107.5 composite · lower is better
Explore rankings
Player profile · ATL / DAL / HOU / MEM
Chandler Parsons
Chandler Parsons advanced stats and career rankings
99.4 average league finish
598 total value
Bottom line · Career overview
Chandler Parsons ranks #1934 all time. Across his three best seasons, his average league finish was #88.3. His full-career value ranks #697, so longevity is a major reason he lands this high. Explore Chandler Parsons's advanced stats by season, era-adjusted impact, workload, and historical comparisons.
Career standing
How Chandler Parsons ranks all time
These are league placements, not raw scores. Each season is judged against that season's qualified player pool.
Best in the league
Elite finishes
Upper-tier finishes
Standard deviations across scoring seasons
Career Composite107.5
Equal average of Best 3, Prime 5, and Best 10 league finishes. The overlapping windows make this explicitly peak-weighted. Lower is better.
- Best 3 weight
- 63.3%
- Score
- 107.5
- Qualified seasons
- 8
- All-time rank
- #1934
Strongest seasons
Every season
Chandler Parsons advanced stats by season
Era-centered box impact supports comparisons through time. Impact Rate and its rank compare players only within that season.
| Season | Team | Age | GP | MP | Era-centered box impact | Impact Rate | Rate rank | Season Value | Value percentile | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2019–20Historical Defense Estimate | ATL | 31 | 5 | 54 | -10.40 | — | — | -9.7 | — | Limited |
| 2018–19Historical Defense Estimate | MEM | 30 | 25 | 496 | -3.15 | 10.9 | #329 | -11.4 | 18th | Established |
| 2017–18Historical Defense Estimate | MEM | 29 | 36 | 691 | +0.55 | 69.0 | #113 | 34.9 | 45th | Established |
| 2016–17Historical Defense Estimate | MEM | 28 | 34 | 675 | -3.83 | 7.4 | #337 | -23.8 | 13th | Established |
| 2015–16Historical Defense Estimate | DAL | 27 | 61 | 1,799 | +1.55 | 81.0 | #70 | 125.5 | 80th | Strong |
| 2014–15Historical Defense Estimate | DAL | 26 | 66 | 2,186 | +0.96 | 74.9 | #94 | 128.4 | 81st | Strong |
| 2013–14Historical Defense Estimate | HOU | 25 | 74 | 2,783 | +0.32 | 65.8 | #119 | 129.4 | 80th | Strong |
| 2012–13Historical Defense Estimate | HOU | 24 | 76 | 2,758 | +0.62 | 71.4 | #101 | 144.7 | 82nd | Strong |
| 2011–12Historical Defense Estimate | HOU | 23 | 63 | 1,804 | +0.31 | 60.9 | #135 | 79.6 | 70th | Strong |
Career movement
Chandler Parsons's career impact by season
Peak +1.55 in 2015–16 · 9 seasons · 13,246 minutes
The same historical box-score model is used for every season, making the career shape comparable through time. This is separate from the current lineup-context ranking.
Era-centered box impactMinutes
Across-era box estimateWorkload
Career comparison
Compare the shape, not the calendar
Align by NBA experience to compare season one with season one, or by age to compare players at the same stage of life.
Chandler ParsonsDelonte West
NBA season number · fixed impact axis −5 to +15
Similar career arcs
Players with careers similar to Chandler Parsons
The score compares era-centered box impact, peak, prime, workload, career length, position, and trajectory aligned by NBA experience. It describes career shape, not playing style or equal ability.
SG · All-Time Career #1568
Delonte West
91%career match
88% season match · 2015–16 ↔ 2008–09PF · All-Time Career #1742Kenneth Faried
91%career match
92% season match · 2015–16 ↔ 2015–16SF · All-Time Career #886Alvin Scott
91%career match
95% season match · 2015–16 ↔ 1981–82SG · All-Time Career #1743Marcus Thornton
91%career match
91% season match · 2015–16 ↔ 2012–13SG · All-Time Career #744Herm Gilliam
91%career match
90% season match · 2015–16 ↔ 1974–75SF · All-Time Career #1320M.L. Carr
90%career match
89% season match · 2015–16 ↔ 1979–80Impact Rate shows how strong a player was compared with everyone else that season. Season Value adds how much he played. The career ranking rewards a high peak, a long prime, and repeated seasons near the top. Older seasons use clearly labeled estimates where the NBA did not record today's full set of statistics. Read how every ranking works →