Who is better, Holdsclaw or Jackson?
Chamique Holdsclaw leads with a GOAT score of 84.4 against 84.3 for Lauren Jackson — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Chamique Holdsclaw above Lauren Jackson: 84.4 vs 84.3. Chamique Holdsclaw leads on Peak, Statistics. Lauren Jackson leads on Dominance, Longevity, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Holdsclaw wins: Peak, Statistics
Jackson wins: Dominance, Longevity, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/chamique-holdsclaw-vs-lauren-jackson
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Holdsclaw leads in 2 of 5 weighted categories.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Holdsclaw | 0 | 0 | 50 | 112 | 366 | 694 |
| 🇦🇺 Jackson | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 15.2 | 91.7 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | HoldsclawRetired | JacksonRetired |
|---|---|---|
| NCAA titles | 3 | — |
| WNBA All-Star selections | 6 | — |
| WNBA Rookie of the Year awards | 1 | — |
| WNBA scoring titles | 1 | 3 |
| Career WNBA points | 3,025 | — |
| WNBA MVP awards | — | 3 |
| WNBA titles | — | 2 |
| Olympic medals | — | 4 |
| Career points per game | — | 18.9 |
| Dominance w25% | 82 | 84 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 88 |
| Longevity w20% | 78 | 80 |
| Honours w20% | 82 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 90 | 86 |
Chamique Holdsclaw leads with a GOAT score of 84.4 against 84.3 for Lauren Jackson — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Jackson scores higher on dominance, honours, longevity. Holdsclaw leads on peak, statistics.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Holdsclaw: 84.4, Jackson: 84.3.
Make your case for Holdsclaw vs Jackson. The scoring is published in full — if you can point at the pillar or the weight you disagree with, we read it. Read the methodology paper.