Fat Lever
1982–83 to 1993–94 · 11 seasons
NBA player comparison
Fat Lever vs. Maurice Cheeks: Career comparison
Regular-season verdict
Fat Lever ranks higher in career impact
Maurice Cheeks
1978–79 to 1992–93 · 15 seasons
Impact comparison
#66LeadsCareer Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#100
+6.7LeadsPeak era-centered impactEstimated points per 100 possessions above that season's league average+4.3
+5.7LeadsBest 5 average impact+3.6
5.3LeadsBest 3 average finishAverage league place; closer to No. 1 is better10.7
+3,267 ptsPoints above replacementCumulative regular-season value+3,330 ptsLeads
4LeadsTop-10 impact seasons1
Career Impact Rank places Fat Lever #66 and Maurice Cheeks #100. It combines league finishes across each player's best three, five, and ten regular seasons, giving the most weight to the best three. Maurice Cheeks 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 RankSee exactly how both rankings are calculatedFat Lever9.887 · No. 66Maurice Cheeks14.093 · No. 100
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.
Fat Lever
9.887 composite · No. 66 all-time
| Window and finishes used | Average finish | Weight | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best 3No. 41986–87Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 61987–88Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 61988–89Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate | 5.333 | 50% | 2.667 |
| Best 5No. 41986–87Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 61987–88Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 61988–89Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 101989–90Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 191984–85Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate | 9.000 | 30% | 2.700 |
| Best 10No. 41986–87Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 61987–88Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 61988–89Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 101989–90Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 191984–85Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 261985–86Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 301983–84Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 381982–83Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 401993–94Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 471991–92Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate | 22.600 | 20% | 4.520 |
2.667 + 2.700 + 4.520= 9.887
Maurice Cheeks
14.093 composite · No. 100 all-time
| Window and finishes used | Average finish | Weight | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best 3No. 91981–82Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 111982–83Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 121980–81Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate | 10.667 | 50% | 5.333 |
| Best 5No. 91981–82Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 111982–83Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 121980–81Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 211985–86Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 211986–87Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate | 14.800 | 30% | 4.440 |
| Best 10No. 91981–82Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 111982–83Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 121980–81Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 211985–86Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 211986–87Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 221987–88Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 241983–84Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 241984–85Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 251979–80Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 471989–90Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate | 21.600 | 20% | 4.320 |
5.333 + 4.440 + 4.320= 14.093
Averages, contributions, and totals are displayed to three decimal places. The ranking calculation keeps full source precision. Read the full method →
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.
| Metric | Fat Lever | Maurice Cheeks |
|---|---|---|
| Career Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank | #66Better result for this metric. | #100 |
| Best 3 average finish | 5.3Better result for this metric. | 10.7 |
| Best 5 average finish | 9.0Better result for this metric. | 14.8 |
| Best 10 average finish | 22.6 | 21.6Better result for this metric. |
Show more stats: Impact
| Metric | Fat Lever | Maurice Cheeks |
|---|---|---|
| Points-above-replacement rankAll-time rank in estimated regular-season points above replacement | #74 | #69Better result for this metric. |
| Peak era-centered impactEstimated points per 100 possessions above that season's league average | +6.7Better result for this metric. | +4.3 |
| Best 3 average impact | +6.4Better result for this metric. | +3.9 |
| Best 5 average impact | +5.7Better result for this metric. | +3.6 |
| Best 10 average impact | +3.9Better result for this metric. | +3.1 |
| Points above replacementRegular season · fixed -2.0 replacement baseline · higher is better | +3,267 pts | +3,330 ptsBetter result for this metric. |
| Seasons ranked No. 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Top-five impact seasons | 1Better result for this metric. | 0 |
| Top-ten impact seasons | 4Better result for this metric. | 1 |
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 | Fat Lever | Maurice Cheeks |
|---|---|---|
| Games | 752 | 1,101 |
| Minutes | 23,814 | 34,845 |
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.
| Metric | Fat Lever | Maurice Cheeks |
|---|---|---|
| True shooting percentage | 49.6% | 57.2%Better result for this metric. |
| True shootingAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile | 48.9% | 58.2%Better result for this metric. |
Show more stats: Shooting
| Metric | Fat Lever | Maurice Cheeks |
|---|---|---|
| Field-goal percentage | 44.7% | 52.3%Better result for this metric. |
| Three-point percentage | 31.0%Better result for this metric. | 25.5% |
| Free-throw percentage | 77.1% | 79.3%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 | Fat Lever | Maurice Cheeks |
|---|---|---|
| Assist rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile | 25.6% | 29.7%Better result for this metric. |
| Assists per game | 6.2 | 6.7Better result for this metric. |
Show more stats: Passing
| Metric | Fat Lever | Maurice Cheeks |
|---|---|---|
| Turnover rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile | 12.4%Better result for this metric. | 17.7% |
Rebounding
Rebound rate is the share of available rebounds collected while on court.
| Metric | Fat Lever | Maurice Cheeks |
|---|---|---|
| Rebound rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile | 9.7%Better result for this metric. | 5.0% |
| Rebounds per game | 6.0Better result for this metric. | 2.8 |
Defense
Steals and blocks describe only part of defense. They do not capture every stop, rotation, or matchup.
| Metric | Fat Lever | Maurice Cheeks |
|---|---|---|
| Steal rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile | 3.2% | 3.3%Better result for this metric. |
Show more stats: Defense
| Metric | Fat Lever | Maurice Cheeks |
|---|---|---|
| Block rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile | 0.5% | 0.6%Better result for this metric. |
Scoring
Points per game describe scoring volume, not overall impact.
| Metric | Fat Lever | Maurice Cheeks |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 13.9Better result for this metric. | 11.1 |
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
Fat Lever ranks higher in career impact.
Fat LeverMetricMaurice Cheeks
#66LeadsCareer Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#100
+6.7LeadsPeak era-centered impactEstimated points per 100 possessions above that season's league average+4.3
+5.7LeadsBest 5 average impact+3.6
+3,267 ptsPoints above replacementRegular season · fixed -2.0 replacement baseline · higher is better+3,330 ptsLeads
This is the ranking result. It uses regular-season impact only. Team records, playoffs, and awards do not change it.
Team Success
Maurice Cheeks leads every available measure below.
Fat LeverMetricMaurice Cheeks
434Listed-team regular-season wins803Leads
48.1%Listed-team winning percentage61.2%Leads
250-win team seasons8Leads
060-win team seasons2Leads
8Playoff team seasons14Leads
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
Maurice Cheeks leads every available measure below.
Fat LeverMetricMaurice Cheeks
8Playoff appearances13Leads
48Playoff games133Leads
23Team playoff wins74Leads
0Finals appearances3Leads
0Championships1Leads
Context only. Not included in Career Impact Rank. Team playoff results count only seasons when the player appeared in a playoff game.
Awards
The advantages are split across the available measures.
Fat LeverMetricMaurice Cheeks
2All-Star4Leads
0MVP0
1LeadsAll-NBA0
1All-Defense5Leads
0DPOY0
0Rookie 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.
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.
Fat LeverMaurice CheeksPeak seasonHistorical source qualification
Estimated points per 100 possessions above that season's league average
Striped bars mark seasons with fewer than 40 games. A dashed mark means that player had no season at the aligned point.
Season-by-season evidenceRead both careers at the same stage
Every observed season keeps its age, era-centered impact estimate, league rank when qualified, career-stage label, and exact evidence link. A missing career point stays missing.
Fat LeverNBA seasonMaurice Cheeks
Season 1
Season 2
Season 3
Season 4
Season 5
Season 6
Season 7
Season 8
Season 9
Season 10
Season 11
No season
Season 12No season
Season 13No season
Season 14Observed values come from the accepted season comparison record. Historical source qualifications stay attached to affected seasons. Missing means no NBA season exists at that aligned point; it is never interpolated. Missing is not the same as estimated.