I read it as over a season but sure if it's the end of the season there have been plenty of players who have gone ppg over 20, 40, 60 games... where do you draw the line?
I definitely see how one could theoretically see it that way, and it's certainly unclear where the line should be drawn, but 20, 40, games? At that point you struggle with sample size, possibly unsustainable rates and potentially a lot of other things.
60 games seems somewhat reasonable?
But 70, or even 75, would anyone really make arguments like "do you really think he'll keep that pace up over a season" relative to a 82 game season?
Since the mid-nineties lockout...
There have been 1486 player seasons consisting of 82 games.
There have been 3400 player seasons consisting of 75-81 games.
There have been 1551 player seasons consisting of 70-74 games.
That's a lot of potentially relevant seasons that gets filtered out by using such a strict interpretation.