Who is better, Taurasi or Auerbach?
Diana Taurasi leads with a GOAT score of 94.2 against 93.6 for Red Auerbach — a gap of 0.6 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Diana Taurasi above Red Auerbach: 94.2 vs 93.6. Diana Taurasi leads on Longevity, Statistics. Red Auerbach leads on Dominance, Peak, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Taurasi wins: Longevity, Statistics
Auerbach wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/diana-taurasi-vs-red-auerbach
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Taurasi leads in 2 of 5 weighted categories.
Auerbach — Insufficient verified career data to calculate a reliable GOAT Score.
Cumulative output season by season — the shape of each career against the other.
Setting the pace at age 22
No verified birth date for Auerbach — shown in the pro-debut view instead.
Every career is cut at the season the athlete turned 22, so a rookie today is measured against exactly what a legend had banked by the same birthday.
| Metric | TaurasiRetired | AuerbachRetired |
|---|---|---|
| WNBA points | 10,646 | — |
| WNBA titles | 3 | — |
| Olympic golds | 6 | — |
| All-Star selections | 11 | — |
| Finals MVP | 1 | — |
| Seasons played | 20 | — |
| NBA championships as coach | — | 9 |
| Consecutive NBA titles | — | 8 |
| Career coaching wins | — | 938 |
| NBA Coach of the Year awards | — | 1 |
| Seasons as a head coach | — | 20 |
| Dominance w25% | 94 | 97 |
| Peak w20% | 93 | 96 |
| Longevity w20% | 96 | 86 |
| Honours w20% | 94 | 97 |
| Statistics w15% | 94 | 90 |
Diana Taurasi leads with a GOAT score of 94.2 against 93.6 for Red Auerbach — a gap of 0.6 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Auerbach scores higher on peak, dominance, honours. Taurasi leads on statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Taurasi: 94.2, Auerbach: 93.6.
Make your case for Taurasi vs Auerbach. 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.