Head-to-Head: Games Played Between Bill Walton and Bryan Warrick

This is the detail of NBA games in which Bill Walton and Bryan Warrick played against each other, including head-to-head record, stats average, game highs and game-by-game data both in the Regular Season and Playoffs.

Player comparisons:
Career comparison / Season by season / Games against each other

They faced each other a total of 4 times in NBA games. Bill Walton has a 3-1 winning record over Bryan Warrick. They never met in the Playoffs.

Games Played Against Each Other

Bill Walton
vs.
Bryan Warrick
NBA Timeline:
1946-47
2023-24
Bill Walton:
1974-75 to 1986-87
Bryan Warrick:
1982-83 to 1985-86
4 Games played
4 in Regular Season
0 in Playoffs

Summary of Victories

 Games Won in
Regular Season		 in
Playoffs
Bill Walton
3
3
0
Bryan Warrick
1
1
0

Stats in Games Between Them

Averages
Player
 Points Rebounds Assists
Bill Walton 7.0 5.8 3.0
Bryan Warrick 7.0 1.0 3.3
Game Highs
Player
 Points Rebounds Assists
Bill Walton 13 8 4
Bryan Warrick 16 2 7
Games with better stats than the other player...
Player
 Points Rebounds Assists
Bill Walton 1

game		 4

games		 2

games
Bryan Warrick 2

games 		0

games		 2

games
Both had same stat 1

game		 0

games		 0

games

Head To Head Games Played: One by One

more >>
1982-83 Season
Game
  
Player
 Pts Reb Ast Stl Blk TO PF Min
FG
%
3PT
%
FT
%
Feb. 04, 1983
1. Clippers 93   Bill Walton 13 7 4 4 31 5-7 .714 0-0 - 3-4 .750
Bullets 100   Bryan Warrick 0 0 0 0 0 05 0-0 - 0-0 - 0-0 -
1985-86 Season
Game
  
Player
 Pts Reb Ast Stl Blk TO PF Min
FG
%
3PT
%
FT
%
Oct. 30, 1985
2. Celtics 117   Bill Walton 3 3 2 1 0 5 5 10 0-2 .000 0-0 - 3-4 .750
Bucks 106   Bryan Warrick 3 0 1 1 0 2 2 05 1-2 .500 1-1 1.000 0-0 -
Feb. 23, 1986
3. Celtics 113   Bill Walton 6 8 4 1 1 2 5 23 2-2 1.000 0-0 - 2-2 1.000
Pacers 98   Bryan Warrick 16 2 7 2 0 2 4 34 6-10 .600 0-0 - 4-4 1.000
Mar. 19, 1986
4. Celtics 127   Bill Walton 6 5 2 0 1 1 2 26 3-5 .600 0-0 - 0-0 -
Pacers 108   Bryan Warrick 9 2 5 2 0 0 3 30 3-8 .375 0-0 - 3-4 .750
Share: