes of play.
How did Bam Adebayo perform against the Bulls?
Adebayo posted 20 points on 72.7% shooting, grabbed 9 rebounds, and added 3 assists — a dominant two-way showing that set the physical tone for Miami’s interior attack.
What was Chicago’s field goal percentage in this game?
The Bulls shot just 32.2% from the field overall and a poor 14.6% from three-point range, which was a major reason for the lopsided final score.
Were any players ruled out for this game?
Yes — Chicago’s Kevin Huerter and Tre Jones both missed the game due to injury/illness. Miami’s Nikola Jović was also listed as DND (Injury/Illness), and Norman Powell sat out for a personal reason (NWT).
How many assists did the Miami Heat record as a team?
Miami dished out an impressive 44 team assists, reflecting their high-level ball movement and offensive execution throughout all four quarters of the game.
What was the attendance at Kaseya Center for this game?
The game drew an attendance of 19,700 fans at Kaseya Center in Miami, FL, where the Heat put on a full show for the home crowd.
How did the quarter scores break down in this game?
Miami outscored Chicago in three of four quarters — leading 34–13 in Q1, 28–27 in Q2, 39–22 in Q3, and 33–29 in Q4, maintaining total control throughout.
Final Thoughts
This was as complete a performance as you’ll see from the Miami Heat in 2026. From the opening tip to the final buzzer, Miami controlled pace, won the turnover battle, and shot the lights out while holding Chicago to one of its worst shooting nights of the season. Analysts covering Miami Heat performance trends and in-depth 2026 NBA match results will likely point to this game as a benchmark for what this Heat roster is capable of. The Bulls, meanwhile, head into their next stretch needing a serious response — starting with their shooting.
