Using the Point Guard Efficiency Equation (PGEE) of averages including points + rebounds (x.75) + assists (x1.33) - turnovers (x2), let's evaluate the five best PG's in question to this point this season.
Rose = 26.6 + 4.6(x.75) + 8.2(x1.33) - 3.7(x2) = 26.68
Westbrook = 23.8 + 5.1(x.75) +8.4(x1.33) - 3.6(x2) = 23.88
Williams = 21.9 + 4.2(x.75) +9.9(x1.33) - 3.6(x2) = 21.98
Paul = 16.5 + 4.9(x.75) + 10.1(x1.33) - 2.5(x2) = 16.58
Rondo = 10.6 + 4.8(x.75) + 14.2(x1.33) - 4(x2) = 10.68
Thoughts?
I have a number of problems with your formula:
a) You're making no adjustment for minutes played. When comparing players of similar minutes it makes sense to normalise their stats to per 36/48 numbers.
b) Points by themselves don't tell the story. Efficiency matters. Chris Paul may only be scoring 17 points/36 to Rose's 24, but he's taking 12 shots vs Rose's 20 to do it.
c) You're way over valuing rebounds. Rebounding for point guards is pretty meaningless, statistically the correlation between the number of rebounds a point guard gets and team rebounding is very weak. Jason Kidd has made a career out of grabbing misses the bigs on his team would get anyway.
d) You're over valuing assists. Assists are a fairly crappy measure of passing ability and have a very weak correlation to offensive efficiency. They're also very inconsistently recorded across the league due to each arena having their own scorers. I realise assists are the only measure we really have of passing ability, but hey, that's why the point guard position is the hardest to measure statistically. At the very least there's no way an assist should be worth 1 1/3 points or only 2/3 a turnover.
e) You make no allowances for defense. Even though we don't have great measures of defense there's no reason steals should not be included.
Overall if you want to distill players down to a single number the more established stats like PER, while still not perfect, do a better job than this formula.