Using NBA.COM's efficiency ratings, I tried to come up with an objective way to look at who have been the most successful guards in the NBA during the playoffs over the course of the last five seasons.
I'll admit that the reason I started with the 2009 playoffs is because that was the year that Rajon Rondo became a superstar playoff performer. I wanted to see how our point guard stacked up against other elite guards during that time span.
Anyway, I multiplied each player's playoff efficiency rating by the number of games each player played in a given year's playoffs, then I added all the yearly totals for each player together, giving the total playoff efficiency since 2009. The total playoff efficiency divided by the total number of playoff games played over that stretch gives each player's average playoff efficiency over this time span.
Here it is:
Kobe Bryant: Average: 24.5, total games played: 68, total: 1,666
Dwayne Wade: Average: 22.0, total games played: 70, total: 1,540
Rajon Rondo: Average: 22.8, total games played: 66, total: 1,504.8
Tony Parker: Average: 19.4, total games played: 49, total: 950.6
Russell Westbrook: Average: 20.9, total games played: 45, total: 940.5
James Harden: Average: 18.0, total games played: 43, total: 774
Chris Paul: Average: 23.3, total games played: 28, total: 652.4
Derrick Rose: Average: 21.2, total games played: 29, total: 614.8
Deron Williams: Average: 23.4, total games played: 22, total: 514.8
Steph Curry: Average: 22.5, total games played: 12, total: 270
I like that you calculated the weighted average.
Interesting though, if you use ESPN's PER, you get the opposite result:
Rondo 66 GP, TPER 1274, PER/GP = 19.31
Parker 49 GP, TPER 1031, PER/GP = 21.03
Some of this seems to be because PER is less dependent on minutes played. If you use NBA.com's efficiency per 48, you get something significantly closer:
Rondo 26.53
Parker 25.34
The upshot? Kind of a mixed bag. NBA.com's ranking does seem to favor players like Rondo, while PER favors players like Parker. But, I think a lot of that is coming from NBA.com's greater valuation of players who play a lot of minutes.
Whether you think guys who play many minutes are more valuable than guys who don't is probably a subjective thing, at least as regards Rondo and Parker. Some of the difference probably comes from the fact that Rondo has had arguably poorer backups, and from Pop's preference to rest his big players. If so, playing fewer minutes can hardly be held against Parker. But I can see the other side of the argument too.