Ed Mikan
1950–51
61 games · 1,192.62 minutes
NBA player comparison
Ed Mikan vs. Joe Fulks: 1950–51 season
Regular-season verdict
Joe Fulks leads in impact for 1950–51
Joe Fulks ranks ahead of Ed Mikan in estimated impact while playing. This compares regular-season performance, not total contribution across the season.
Joe Fulks
1950–51
66 games · 2,757.954 minutes
Impact comparison
Impact estimate is measured in points per 100 possessions above league average. Zero is average; higher is better. Impact Rate rank is a league place, not a 0–100 score: No. 1 is best.
-2.4Impact estimateEstimated points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better-1.3Leads
#86Impact Rate rankLeague place · No. 1 is best#67Leads
61Games66
1,193Minutes2,758
8.6PPG18.7Leads
40.9%LeadsTS%39.8%
Joe Fulks's estimated impact per 100 possessions was -1.3, compared with -2.4 for Ed Mikan. This compares their impact while playing, not their total contribution across the season. Both players are compared in the 1950–51 season using its published Impact Rate. A ranked comparison requires at least 450 minutes for each player.
Ed Mikan: 61 games and 1,193 minutes. Joe Fulks: 66 games and 2,758 minutes. Playing time matters when judging the whole season; the impact estimate above is a rate, not a season total.
Read turnover rate alongside offensive workload. Offensive usage measures the share of team plays a player ends with a shot, free throws, or a turnover while on the court—not every touch, pass, or act of playmaking. These rows provide context; they are not extra points added to the ranking.
Regular season only. Impact figures are estimates; small gaps are not exact. Playoffs, awards and titles do not determine the verdict.
Behind the estimate
Why the model rates them this way
A verified breakdown of this season’s published estimate is unavailable. We do not substitute another season’s calculation.
What this does not establish: these figures do not prove that either player made his teammates shoot better. A verified teammate-shooting comparison is unavailable for this selected season. A small difference in the estimates is not a decisive basketball distinction.
Full comparison · 1950–51 season
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?
The impact estimate compares performance while playing, not total contribution over the season. The individual-stat estimate plus the lineup adjustment gives the final estimate.
| Metric | Ed Mikan | Joe Fulks |
|---|---|---|
| Impact estimateEstimated points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better | -2.4 | -1.3Better result for this metric. |
| Impact Rate rankLeague place · No. 1 is best | #86 | #67Better result for this metric. |
Ed Mikan: verified lineup window unavailable. Joe Fulks: verified lineup window unavailable. The adjustment is not necessarily based on this season alone.
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.
| Metric | Ed Mikan | Joe Fulks |
|---|---|---|
| Games | 61 | 66 |
| Minutes | 1,193 | 2,758 |
3 · Individual skills
Where does each player have an advantage?
These figures describe the selected regular seasons. They provide context, not extra points added to the verdict. 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.
| Metric | Ed Mikan | Joe Fulks |
|---|---|---|
| True shooting percentage | 40.9%Better result for this metric. | 39.8% |
Show more stats: Shooting
| Metric | Ed Mikan | Joe Fulks |
|---|---|---|
| Field-goal percentage | 34.7%Better result for this metric. | 31.6% |
| Three-point percentage | Unavailable | Unavailable |
| Free-throw percentage | 72.5% | 85.5%Better result for this metric. |
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.
| Metric | Ed Mikan | Joe Fulks |
|---|---|---|
| Assists per game | 1.0 | 1.8Better result for this metric. |
Rebounding
Rebound rate is the share of available rebounds collected while on court.
| Metric | Ed Mikan | Joe Fulks |
|---|---|---|
| Rebounds per game | 5.6 | 7.9Better result for this metric. |
Scoring
Points per game describe scoring volume, not overall impact.
| Metric | Ed Mikan | Joe Fulks |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 8.6 | 18.7Better result for this metric. |
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.
Regular Season Impact
Joe Fulks leads in impact for 1950–51.
Ed MikanMetricJoe Fulks
-2.4Impact estimateEstimated points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better-1.3Leads
#86Impact Rate rankLeague place · No. 1 is best#67Leads
This is the ranking result. It uses regular-season impact only. Team records, playoffs, and awards do not change it.
Team Success
Ed Mikan leads every available measure below.
Ed MikanMetricJoe Fulks
206LeadsListed-team regular-season wins114
46.1%LeadsListed-team winning percentage41.8%
050-win team seasons0
060-win team seasons0
5LeadsPlayoff team seasons2
Context only. Not included in Career Impact Rank. Final records for every listed team-season. A traded season can include more than one team.
Playoff Résumé
Ed Mikan leads every available measure below.
Ed MikanMetricJoe Fulks
3LeadsPlayoff appearances2
7LeadsPlayoff games5
1Team playoff wins1
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.
Awards
No recorded measure separates these careers.
Ed MikanMetricJoe Fulks
Not availableAll-Star2
Not availableMVP0
Not availableAll-NBA1
Not availableAll-Defense0
Not availableDPOY0
Not availableRookie of the Year0
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.
Selected seasons
Box impact
Both bars show the same NBA season. Missing or unqualified data does not establish a winner.
Ed MikanJoe Fulks
Estimated points per 100 possessions above that season's league average