hussEyquation
Menu

Explore hussEyquation

NBA player comparison

Mike Bantom vs. Tom Burleson: Career comparison

hussEyquationCareer impact · regular season
Regular-season verdict

Tom Burleson 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.

#899Career Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#819Leads
+0.9Peak box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+1.6Leads
+0.3Best 5 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.4Leads
74.7Best 3 average finishAverage league place · lower is better55.3Leads
+600 ptsLeadsPoints above replacementCumulative regular-season value+469 pts
125.3LeadsBest 10 average finishAverage league place · lower is better151.6

Career Impact Rank places Tom Burleson #819 and Mike Bantom #899. It combines league finishes across each player's best three, five, and ten regular seasons, giving the most weight to the best three. Mike Bantom 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/mike-bantom/tom-burleson/career
Career Impact RankSee exactly how both rankings are calculatedMike Bantom86.813 · No. 899Tom Burleson80.247 · No. 819

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.

Mike Bantom

86.813 composite · No. 899 all-time

Mike Bantom's Career Composite windows
Window and finishes usedAverage finishWeightContribution
Best 3No. 611976–77Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 771978–79Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 861977–78Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate74.66750%37.333
Best 5No. 611976–77Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 771978–79Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 861977–78Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 911974–75Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 921980–81Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate81.40030%24.420
Best 10No. 611976–77Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 771978–79Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 861977–78Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 911974–75Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 921980–81Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 981979–80Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1491975–76Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1721973–74Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1941981–82Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate1 open slot × No. 233125.30020%25.060

37.333 + 24.420 + 25.060= 86.813

Open-season rule: every unfilled slot uses No. 233, this player's stored replacement finish.

Tom Burleson

80.247 composite · No. 819 all-time

Tom Burleson's Career Composite windows
Window and finishes usedAverage finishWeightContribution
Best 3No. 321975–76Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 661974–75Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 681977–78Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate55.33350%27.667
Best 5No. 321975–76Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 661974–75Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 681977–78Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 751976–77Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1301978–79Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate74.20030%22.260
Best 10No. 321975–76Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 661974–75Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 681977–78Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 751976–77Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimateNo. 1301978–79Recorded box inputsIncludes bounded historical defense estimate5 open slots × No. 229151.60020%30.320

27.667 + 22.260 + 30.320= 80.247

Open-season rule: every unfilled slot uses No. 229, 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: Mike Bantom and Tom Burleson
MetricMike BantomTom Burleson
Career Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#899#819Better result for this metric.
Best 3 average finishAverage league place · lower is better74.755.3Better result for this metric.
Best 5 average finishAverage league place · lower is better81.474.2Better result for this metric.
Best 10 average finishAverage league place · lower is better125.3Better result for this metric.151.6
Show more stats: Impact
Impact: Mike Bantom and Tom Burleson
MetricMike BantomTom Burleson
Points-above-replacement rankAll-time rank in estimated regular-season points above replacement#695Better result for this metric.#815
Peak box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.9+1.6Better result for this metric.
Best 3 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.5+0.9Better result for this metric.
Best 5 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.3+0.4Better result for this metric.
Best 10 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is betterUnavailableUnavailable
Points above replacementRegular season · fixed -2.0 replacement baseline · higher is better+600 ptsBetter result for this metric.+469 pts
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: Mike Bantom and Tom Burleson
MetricMike BantomTom Burleson
Games706446
Minutes19,7259,425

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: Mike Bantom and Tom Burleson
MetricMike BantomTom Burleson
True shooting percentage50.8%Better result for this metric.50.3%
True shootingAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile50.8%50.8%
Show more stats: Shooting
Shooting: Mike Bantom and Tom Burleson
MetricMike BantomTom Burleson
Field-goal percentage46.8%Better result for this metric.44.5%
Three-point percentage20.0%Better result for this metric.0.0%
Free-throw percentage69.2%72.6%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: Mike Bantom and Tom Burleson
MetricMike BantomTom Burleson
Assist rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile11.3%Better result for this metric.8.7%
Assists per game2.3Better result for this metric.1.3
Show more stats: Passing
Passing: Mike Bantom and Tom Burleson
MetricMike BantomTom Burleson
Turnover rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile15.8%15.2%Better result for this metric.

Rebounding

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

Rebounding: Mike Bantom and Tom Burleson
MetricMike BantomTom Burleson
Rebound rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile11.9%15.7%Better result for this metric.
Rebounds per game6.4Better result for this metric.6.3

Defense

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

Defense: Mike Bantom and Tom Burleson
MetricMike BantomTom Burleson
Steal rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile1.4%1.5%Better result for this metric.
Show more stats: Defense
Defense: Mike Bantom and Tom Burleson
MetricMike BantomTom Burleson
Block rateAverage across the best impact seasons selected for the model input profile1.3%3.4%Better result for this metric.

Scoring

Points per game describe scoring volume, not overall impact.

Scoring: Mike Bantom and Tom Burleson
MetricMike BantomTom Burleson
Points per game12.1Better result for this metric.9.4

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 Burleson ranks higher in career impact.

Mike BantomMetricTom Burleson
#899Career Impact RankPeak-weighted regular-season rank#819Leads
+0.9Peak box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+1.6Leads
+0.3Best 5 average box impactEra-adjusted points per 100 possessions above league average · higher is better+0.4Leads
+600 ptsLeadsPoints above replacementRegular season · fixed -2.0 replacement baseline · higher is better+469 pts

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.

Mike BantomMetricTom Burleson
633LeadsListed-team regular-season wins361
0.8%Listed-team winning percentage0.9%Leads
5Leads50-win team seasons2
4Leads60-win team seasons2
4Playoff team seasons4

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

Mike Bantom leads every available measure below.

Mike BantomMetricTom Burleson
3LeadsPlayoff appearances2
29LeadsPlayoff games15
14LeadsTeam playoff wins6
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.

Context

Awards

No recorded measure separates these careers.

Mike BantomMetricTom Burleson
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.

View
Align careers by
Mike BantomTom BurlesonPeak seasonHistorical source qualification

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

S1
S2
S3
S4
S5
S6
S7
S8
S9

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.