Who is better, Gadjovich or MacDermid?
Kurtis MacDermid leads with a GOAT score of 39.8 against 39.2 for Jonah Gadjovich — a gap of 0.6 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
AthletesTeams
Gadjovich vs MacDermid
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
GOAT verdictgoatrank.world
MacDermidWinner
39.8MacDermid wins: Peak, Longevity, Statistics
Gadjovich
39.2Gadjovich wins: Dominance, Honours
Candidates
Locked to Ice HockeyShareable URL · /compare/ros-jonah-gadjovich-vs-ros-kurtis-macdermid
Time range
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Category radar
Verdict
Weighted GOAT score
🏳️ Kurtis MacDermid
39.8
MacDermid leads in 3 of 5 weighted categories.
1. Kurtis MacDermid
2. Jonah Gadjovich
Category breakdown
Season form · Points per season
Career timeline · Points 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 · Points per season1. 🏳️ Kurtis MacDermid5 seasons played · career day 1,82522 points
Setting the pace at this stage
2. 🏳️ Jonah Gadjovich5 seasons played · career day 1,82618 points
-18.2% vs MacDermid at the same stage
| Ghost race · career day | 30 | 100 | 365 | 1000 | 1825 | 3650 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🏳️ Gadjovich | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 14 | 21 |
| 🏳️ MacDermid | 0 | 0 | 4 | 5 | 22 | 32 |
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
MacDermid39.8
Gadjovich39.2
FAQ
Where does Gadjovich beat MacDermid?
Gadjovich scores higher on dominance, honours. MacDermid leads on peak, statistics, longevity.
How is the Gadjovich vs MacDermid score calculated?
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Gadjovich: 39.2, MacDermid: 39.8.
What do you think?
0 commentsMake your case for Gadjovich vs MacDermid. 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.