hussEyquation
Menu

Explore hussEyquation

NBA player comparison

Chris Gatling vs. Ed Davis: Career comparison

hussEyquationCareer impact · regular season
Regular-season verdict

Chris Gatling ranks higher in career impact

Ed Davis

2010–11 to 2021–22 · 12 seasons

Impact comparison

Box impact estimates points per 100 possessions above each season's league average. Higher is better. Career ranks and average league finishes work the other way: lower is better.

#1066LeadsCareer Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#1119
+2.9LeadsPeak box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+2.3
+0.6Best 5 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.8Leads
80.7Best 3 average finishAverage league place · lower is better74.3Leads
+358 ptsPoints above replacementCumulative regular-season value+483 ptsLeads
153.1LeadsBest 10 average finishAverage league place · lower is better183.6

Career Impact Rank places Chris Gatling #1066 and Ed Davis #1119. It combines league finishes across each player's best three, five, and ten regular seasons, giving the most weight to the best three. Ed Davis had more total career value.

Regular season only. Impact figures are estimates; small gaps are not exact. Playoffs, awards and titles do not determine the verdict.

Career impact · regular seasonhusseyquation.com/compare/chris-gatling/ed-davis/career
Career Impact RankSee exactly how both rankings are calculatedChris Gatling101.133 · No. 1,066Ed Davis105.927 · No. 1,119

Only the three league-finish windows below determine Career Impact Rank. Career Value and peak impact are separate measures; neither adds points to this calculation. Lower composite scores rank higher.

Chris Gatling

101.133 composite · No. 1,066 all-time

Chris Gatling's Career Composite windows
Window and finishes usedAverage finishWeightContribution
Best 3No. 351996–97Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1021995–96Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1051994–95Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate80.66750%40.333
Best 5No. 351996–97Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1021995–96Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1051994–95Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1241993–94Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1371991–92Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate100.60030%30.180
Best 10No. 351996–97Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1021995–96Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1051994–95Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1241993–94Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1371991–92Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1721992–93Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1761999–00Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1992000–01Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 2131997–98Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 2682001–02Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate153.10020%30.620

40.333 + 30.180 + 30.620= 101.133

Ed Davis

105.927 composite · No. 1,119 all-time

Ed Davis's Career Composite windows
Window and finishes usedAverage finishWeightContribution
Best 3No. 442014–15Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 732015–16Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1062012–13Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate74.33350%37.167
Best 5No. 442014–15Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 732015–16Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1062012–13Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1502011–12Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1612018–19Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate106.80030%32.040
Best 10No. 442014–15Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 732015–16Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1062012–13Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1502011–12Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1612018–19Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1702010–11Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1952013–14Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 2222017–18Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 3522016–17Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate1 open slot × No. 363183.60020%36.720

37.167 + 32.040 + 36.720= 105.927

Open-season rule: every unfilled slot uses No. 363, this player's stored replacement finish.

Averages, contributions, and totals are displayed to three decimal places. The ranking calculation keeps full source precision. Read the full method →

Share this comparisonChoose a social post or link-preview image.

Full comparison · Career comparison

Understand the numbers

Start with impact, then compare playing time and skills. Team results add context. These are not categories to tally into a winner.

1 · Ranking evidence

Impact: who ranks higher, and why?

Career Impact Rank compares entire regular-season careers across NBA history. It combines average league places across the best three, five, and ten seasons, weighted 50%, 30%, and 20%. A lower rank or average place is better.

Impact: Chris Gatling and Ed Davis
MetricChris GatlingEd Davis
Career Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#1066Better result for this metric.#1119
Best 3 average finishAverage league place · lower is better80.774.3Better result for this metric.
Best 5 average finishAverage league place · lower is better100.6Better result for this metric.106.8
Best 10 average finishAverage league place · lower is better153.1Better result for this metric.183.6
Show more stats: Impact
Impact: Chris Gatling and Ed Davis
MetricChris GatlingEd Davis
Points-above-replacement rankAll-time rank in estimated regular-season points above replacement#934#793Better result for this metric.
Peak box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+2.9Better result for this metric.+2.3
Best 3 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+1.3+1.4Better result for this metric.
Best 5 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.6+0.8Better result for this metric.
Best 10 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better-0.5Unavailable
Points above replacementRegular season · fixed -2.0 replacement baseline · higher is better+358 pts+483 ptsBetter result for this metric.
Seasons ranked No. 100
Top-five impact seasons00
Top-ten impact seasons00

2 · Playing time and responsibility

How much did each player take on?

Read games and minutes alongside impact. Offensive usage is the share of team plays a player ends with a shot, free throws, or a turnover while on court. More usage is not automatically better.

Playing time and workload: Chris Gatling and Ed Davis
MetricChris GatlingEd Davis
Games700722
Minutes13,76013,756

3 · Individual skills

Where does each player have an advantage?

These are each player's averages across up to ten best seasons. Career Impact Rank gives the Best 3, Best 5, and Best 10 average league finishes 50%, 30%, and 20% window weights, giving the most weight to the highest peak. The model accounts for position, role, pace, playing time, and team results. Green marks the better result for a metric, including lower turnover rates. Workload and shot-selection measures stay neutral. These rows are not votes toward the ranking.

Shooting

True shooting includes two-pointers, three-pointers, and free throws.

Shooting: Chris Gatling and Ed Davis
MetricChris GatlingEd Davis
True shooting percentage55.5%58.1%Better result for this metric.
True shootingAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile56.4%58.2%Better result for this metric.
Show more stats: Shooting
Shooting: Chris Gatling and Ed Davis
MetricChris GatlingEd Davis
Field-goal percentage51.3%56.7%Better result for this metric.
Three-point percentage24.9%Better result for this metric.0.0%
Free-throw percentage66.0%Better result for this metric.58.3%

Passing

Assist rate is the share of teammates’ made shots assisted while the player is on court. Read turnovers alongside offensive workload; lower turnover rate is generally better.

Passing: Chris Gatling and Ed Davis
MetricChris GatlingEd Davis
Assist rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile5.5%5.8%Better result for this metric.
Assists per game0.70.7
Show more stats: Passing
Passing: Chris Gatling and Ed Davis
MetricChris GatlingEd Davis
Turnover rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile14.0%12.9%Better result for this metric.

Rebounding

Rebound rate is the share of available rebounds collected while on court.

Rebounding: Chris Gatling and Ed Davis
MetricChris GatlingEd Davis
Rebound rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile15.5%18.6%Better result for this metric.
Rebounds per game5.36.4Better result for this metric.

Defense

Steals and blocks describe only part of defense. They do not capture every stop, rotation, or matchup.

Defense: Chris Gatling and Ed Davis
MetricChris GatlingEd Davis
Steal rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile1.7%Better result for this metric.1.2%
Show more stats: Defense
Defense: Chris Gatling and Ed Davis
MetricChris GatlingEd Davis
Block rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile2.0%3.2%Better result for this metric.

Scoring

Points per game describe scoring volume, not overall impact.

Scoring: Chris Gatling and Ed Davis
MetricChris GatlingEd Davis
Points per game10.3Better result for this metric.5.9

4 · Team context, not ranking inputs

What happened with and without them?

A verified with/without comparison is unavailable for this scope. We do not substitute another season’s observations.

Four separate questions

Impact, winning, playoffs, and awards

These are different ways to understand a career. Only Regular Season Impact determines the hussEyquation verdict. The other three sections add basketball context without adding points or changing the rank.

Ranking result

Regular Season Impact

Chris Gatling ranks higher in career impact.

Chris GatlingMetricEd Davis
#1066LeadsCareer Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#1119
+2.9LeadsPeak box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+2.3
+0.6Best 5 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.8Leads
+358 ptsPoints above replacementRegular season · fixed -2.0 replacement baseline · higher is better+483 ptsLeads

This is the ranking result. It uses regular-season impact only. Team records, playoffs, and awards do not change it.

Context

Team Success

The advantages are split across the available measures.

Chris GatlingMetricEd Davis
522LeadsListed-team regular-season wins493
44.8%Listed-team winning percentage47.9%Leads
250-win team seasons2
060-win team seasons0
5Playoff team seasons7Leads

Context only. Not included in Career Impact Rank. Final records for every listed team-season. A traded season can include more than one team.

Context

Playoff Résumé

Ed Davis leads every available measure below.

Chris GatlingMetricEd Davis
5Playoff appearances5
15Playoff games33Leads
1Team playoff wins17Leads
0Finals appearances0
0Championships0

Context only. Not included in Career Impact Rank. Team playoff results count only seasons when the player appeared in a playoff game.

Context

Awards

No recorded measure separates these careers.

Chris GatlingMetricEd Davis
1All-StarNot available
0MVPNot available
0All-NBANot available
0All-DefenseNot available
0DPOYNot available
0Rookie of the YearNot available

Context only. Not included in Career Impact Rank. Major regular-season honors are recognition, not inputs to the impact ranking.

How each context field is counted
Listed-team regular-season wins
The sum of each listed team's final wins in every season the player represented that team.
Listed-team winning percentage
Those team wins divided by those teams' total regular-season games.
50- and 60-win team seasons
Listed team-seasons that finished with at least 50 or 60 wins. Shortened seasons are not projected to 82 games.
Team seasons reaching playoffs
Listed team-seasons in which that team qualified for the playoffs.
Playoff appearances and games
Postseasons and games in which the player appeared.
Team playoff wins
Team wins from those postseasons. They describe team results, not individual credit.
Finals appearances and championships
Seasons when the player appeared in the playoffs for the finalist or champion.
Awards
Recorded NBA selections and major regular-season honors. A zero means the source records none; Not available means the source field is missing.

Source and scope Basketball Reference, NBA seasons 1950–51 through 2025–26, accessed 2026-10-09.

Career Shape Explorer

How the careers developed

Follow every regular season by NBA experience or age. This view describes the path; it does not create another verdict.

View
Align careers by
Chris GatlingEd DavisPeak seasonHistorical source qualification

Estimated points per 100 possessions above that season's league average

S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
S7
S8
S9
S10
S11
S12

Striped bars mark seasons with fewer than 40 games. A dashed mark means that player had no season at the aligned point.

S means NBA season number; A means player age. Peak labels identify each player's accepted best season. Hover or focus any pair for season detail, or open Season timeline for the complete evidence ledger.