Jonas Jerebko
2009–10 to 2018–19 · 9 seasons
NBA player comparison
Jonas Jerebko vs. Trey Lyles: Career comparison
Regular-season verdict
Jonas Jerebko ranks higher in career impact
Trey Lyles
2015–16 to 2024–25 · 10 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.
#1481LeadsCareer Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#1518
+1.2Peak box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+1.5Leads
-0.1Best 5 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better-0.0Leads
128.3Best 3 average finishAverage league place · lower is better124.3Leads
+280 ptsPoints above replacementCumulative regular-season value+286 ptsLeads
201.2LeadsBest 10 average finishAverage league place · lower is better224.4
Career Impact Rank places Jonas Jerebko #1481 and Trey Lyles #1518. It combines league finishes across each player's best three, five, and ten regular seasons, giving the most weight to the best three. Trey Lyles had the higher single-season impact estimate and 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 calculatedJonas Jerebko149.647 · No. 1,481Trey Lyles154.867 · No. 1,518
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.
Jonas Jerebko
149.647 composite · No. 1,481 all-time
| Window and finishes used | Average finish | Weight | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best 3No. 822014–15Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1322012–13Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1712009–10Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate | 128.333 | 50% | 64.167 |
| Best 5No. 822014–15Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1322012–13Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1712009–10Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1812013–14Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1882017–18Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate | 150.800 | 30% | 45.240 |
| Best 10No. 822014–15Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1322012–13Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1712009–10Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1812013–14Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1882017–18Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1882018–19Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1962011–12Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 2502015–16Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 2612016–17Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate1 open slot × No. 363 | 201.200 | 20% | 40.240 |
64.167 + 45.240 + 40.240= 149.647
Open-season rule: every unfilled slot uses No. 363, this player's stored replacement finish.
Trey Lyles
154.867 composite · No. 1,518 all-time
| Window and finishes used | Average finish | Weight | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best 3No. 712017–18Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1182021–22No. 1842019–20Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate | 124.333 | 50% | 62.167 |
| Best 5No. 712017–18Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1182021–22No. 1842019–20Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 2042022–23No. 2202023–24 | 159.400 | 30% | 47.820 |
| Best 10No. 712017–18Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1182021–22No. 1842019–20Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 2042022–23No. 2202023–24No. 2282024–25No. 2552018–19Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 2682015–16Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 3262016–17Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate1 open slot × No. 370 | 224.400 | 20% | 44.880 |
62.167 + 47.820 + 44.880= 154.867
Open-season rule: every unfilled slot uses No. 370, 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 →
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 | Jonas Jerebko | Trey Lyles |
|---|---|---|
| Career Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank | #1481Better result for this metric. | #1518 |
| Best 3 average finishAverage league place · lower is better | 128.3 | 124.3Better result for this metric. |
| Best 5 average finishAverage league place · lower is better | 150.8Better result for this metric. | 159.4 |
| Best 10 average finishAverage league place · lower is better | 201.2Better result for this metric. | 224.4 |
Show more stats: Impact
| Metric | Jonas Jerebko | Trey Lyles |
|---|---|---|
| Points-above-replacement rankAll-time rank in estimated regular-season points above replacement | #1040 | #1029Better result for this metric. |
| Peak box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better | +1.2 | +1.5Better result for this metric. |
| Best 3 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better | +0.2 | +0.6Better result for this metric. |
| Best 5 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better | -0.1 | -0.0Better result for this metric. |
| Best 10 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better | Unavailable | Unavailable |
| Points above replacementRegular season · fixed -2.0 replacement baseline · higher is better | +280 pts | +286 ptsBetter result for this metric. |
| Seasons ranked No. 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Top-five impact seasons | 0 | 0 |
| Top-ten impact seasons | 0 | 0 |
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 | Jonas Jerebko | Trey Lyles |
|---|---|---|
| Games | 635 | 650 |
| Minutes | 11,323 | 11,971 |
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 | Jonas Jerebko | Trey Lyles |
|---|---|---|
| True shooting percentage | 55.4%Better result for this metric. | 55.3% |
| True shootingAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile | 55.5%Better result for this metric. | 55.2% |
Show more stats: Shooting
| Metric | Jonas Jerebko | Trey Lyles |
|---|---|---|
| Field-goal percentage | 45.7%Better result for this metric. | 44.1% |
| Three-point percentage | 36.3%Better result for this metric. | 34.7% |
| Free-throw percentage | 77.0%Better result for this metric. | 74.1% |
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 | Jonas Jerebko | Trey Lyles |
|---|---|---|
| Assist rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile | 7.3% | 8.6%Better result for this metric. |
| Assists per game | 0.8 | 1.1Better result for this metric. |
Show more stats: Passing
| Metric | Jonas Jerebko | Trey Lyles |
|---|---|---|
| Turnover rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile | 11.2% | 10.5%Better result for this metric. |
Rebounding
Rebound rate is the share of available rebounds collected while on court.
| Metric | Jonas Jerebko | Trey Lyles |
|---|---|---|
| Rebound rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile | 12.6% | 13.1%Better result for this metric. |
| Rebounds per game | 4.0 | 4.3Better result for this metric. |
Defense
Steals and blocks describe only part of defense. They do not capture every stop, rotation, or matchup.
| Metric | Jonas Jerebko | Trey Lyles |
|---|---|---|
| Steal rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile | 1.4%Better result for this metric. | 1.1% |
Show more stats: Defense
| Metric | Jonas Jerebko | Trey Lyles |
|---|---|---|
| Block rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile | 1.0% | 1.7%Better result for this metric. |
Scoring
Points per game describe scoring volume, not overall impact.
| Metric | Jonas Jerebko | Trey Lyles |
|---|---|---|
| Points per game | 6.2 | 7.6Better 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
Jonas Jerebko ranks higher in career impact.
Jonas JerebkoMetricTrey Lyles
#1481LeadsCareer Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#1518
+1.2Peak box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+1.5Leads
-0.1Best 5 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better-0.0Leads
+280 ptsPoints above replacementRegular season · fixed -2.0 replacement baseline · higher is better+286 ptsLeads
This is the ranking result. It uses regular-season impact only. Team records, playoffs, and awards do not change it.
Team Success
The advantages are split across the available measures.
Jonas JerebkoMetricTrey Lyles
388Listed-team regular-season wins443Leads
48.3%Listed-team winning percentage50.3%Leads
250-win team seasons2
060-win team seasons0
5LeadsPlayoff team seasons3
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
Jonas Jerebko leads every available measure below.
Jonas JerebkoMetricTrey Lyles
5LeadsPlayoff appearances3
48LeadsPlayoff games12
30LeadsTeam playoff wins14
1LeadsFinals 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.
Jonas JerebkoMetricTrey Lyles
Not availableAll-StarNot available
Not availableMVPNot available
Not availableAll-NBANot available
Not availableAll-DefenseNot available
Not availableDPOYNot available
Not availableRookie 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.
Jonas JerebkoTrey LylesPeak 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.
Jonas JerebkoNBA seasonTrey Lyles
Season 1
Season 2
Season 3
Season 4
Season 5
Season 6
Season 7
Season 8
Season 9
No season
Season 10Observed 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.