Who is better, Stockton or Archibald?
John Stockton leads with a GOAT score of 88.2 against 88.2 for Nate Archibald — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently scores John Stockton and Nate Archibald level at 88.2. John Stockton leads on Longevity, Statistics. Nate Archibald leads on Peak, Dominance, Honours.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Stockton wins: Longevity, Statistics
Archibald wins: Dominance, Peak, Honours
Shareable URL · /compare/john-stockton-vs-nate-archibald
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Stockton 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸 Stockton | 0 | 0 | 5.1 | 12.5 | 34.5 | 102.5 |
| 🇺🇸 Archibald | 0 | 0 | 55 | 132 | 413 | 713 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | StocktonRetired | ArchibaldRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Career assists | 15,806 | 6,476 |
| Career steals | 3,265 | — |
| All-Star selections | 10 | 6 |
| Olympic golds | 2 | — |
| Assist titles | 9 | — |
| Games played | 1,504 | — |
| Scoring and assist titles in one season | — | 1 |
| NBA championships | — | 1 |
| Points per game in 1973 | — | 34 |
| Dominance w25% | 84 | 88 |
| Peak w20% | 88 | 98 |
| Longevity w20% | 94 | 80 |
| Honours w20% | 82 | 84 |
| Statistics w15% | 96 | 92 |
John Stockton leads with a GOAT score of 88.2 against 88.2 for Nate Archibald — a gap of 0.0 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Archibald scores higher on peak, dominance, honours. Stockton leads on statistics, longevity.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Stockton: 88.2, Archibald: 88.2.
Make your case for Stockton vs Archibald. 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.