Who is better, Laperrière or McDavid?
Jacques Laperrière leads with a GOAT score of 86.7 against 86.5 for Connor McDavid — a gap of 0.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Jacques Laperrière above Connor McDavid: 86.7 vs 86.5. Jacques Laperrière leads on Longevity, Honours. Connor McDavid leads on Statistics, Dominance, Peak.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Laperrière wins: Longevity, Honours
McDavid wins: Dominance, Peak, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/jacques-laperriere-vs-mcdavid
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Laperrière 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇨🇦 Laperrière | 0 | 0 | 58 | 123 | 362 | 700 |
| 🇨🇦 McDavid | 0 | 0 | 48 | 148 | 469 | 982 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | LaperrièreRetired | McDavidActive · Edmonton Oilers |
|---|---|---|
| Stanley Cups | 6 | — |
| Norris Trophy | 1 | — |
| Calder Trophy | 1 | — |
| NHL points | 282 | 1,100 |
| All-Star selections | 4 | 8 |
| Hart Trophies | — | 3 |
| Art Ross Trophies | — | 5 |
| Conn Smythe Trophies | — | 1 |
| 100-point seasons | — | 7 |
| Dominance w25% | 84 | 90 |
| Peak w20% | 90 | 94 |
| Longevity w20% | 82 | 72 |
| Honours w20% | 92 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 86 | 93 |
Jacques Laperrière leads with a GOAT score of 86.7 against 86.5 for Connor McDavid — a gap of 0.2 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
McDavid scores higher on peak, dominance, statistics. Laperrière leads on honours, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Laperrière: 86.7, McDavid: 86.5.
Make your case for Laperrière vs McDavid. 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.