Who is better, Niedermayer or Sawchuk?
Scott Niedermayer leads with a GOAT score of 89.5 against 89.4 for Terry Sawchuk — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Shareable comparison — send this exact matchup to anyone.
Quick answer
GOAT Rank currently ranks Scott Niedermayer above Terry Sawchuk: 89.5 vs 89.4. Scott Niedermayer leads on Honours, Peak. Terry Sawchuk leads on Statistics, Dominance, Longevity.
How the GOAT Score is calculated →Niedermayer wins: Peak, Honours
Sawchuk wins: Dominance, Longevity, Statistics
Shareable URL · /compare/scott-niedermayer-vs-terry-sawchuk
Showing full careers. Pick a window to recalculate the selected period.
Niedermayer 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🇨🇦 Niedermayer | 0 | 0 | 50 | 104 | 289 | 589 |
| 🇨🇦 Sawchuk | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 23 | 68 |
Careers are aligned from debut; the first 5 season periods are measured against the same career window.
| Metric | NiedermayerRetired | SawchukRetired |
|---|---|---|
| Stanley Cups | 4 | 4 |
| Norris Trophies | 1 | — |
| Conn Smythe Trophies | 1 | — |
| Olympic gold medals | 2 | — |
| Career points | 740 | — |
| Vezina Trophies | — | 4 |
| Career shutouts | — | 103 |
| Career wins | — | 445 |
| Games played | — | 971 |
| Dominance w25% | 86 | 88 |
| Peak w20% | 92 | 90 |
| Longevity w20% | 88 | 90 |
| Honours w20% | 94 | 88 |
| Statistics w15% | 88 | 92 |
Scott Niedermayer leads with a GOAT score of 89.5 against 89.4 for Terry Sawchuk — a gap of 0.1 points on GOAT Rank's weighted model.
Sawchuk scores higher on dominance, statistics, longevity. Niedermayer leads on peak, honours.
Both are scored on peak, dominance, honours, statistics, longevity within their sport. Niedermayer: 89.5, Sawchuk: 89.4.
Make your case for Niedermayer vs Sawchuk. 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.