Who is better, Alfredsson or Crawford?
Daniel Alfredsson leads with a GOAT score of 80.3 against 80.2 for Rusty Crawford — 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 Daniel Alfredsson above Rusty Crawford: 80.3 vs 80.2. Daniel Alfredsson leads on Dominance, Longevity. Rusty Crawford leads on Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Alfredsson wins: Dominance, Longevity
Crawford wins: Peak
Shareable URL · /compare/daniel-alfredsson-vs-rusty-crawford
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Alfredsson leads in 4 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇸🇪 Alfredsson | 0 | 0 | 0 | 61 | 235 | 506 |
| 🇨🇦 Crawford | 0 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 39 | 87 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | AlfredssonRetired | CrawfordRetired |
|---|---|---|
| NHL points | 1,157 | — |
| NHL goals | 444 | — |
| Olympic golds | 1 | — |
| Calder Trophy | 1 | — |
| Seasons as captain | 14 | — |
| Playoff points | 100 | — |
| Stanley Cups | — | 2 |
| Career professional goals | — | 110 |
| Seasons played | — | 18 |
| NHL games played | — | 38 |
| Hall of Fame inductions | — | 1 |
| Dominance w25% | 74 | 72 |
| Peak w20% | 82 | 86 |
| Longevity w20% | 88 | 86 |
| Honours w20% | 76 | 76 |
| Statistics w15% | 84 | 84 |
Daniel Alfredsson leads with a GOAT score of 80.3 against 80.2 for Rusty Crawford — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Crawford scores higher on peak. Alfredsson leads on dominance, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Alfredsson: 80.3, Crawford: 80.2.
Make your case for Alfredsson vs Crawford. 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.