MILWAUKEE, United States, October 23, 2026: The Chicago Bulls recovered from a 15-point first-quarter deficit to defeat the Milwaukee Bucks 132-125 at Fiserv Forum on Friday, producing a remarkable 44-point second quarter before completing the comeback in the final minute. Two days after suffering a humiliating 135-92 season-opening defeat against Toronto, Chicago responded with 115 points across the final three quarters to give head coach Tiago Splitter his first regular-season victory.
Milwaukee led 32-17 after the opening period and still held a 104-102 advantage entering the fourth quarter, but Chicago outscored the hosts 30-21 during the final 12 minutes. The Bulls were ahead 124-123 with 1:16 remaining and led by only two points with 35 seconds left before finishing with a decisive 7-2 scoring advantage. The result left Chicago at 1-1 and Milwaukee at 0-2, with the Bucks surrendering a fourth-quarter lead for the second consecutive game.
Chicago Bulls vs Milwaukee Bucks 132-125: Final Score and Quarter-by-Quarter Breakdown
The final score reflected a game that changed direction repeatedly.
Milwaukee dominated the first quarter, Chicago transformed the contest in the second, and both teams traded offensive blows during a high-scoring third.
The final period belonged to the Bulls.
| Team | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Final |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chicago Bulls | 17 | 44 | 41 | 30 | 132 |
| Milwaukee Bucks | 32 | 30 | 42 | 21 | 125 |
| Chicago scoring margin | -15 | +14 | -1 | +9 | +7 |
Competition: NBA 2026-27 regular season.
Venue: Fiserv Forum, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Date: Friday, October 23, 2026.
Result: Chicago Bulls defeated Milwaukee Bucks 132-125.
Records after the game: Chicago 1-1; Milwaukee 0-2.
Chicago scored 44 points during the second quarter and 41 in the third, producing 85 points across the middle two periods.
Milwaukee’s offense remained dangerous, particularly in the third quarter, but the Bucks could not sustain the same production when the result was decided.
Milwaukee Lead 32-17 as Chicago’s Toronto Nightmare Threatens to Continue
The opening quarter suggested that Chicago could be heading toward another damaging defeat.
Milwaukee scored 32 points while holding the Bulls to just 17, establishing a 15-point advantage.
For Chicago, the scoreline carried an uncomfortable reminder of its previous game.
On October 21, the Toronto Raptors had overwhelmed the Bulls 135-92, producing the most lopsided season-opening defeat in Chicago franchise history.
Toronto scored 43 points in the first quarter of that game, while Chicago managed only 23.
The Bulls were again struggling early against Milwaukee, scoring six fewer first-quarter points than they had managed against Toronto.
That raised immediate questions about whether Chicago’s defensive problems and inconsistent attacking execution would continue under first-year coach Tiago Splitter.
The Sports Encounter’s detailed analysis of Toronto’s 43-point victory over Chicago examined how poor three-point shooting, turnovers and defensive breakdowns undermined the Bulls.
Chicago had committed 27 turnovers in that opener and made only four of 36 attempts from three-point range.
Those numbers provided important context for the challenge facing Splitter before Friday’s encounter.
Following the defeat in Toronto, the coach had criticized the team’s defensive effort, particularly how players responded after losing possession, describing aspects of the performance as “something we cannot accept.”
The early scoreboard against Milwaukee suggested that the same difficulties could produce another long evening.
What happened in the second quarter changed that interpretation dramatically.
Bulls Score 44 in the Second Quarter to Erase Almost the Entire Deficit
Chicago’s response was immediate and emphatic.
After managing just 17 points in the opening 12 minutes, the Bulls scored 44 during the second quarter.
Milwaukee still produced 30 points during the period, so the home team did not completely lose its attacking rhythm.
But Chicago’s offensive improvement was overwhelming.
The visitors outscored Milwaukee by 14 points in the quarter, reducing a 15-point deficit to just one at halftime.
The score was 62-61 in Milwaukee’s favor after 24 minutes.
That turnaround changed the competitive position of both teams.
Milwaukee had been within striking distance of establishing a commanding halftime advantage.
Instead, the Bucks entered the interval protecting the narrowest possible lead without the score being tied.
Chicago, meanwhile, had demonstrated that its poor opening period did not have to determine the result.
Why the 44-Point Quarter Was the Most Important Part of Chicago’s Comeback
The second-quarter scoring burst mattered for three reasons.
First, it prevented Milwaukee from building on its early dominance.
Second, it gave Chicago enough offensive confidence to remain competitive during the third quarter, when the Bucks scored another 42 points.
Third, it left the Bulls close enough to take advantage of Milwaukee’s fourth-quarter decline.
The arithmetic reveals the importance of that response.
Chicago’s 44 points were approximately 2.6 times its first-quarter output of 17.
The Bulls also improved their quarter-by-quarter scoring by 27 points between the first and second periods.
That represented the largest offensive change of the night for either team.
The final result cannot be explained without this extraordinary second-quarter recovery.
Bucks Take a Two-Point Lead Into the Fourth Despite Chicago’s 41-Point Third Quarter
The third quarter produced another remarkable offensive exchange.
Chicago scored 41 points, a total that would ordinarily represent an excellent period of basketball.
Milwaukee scored 42.
Instead of allowing Chicago to complete the comeback before the fourth, the Bucks protected their lead and increased it from one point to two.
Milwaukee entered the final period ahead 104-102.
The teams had combined for 83 points during the third quarter alone.
That level of scoring reflected how difficult both sides were finding it to restrict their opponents.
However, the scoreboard also revealed an important difference.
Chicago had recovered from a poor start and continued matching Milwaukee’s offense.
The Bucks had surrendered almost their entire early advantage despite scoring 104 points through three quarters.
That placed greater pressure on Milwaukee to maintain its scoring level during the final 12 minutes.
It was a challenge the hosts failed to meet.
The Final 76 Seconds: Chicago Turn a One-Point Lead Into Seven
The game remained fiercely competitive during the fourth quarter.
Chicago eventually moved ahead, but Milwaukee stayed close enough to challenge until the closing possessions.
With 1:16 remaining, the Bulls led 124-123.
The Bucks were only one point behind and had enough time to regain the advantage.
With 35 seconds left, Chicago led 125-123.
At that stage, a single Milwaukee basket could have tied the game, while a successful three-pointer could have changed the lead.
Instead, Chicago completed the finish more effectively.
The Bulls scored seven additional points in the final 35 seconds while Milwaukee added just two.
That scoring difference changed the final margin from two points to seven.
| Checkpoint | Chicago | Milwaukee | Game Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| End of first quarter | 17 | 32 | Bucks lead by 15 |
| Halftime | 61 | 62 | Bucks lead by 1 |
| End of third quarter | 102 | 104 | Bucks lead by 2 |
| Q4, 1:16 remaining | 124 | 123 | Bulls lead by 1 |
| Q4, 0:35 remaining | 125 | 123 | Bulls lead by 2 |
| Final | 132 | 125 | Bulls win by 7 |
TSE statistical finding: Chicago outscored Milwaukee 8-2 over the final 76 seconds, turning a one-point advantage into a seven-point victory.
The scoring progression establishes the result and the swing in the margin. The individual scoring possessions and late-game shot selection should be assessed through the complete NBA’s official possession-by-possession record rather than reconstructed from the final score alone.
The finish was particularly important because Milwaukee had entered the fourth quarter with the advantage.
For the second consecutive game, the Bucks failed to turn a lead after three quarters into a victory.
Milwaukee Have Now Lost Two Straight Games Despite Leading Entering the Fourth
Milwaukee’s defeat becomes considerably more revealing when placed alongside its season opener.
Two days earlier, the Bucks lost 128-116 to the Washington Wizards.
Milwaukee had led 93-90 entering the fourth quarter of that game.
Washington then outscored the Bucks 38-23 during the final period, overturning the deficit and winning by 12.
Anthony Davis scored 34 points and collected 12 rebounds for Washington, while Trae Young contributed 20 points and 13 assists.
TSE’s report on the Wizards’ 128-116 victory examined how Davis’s performance and Milwaukee’s late defensive decline shaped the opening-night result.
Against Chicago, the pattern repeated.
The Bucks entered the fourth quarter ahead 104-102, only to be outscored 30-21.
This time, Milwaukee did not surrender a large advantage during the opening minutes of the quarter.
Instead, the teams remained close until Chicago executed more effectively during the final possessions.
The outcomes were different in detail, but the underlying problem was similar.
Milwaukee could not protect its advantage when the match moved into its decisive phase.
| Opponent | Bucks Lead After Q3 | Bucks Q4 | Opponent Q4 | Final Result |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Washington Wizards | 3 points | 23 | 38 | Lost 116-128 |
| Chicago Bulls | 2 points | 21 | 30 | Lost 125-132 |
| Combined | Led both games | 44 | 68 | Two defeats |
Original TSE calculation: Milwaukee have been outscored 68-44 across the fourth quarters of their first two games, a combined deficit of 24 points.
That is a significant concern for head coach Taylor Jenkins.
The Bucks have generated enough offense to compete against both Washington and Chicago, scoring 116 and 125 points respectively.
But their final-quarter performances have undermined those totals.
Jenkins must now examine how Milwaukee can maintain its offensive rhythm while producing more reliable defensive stops during the closing minutes.
From a 43-Point Defeat to a Seven-Point Win: What Changed for Chicago?
The contrast between Chicago’s first two results is extraordinary.
The Bulls lost their opener by 43 points.
They won their next game by seven.
That represents a 50-point improvement in the final scoring margin between their first and second matches.
It does not mean Chicago improved by 50 points in a statistical measure of overall team quality. The difference simply compares the margins from two separate games against different opponents.
Nevertheless, it provides a vivid measure of how dramatically the outcomes changed.
| Measure | October 21 at Toronto | October 23 at Milwaukee |
|---|---|---|
| Final score | 92-135 | 132-125 |
| Result | Lost by 43 | Won by 7 |
| Bulls first-quarter points | 23 | 17 |
| Opponent first-quarter points | 43 | 32 |
| Bulls second-quarter points | Not used in this comparison | 44 |
| Bulls total points | 92 | 132 |
| Bulls record afterward | 0-1 | 1-1 |
Chicago scored 40 more points against Milwaukee than against Toronto.
Perhaps more importantly, the Bulls continued competing after another poor first quarter.
Against Toronto, the early deficit expanded into a record defeat.
Against Milwaukee, the early deficit became the starting point for a successful comeback.
That distinction matters for a rebuilding team attempting to establish its identity under a new coach.
The result suggests greater resilience and scoring potential, although one comeback does not establish that the turnovers, defensive weaknesses and shooting inconsistencies identified against Toronto have been permanently resolved.
Splitter’s Young Bulls Need to Turn This Comeback Into a Repeatable Performance
Chicago entered the season following significant roster changes and a renewed emphasis on player development.
Josh Giddey, Matas Buzelis and rookie Caleb Wilson form important parts of that transition, while veteran Norman Powell provides additional scoring experience.
The Bulls also retained promising forward Leonard Miller for the 2026-27 campaign, exercising his team option after he had shown encouraging production following his arrival from Minnesota.
TSE’s analysis of Chicago’s decision to retain Leonard Miller examined how the team is attempting to balance developing talent, roster flexibility and cost-conscious personnel decisions.
Those decisions created a squad with potential but also considerable uncertainty.
Wilson, the fourth overall selection in the 2026 NBA Draft, committed nine turnovers during his debut against Toronto.
His early experience reflects the challenge facing young players as they adjust to NBA defensive pressure and the pace of professional basketball.
TSE’s 2026 NBA Draft coverage examined the wider class of incoming players and the roster decisions shaping this season.
For Splitter, the victory in Milwaukee provides an important early reward.
The Bulls demonstrated that they can recover from a difficult start and maintain high scoring production over multiple quarters.
But sustainable progress requires identifying why the first quarter went poorly and why the final three periods were so much more productive.
Those answers cannot be established from the final score alone.
The complete player statistics, shot charts, turnovers and lineup combinations will provide further evidence of which individual performances and adjustments produced the recovery.
A Remarkable Coincidence: Two NBA Games Finish 132-125 After 44-Point Second Quarters
Chicago’s victory also produced an unusual parallel with another result from opening week.
On October 21, the Atlanta Hawks defeated the Orlando Magic by exactly the same score, 132-125.
Atlanta also scored 44 points during the second quarter of that game.
The Hawks had trailed Orlando 33-28 after the opening period before using their second-quarter surge to establish a halftime advantage.
Orlando subsequently recovered in the third quarter, but Atlanta outscored the Magic 33-25 during the fourth to secure victory.
The Sports Encounter’s Hawks-Magic report detailed how Nickeil Alexander-Walker’s late three-point shooting helped Atlanta close the contest.
The similarity between the two games is worth examining.
| Measure | Hawks vs Magic, Oct. 21 | Bulls vs Bucks, Oct. 23 |
|---|---|---|
| Winning team | Atlanta | Chicago |
| Final score | 132-125 | 132-125 |
| Winner’s Q1 points | 28 | 17 |
| Winner’s Q2 points | 44 | 44 |
| Winner’s halftime position | Leading by 10 | Trailing by 1 |
| Winner’s Q4 points | 33 | 30 |
| Final victory margin | 7 | 7 |
Both winning teams produced identical final scores and identical 44-point second quarters.
Both also entered halftime in a substantially stronger position than they had occupied after the opening period.
The difference was how their opponents responded.
Orlando overturned Atlanta’s advantage in the third quarter, while Milwaukee maintained a narrow lead through three quarters against Chicago.
Both contests were ultimately decided by the winning teams’ superior fourth-quarter scoring.
The comparison is an interesting opening-week coincidence, not evidence that a particular scoring pattern predicts victory.
Milwaukee’s New Look Faces an Immediate Test Under Taylor Jenkins
The Bucks began the season with substantial changes to their playing personnel and coaching direction.
Tyler Herro and Jaime Jaquez Jr. have become important offensive options, while Myles Turner, Kyle Kuzma and Ryan Rollins provide different contributions within the rotation.
Jenkins faces the task of developing a more reliable collective structure after a difficult period for the franchise.
The first two games have shown that Milwaukee can generate points.
The team scored 116 against Washington and 125 against Chicago, averaging 120.5 points across its opening two contests.
But Milwaukee also conceded 128 and 132, an average of 130 points per game.
That combination has produced a 0-2 start despite competitive stretches in both matches.
The immediate concern is therefore not simply increasing the number of points scored.
Milwaukee must reduce the damage opponents inflict during decisive stretches, especially when the Bucks enter the fourth quarter ahead.
The first two results offer a clear warning that maintaining an advantage requires better closing execution.
What Does the Result Mean for Chicago and Milwaukee?
Chicago’s victory provides an early measure of encouragement after a difficult start.
The Bulls have now shown that they can score at a high rate and respond when an opponent begins strongly.
However, the result does not immediately make Chicago an Eastern Conference contender.
The season is only two games old, and the problems exposed against Toronto remain relevant to any longer-term assessment.
Milwaukee’s situation is more uncomfortable.
The Bucks have lost twice despite holding leads entering the final quarter, and both defeats have exposed limitations in their late-game defense.
The wider Eastern Conference will continue changing as teams establish their rotations and develop chemistry.
For a broader view of the league’s preseason expectations, TSE previously examined how roster depth and offseason decisions influenced the 2026-27 NBA championship outlook.
Those expectations remain useful context, but actual performances will gradually provide stronger evidence about where Chicago and Milwaukee stand.
What Happens Next for the Bulls and Bucks?
Both teams have another game scheduled for Saturday, October 24.
Chicago return home to host the Washington Wizards at the United Center.
The matchup will provide an immediate comparison with the team that defeated Milwaukee in its season opener.
For Splitter, the priority will be preserving Chicago’s improved attacking production while reducing the risk of another disastrous opening quarter.
Milwaukee travel to Philadelphia to face the 76ers.
The Bucks must find a way to compete more effectively in the final period, especially after entering the fourth quarter ahead in each of their first two defeats.
The Chicago Bulls’ official schedule confirms the next fixture, while the NBA’s official Bulls-Bucks box score provides the match’s player and team statistical record.
For more game reports, league analysis, roster developments and season coverage, visit The Sports Encounter’s NBA Hub and our NBA news section.
Bulls vs Bucks 132-125: Frequently Asked Questions
Who won Chicago Bulls vs Milwaukee Bucks on October 23, 2026?
The Chicago Bulls defeated the Milwaukee Bucks 132-125 at Fiserv Forum, securing their first victory of the 2026-27 NBA season.
How many points did Chicago trail by?
The Bulls trailed by 15 points after the first quarter, with Milwaukee leading 32-17.
How many points did the Bulls score in the second quarter?
Chicago scored 44 points in the second quarter, outscoring Milwaukee 44-30 and reducing the halftime deficit to one point.
What was the halftime score?
Milwaukee led Chicago 62-61 at halftime.
What was the score entering the fourth quarter?
The Bucks led 104-102 after three quarters.
What happened during the final 35 seconds?
Chicago led 125-123 with 35 seconds remaining and outscored Milwaukee 7-2 from that point to win 132-125.
What are the Bulls’ and Bucks’ records after the game?
Chicago improved to 1-1, while Milwaukee fell to 0-2.
Who do Chicago and Milwaukee play next?
The Bulls are scheduled to host the Washington Wizards on October 24, while the Bucks visit the Philadelphia 76ers on the same date.
Final Analysis: Chicago Find the Response Milwaukee Cannot Produce
Chicago’s victory was an impressive recovery from a poor opening quarter and an even worse season-opening defeat.
The Bulls were outscored by 15 points in the first period but recovered 14 of them before halftime.
They continued scoring heavily in the third quarter, remained within two points entering the fourth and finished with a decisive nine-point advantage during the final period.
Milwaukee had ample opportunities to protect its lead.
The Bucks scored 104 points through three quarters and entered the final period ahead.
But for the second consecutive game, they failed to close out a promising position.
The most revealing statistic is the combined 68-44 fourth-quarter scoring deficit Milwaukee has suffered across its first two games.
That is an issue Jenkins must address before another narrow contest reaches its decisive minutes.
For Chicago, the result is a reminder that the opening quarter does not have to dictate the outcome.
Two days after a 43-point defeat, the Bulls produced 132 points and showed the resilience needed to secure an important road victory.
Final score: Chicago Bulls 132, Milwaukee Bucks 125. Chicago’s record: 1-1. Milwaukee’s record: 0-2.