Stats are a bit of a lie, aren't they? We love them because they give us a neat little ladder to climb, a way to say "this guy is definitively better than that guy" without actually having to argue about it at the bar for three hours. But when you look at the NBA all time PER leaders, you're not just looking at a list of the best hoopers ever. You're looking at a specific kind of basketball math that was invented by John Hollinger to solve a problem: how do you compare a 7-foot center who grabs 15 boards to a point guard who dishes 12 assists?
The answer is the Player Efficiency Rating (PER). It basically takes every positive thing a player does—points, blocks, steals, you name it—and subtracts the "bad" stuff like turnovers and missed shots. Then it adjusts for pace, so a guy playing in the lightning-fast 1960s isn't unfairly beating out a guy from the grind-it-out 90s.
📖 Related: Bernhard Langer Golf Clubs: The Truth About His Frankenstein Bag
But here’s the kicker. If you check the leaderboard today, in early 2026, the name at the very top might surprise you. Or maybe it won't, if you've been watching the Denver Nuggets lately.
The Joker and the Ghost of MJ
For decades, Michael Jordan sat on the throne. His career PER of 27.91 was the gold standard, the "untouchable" number that proved His Airness was the most efficient weapon the game had ever seen. Then came Nikola Jokic.
Right now, Jokic is sitting at a career PER of 28.84. That's not a typo. He's actually eclipsed Jordan.
Now, before the old-heads start throwing their 1996 championship DVDs at me, there’s a catch. Career PER is what we call a "reverse-longevity" stat. It rewards players who are currently in their prime. Michael Jordan’s number includes those final years with the Washington Wizards when he was 40 and playing on one leg. Jokic is in the middle of his peak. If he plays until he's 40 and his production dips, that career average will probably slide down.
But honestly? Look at the single-season records. Jokic’s 2025-26 season currently has him at a staggering 35.93 PER. To put that in perspective, a PER of 15 is "league average." A PER of 30 is usually enough to win you the MVP. What Jokic is doing right now is basically breaking the formula.
Why Big Men Rule This Metric
If you scroll through the top 10 of the NBA all time PER leaders, you’ll notice a lot of size.
🔗 Read more: The Hat Trick Hockey Definition: Why We Throw Headwear for Three Goals
- Nikola Jokic (1st)
- Joel Embiid (2nd at 27.99)
- Michael Jordan (3rd)
- LeBron James (4th at 26.83)
- Anthony Davis (5th at 26.68)
- Shaquille O'Neal (6th at 26.43)
- David Robinson (7th at 26.18)
- Wilt Chamberlain (8th at 26.16)
See the pattern? Aside from MJ and LeBron, this list is a convention for giants. PER has a bit of a built-in bias. It loves rebounds, and it really loves high field-goal percentages. If you’re a center who dunks everything and grabs ten boards a night, your PER is going to be naturally higher than a point guard who takes difficult threes and has to handle the ball (and thus turn it over) more often.
It's why Stephen Curry, despite being the greatest shooter ever, sits further down at 23.47. It's not that he's "worse" than David Robinson; it’s that the specific math of PER rewards the box-score stuff that big men do more reliably.
The LeBron Longevity Problem
LeBron James is the weirdest case on this list. He’s currently 4th all-time. Think about that. He has played over 20 seasons, and he is still maintaining an efficiency rating higher than Shaquille O'Neal or Wilt Chamberlain.
Usually, when a player gets old, their PER falls off a cliff. They miss more shots, they move slower, they stop getting to the line. LeBron has somehow cheated that system. He’s 41 years old in 2026 and still putting up numbers that would make a 25-year-old All-Star jealous. If he had retired five years ago, his career PER might be even higher, but the fact that it's still at 26.83 after two decades of basketball is arguably more impressive than Jokic’s current peak.
Is PER Still Relevant in 2026?
We’ve come a long way since Hollinger invented this stat. We have EPM (Estimated Plus-Minus), DARKO, and RAPM now. These "impact" metrics try to measure how much a team actually wins when a player is on the floor, rather than just what they put in the box score.
PER doesn't know if you're a good defender. It sees a block, sure, but it doesn't see the way Victor Wembanyama makes an entire team afraid to enter the paint. Wemby's 2025-26 season is actually sitting at a 27.73 PER, which is insane for a sophomore, but even that number doesn't fully capture his defensive terror.
PER is basically "Box Score Plus." It’s great for comparing offensive engines, but it’s lousy at telling you who the best lockdown defender is.
✨ Don't miss: Ohio State Football Tickets: How to Actually Get Into the Shoe Without Overpaying
The Surprising Names You Missed
Look further down the list. You'll find Neil Johnston. Who? Exactly. He played for the Philadelphia Warriors in the 50s and has a career PER of 24.86, higher than Kevin Durant (24.66) and Kareem Abdul-Jabbar (24.58).
Does anyone think Neil Johnston was better than Kareem? No. But in his era, he was so much more efficient than his peers that the formula elevates him. That’s the "normalized" part of the stat—it compares you to the average player of your own time. Johnston was a giant among men who couldn't shoot, so he looks like a god in the data.
What You Should Take Away
The list of NBA all time PER leaders is a fascinating historical document, but it's not a Bible. It tells you who dominated the box score most efficiently.
- Context is king: Jokic and Embiid are benefitting from a "prime-only" career average right now. Watch those numbers as they age.
- Size matters: Big men will always have an advantage in PER because of how rebounds and field goal percentages are weighted.
- Longevity kills: To stay in the top 5 after 1,500 games—like LeBron—is the real "Greatest of All Time" indicator.
If you want to use this data for your own arguments, focus on the single-season peaks. That’s where you see the true ceiling of a player. Comparing Michael Jordan’s 1988 season (31.71) to Jokic’s current run is a much fairer fight than looking at career averages that span different stages of life.
To get a better handle on these rankings yourself, go check out the active leaders on Basketball-Reference and filter by "Minutes Played." You'll see how guys like Luka Doncic (currently 10th at 25.66) are climbing the ranks and where they might end up once they hit that 15,000-minute threshold. Keep an eye on the "pace adjustment" factor too—it's the only reason Wilt isn't at 40.0.