hussEyquation
Menu

Explore hussEyquation

NBA player comparison

Grant Long vs. Tom Chambers: Career comparison

hussEyquationCareer impact · regular season
Regular-season verdict

Tom Chambers ranks higher in career impact

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.

#1060Career Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#895Leads
+0.9Peak box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+1.2Leads
+0.5LeadsBest 5 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.4
91.7Best 3 average finishAverage league place · lower is better74.7Leads
+820 ptsPoints above replacementCumulative regular-season value+827 ptsLeads
125.7Best 10 average finishAverage league place · lower is better117.8Leads

Career Impact Rank places Tom Chambers #895 and Grant Long #1060. It combines league finishes across each player's best three, five, and ten regular seasons, giving the most weight to the best three.

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/grant-long/tom-chambers/career
Career Impact RankSee exactly how both rankings are calculatedGrant Long100.433 · No. 1,060Tom Chambers86.033 · No. 895

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.

Grant Long

100.433 composite · No. 1,060 all-time

Grant Long's Career Composite windows
Window and finishes usedAverage finishWeightContribution
Best 3No. 891991–92Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 901995–96Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 961988–89Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate91.66750%45.833
Best 5No. 891991–92Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 901995–96Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 961988–89Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 981998–99Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1181994–95Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate98.20030%29.460
Best 10No. 891991–92Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 901995–96Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 961988–89Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 981998–99Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1181994–95Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1221990–91Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1281992–93Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1631993–94Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1732000–01Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1801989–90Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate125.70020%25.140

45.833 + 29.460 + 25.140= 100.433

Tom Chambers

86.033 composite · No. 895 all-time

Tom Chambers's Career Composite windows
Window and finishes usedAverage finishWeightContribution
Best 3No. 611989–90Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 761988–89Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 871984–85Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate74.66750%37.333
Best 5No. 611989–90Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 761988–89Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 871984–85Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 951987–88Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1001986–87Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate83.80030%25.140
Best 10No. 611989–90Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 761988–89Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 871984–85Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 951987–88Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1001986–87Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1011985–86Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1341983–84Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1531982–83Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1801991–92Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1911990–91Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate117.80020%23.560

37.333 + 25.140 + 23.560= 86.033

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: Grant Long and Tom Chambers
MetricGrant LongTom Chambers
Career Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#1060#895Better result for this metric.
Best 3 average finishAverage league place · lower is better91.774.7Better result for this metric.
Best 5 average finishAverage league place · lower is better98.283.8Better result for this metric.
Best 10 average finishAverage league place · lower is better125.7117.8Better result for this metric.
Show more stats: Impact
Impact: Grant Long and Tom Chambers
MetricGrant LongTom Chambers
Points-above-replacement rankAll-time rank in estimated regular-season points above replacement#545#538Better result for this metric.
Peak box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.9+1.2Better result for this metric.
Best 3 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.8Better result for this metric.+0.7
Best 5 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.5Better result for this metric.+0.4
Best 10 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better-0.1Better result for this metric.-0.3
Points above replacementRegular season · fixed -2.0 replacement baseline · higher is better+820 pts+827 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: Grant Long and Tom Chambers
MetricGrant LongTom Chambers
Games1,0031,107
Minutes28,51433,922

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: Grant Long and Tom Chambers
MetricGrant LongTom Chambers
True shooting percentage53.6%54.2%Better result for this metric.
True shootingAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile53.7%54.2%Better result for this metric.
Show more stats: Shooting
Shooting: Grant Long and Tom Chambers
MetricGrant LongTom Chambers
Field-goal percentage46.7%46.8%Better result for this metric.
Three-point percentage28.3%30.7%Better result for this metric.
Free-throw percentage76.1%80.7%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.

Passing: Grant Long and Tom Chambers
MetricGrant LongTom Chambers
Assist rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile9.3%10.7%Better result for this metric.
Assists per game1.72.1Better result for this metric.
Show more stats: Passing
Passing: Grant Long and Tom Chambers
MetricGrant LongTom Chambers
Turnover rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile15.5%12.2%Better result for this metric.

Rebounding

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

Rebounding: Grant Long and Tom Chambers
MetricGrant LongTom Chambers
Rebound rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile13.0%Better result for this metric.11.2%
Rebounds per game6.16.1

Defense

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

Defense: Grant Long and Tom Chambers
MetricGrant LongTom Chambers
Steal rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile2.2%Better result for this metric.1.3%
Show more stats: Defense
Defense: Grant Long and Tom Chambers
MetricGrant LongTom Chambers
Block rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile0.9%1.1%Better result for this metric.

Scoring

Points per game describe scoring volume, not overall impact.

Scoring: Grant Long and Tom Chambers
MetricGrant LongTom Chambers
Points per game9.518.1Better 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.

Ranking result

Regular Season Impact

Tom Chambers ranks higher in career impact.

Grant LongMetricTom Chambers
#1060Career Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#895Leads
+0.9Peak box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+1.2Leads
+0.5LeadsBest 5 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.4
+820 ptsPoints above replacementRegular season · fixed -2.0 replacement baseline · higher is better+827 ptsLeads

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

Context

Team Success

Tom Chambers leads every available measure below.

Grant LongMetricTom Chambers
527Listed-team regular-season wins706Leads
41.2%Listed-team winning percentage53.8%Leads
150-win team seasons8Leads
060-win team seasons2Leads
7Playoff team seasons11Leads

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

Tom Chambers leads every available measure below.

Grant LongMetricTom Chambers
7Playoff appearances10Leads
42Playoff games108Leads
15Team playoff wins55Leads
0Finals appearances1Leads
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.

Grant LongMetricTom Chambers
Not availableAll-Star4
Not availableMVP0
Not availableAll-NBA2
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.

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
Grant LongTom ChambersPeak 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
S13
S14
S15
S16

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.