54.0 composite · lower is better
Explore rankings
Player profile · HOU / NYK / SAS
Charlie Ward
Charlie Ward advanced stats and career rankings
49.2 average league finish
887 total value
Bottom line · Career overview
Charlie Ward ranks #780 all time. Across his three best seasons, his average league finish was #42.7. His full-career value ranks #513, so longevity is a major reason he lands this high. Explore Charlie Ward's advanced stats by season, era-adjusted impact, workload, and historical comparisons.
Career standing
How Charlie Ward 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
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
- 54.0
- Qualified seasons
- 9
- All-time rank
- #780
Every season
Charlie Ward 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2004–05Historical Defense Estimate | HOU | 34 | 14 | 360 | -1.69 | — | — | 2.1 | — | Limited |
| 2003–04Historical Defense Estimate | NYK/SAS | 33 | 71 | 1,252 | +1.74 | 82.2 | #60 | 87.2 | 68th | Strong |
| 2002–03Historical Defense Estimate | NYK | 32 | 66 | 1,465 | +2.24 | 84.9 | #49 | 117.4 | 75th | Strong |
| 2001–02Historical Defense Estimate | NYK | 31 | 63 | 1,058 | +1.77 | 82.4 | #58 | 74.6 | 65th | Strong |
| 2000–01Historical Defense Estimate | NYK | 30 | 61 | 1,492 | +0.98 | 78.0 | #73 | 80.3 | 69th | Strong |
| 1999–00Historical Defense Estimate | NYK | 29 | 72 | 1,986 | +1.62 | 82.2 | #58 | 133.7 | 79th | Strong |
| 1998–99Historical Defense Estimate | NYK | 28 | 50 | 1,556 | +1.25 | 71.7 | #79 | 91.6 | 77th | Strong |
| 1997–98Historical Defense Estimate | NYK | 27 | 82 | 2,317 | +3.51 | 93.7 | #21 | 234.7 | 91st | Strong |
| 1996–97Historical Defense Estimate | NYK | 26 | 79 | 1,763 | -0.66 | 52.8 | #150 | 44.7 | 54th | Strong |
| 1995–96Historical Defense Estimate | NYK | 25 | 62 | 787 | -0.04 | 60.9 | #128 | 29.3 | 49th | Established |
| 1994–95Historical Defense Estimate | NYK | 24 | 10 | 44 | -12.25 | — | — | -8.6 | — | Limited |
Career movement
Charlie Ward's career impact by season
Peak +3.51 in 1997–98 · 11 seasons · 14,080 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.
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.
NBA season number · fixed impact axis −5 to +15
Similar career arcs
Players with careers similar to Charlie Ward
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.
Terry Rozier
91%career match
93% season match · 1997–98 ↔ 2021–22PG · All-Time Career #1668Tyus Jones
89%career match
93% season match · 1997–98 ↔ 2023–24PG · All-Time Career #1095Jeff Teague
89%career match
97% season match · 1997–98 ↔ 2014–15PG · All-Time Career #1085Dee Brown
88%career match
92% season match · 1997–98 ↔ 1992–93SG · All-Time Career #676Don Chaney
88%career match
92% season match · 1997–98 ↔ 1972–73PG · All-Time Career #1098D'Angelo Russell
88%career match
91% season match · 1997–98 ↔ 2022–23Impact 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 →