Who is better, Laker or Marshall?
Jim Laker leads with a GOAT score of 89.6 against 89.5 for Malcolm Marshall — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
AthletesTeams
Laker vs Marshall
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Jim Laker above Malcolm Marshall: 89.6 vs 89.5. Jim Laker leads on Peak, Statistics. Malcolm Marshall leads on Dominance, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →GOAT verdictgoatrank.world
LakerWinner
89.6Laker wins: Peak, Statistics
Marshall
89.5Marshall wins: Dominance, Honours
Candidates
Locked to CricketShareable URL · /compare/jim-laker-vs-malcolm-marshall
Time range
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Category radar
Verdict
Weighted GOAT score
🇬🇧 Jim Laker
89.6
Laker leads in 3 of 5 weighted categories.
1. Jim Laker
2. Malcolm Marshall
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 year 5 · Form index per season1. 🇬🇧 Jim Laker5 years played · career day 2,55686 runs
Setting the pace at this stage
2. 🇧🇧 Malcolm Marshall5 years played · career day 2,19074 runs
-14.0% vs Laker at the same stage
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇬🇧 Laker | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 42 | 146 |
| 🇧🇧 Marshall | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 41 | 224 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 year periods are measured against the same career window.
Fan vote — data vs the people
GOAT Rank · the data
Laker89.6
Marshall89.5
FAQ
Where does Marshall beat Laker?
Marshall scores higher on dominance, honours. Laker leads on peak, statistics.
How is the Laker vs Marshall score calculated?
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Laker: 89.6, Marshall: 89.5.
What do you think?
0 commentsMake your case for Laker vs Marshall. 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.