Who is better, Keon or Fuhr?
Dave Keon leads with a GOAT score of 89.8 against 89.8 for Grant Fuhr — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
AthletesTeams
Keon vs Fuhr
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently scores Dave Keon and Grant Fuhr level at 89.8. Dave Keon leads on Longevity, Statistics. Grant Fuhr leads on Dominance, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →GOAT verdictgoatrank.world
KeonWinner
89.8Keon wins: Longevity, Statistics
Fuhr
89.8Fuhr wins: Dominance, Peak
Candidates
Locked to Ice HockeyShareable URL · /compare/dave-keon-vs-grant-fuhr
Time range
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Category radar
Verdict
Weighted GOAT score
🇨🇦 Dave Keon
89.8
Keon leads in 3 of 5 weighted categories.
1. Dave Keon
2. Grant Fuhr
Category breakdown
Season form · Form index per season
Career timeline · Form index per season
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
GOAT pace tracker
Career stage · GOAT pace
Through season 5 · Form index per season1. 🇨🇦 Grant Fuhr5 seasons played · career day 1,825360 points
Setting the pace at this stage
2. 🇨🇦 Dave Keon5 seasons played · career day 1,826338 points
-6.1% vs Fuhr at the same stage
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇨🇦 Keon | 0 | 0 | 58 | 121 | 261 | 694 |
| 🇨🇦 Fuhr | 0 | 0 | 60 | 126 | 360 | 729 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
Fan vote — data vs the people
GOAT Rank · the data
Keon89.8
Fuhr89.8
FAQ
Where does Fuhr beat Keon?
Fuhr scores higher on peak, dominance. Keon leads on statistics, longevity.
How is the Keon vs Fuhr score calculated?
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Keon: 89.8, Fuhr: 89.8.
What do you think?
0 commentsMake your case for Keon vs Fuhr. 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.