1. The Mammoth are going to test the Blackhawks’ goalie early and often

   The Mammoth shoot a lot, and the Blackhawks are one of the league’s worst at keeping shots down. Look for a big shot total.

   The call The Mammoth take at least their usual 60.3 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5.

   Utah 5th for shot volume (60.3 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5) · Chicago 29th for shot suppression

   Style fingerprint · this season blended with last · 0 and 1 games this season

2. In close against from distance

   The Mammoth are around the middle of the league for shots from in close, at the close-range end; the Blackhawks are the league’s worst, at the long-range end. Expect that gap to show.

   The call The Mammoth take a bigger share of their shots from within 20 feet than the Blackhawks.

   Shots from in close: Utah 11th, Chicago 32nd

   Style fingerprint · this season blended with last · 1 and 0 games this season

These calls are written by fixed rules from the numbers below, and saved as they stand at puck drop. After the game, each one will be checked against what happened.

How Chicago and Utah play, trait by trait, on the same scales.

Each scale runs from the league’s lowest team on the left to its highest on the right. Numbers blend last season with the 1 and 0 games played so far; traits that take longer to settle lean more on last season.

This season only: 1 games for Chicago, 0 for Utah. Expect these to swing a lot, which is why the likely ranges are so wide.

The biggest differences

• Shot volume
  SelectiveRelentless

  • Chicago: 49.2 shot attempts per 6031st of 32

    Chicago: 46.4 shot attempts per 6011th of 32

  • Utah: 60.3 shot attempts per 605th of 32

    Utah: nothing to show yet this season

• Shot suppression
  PorousStingy

  • Chicago: 60.6 shot attempts allowed per 6029th of 32

    Chicago: 67.2 shot attempts allowed per 6014th of 32

  • Utah: 53.2 shot attempts allowed per 607th of 32

    Utah: nothing to show yet this season

• Shots from in close
  From distanceIn close

  • Chicago: 27.1% of shots come from within 20 feet32nd of 32

    Chicago: 33.3% of shots come from within 20 feet5th of 32

  • Utah: 30.8% of shots come from within 20 feet11th of 32

    Utah: nothing to show yet this season

• Depth
  Top-heavyDeep

  • Chicago: 40.8% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six25th of 32

    Chicago: 42.9% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six10th of 32

  • Utah: 42.8% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six10th of 32

    Utah: nothing to show yet this season

• Off-turnover offense
  PatientOpportunist

  • Chicago: 7.7% of chances come right after a turnover4th of 32

    Chicago: 0.3% of chances come right after a turnover14th of 32

  • Utah: 7.3% of chances come right after a turnover18th of 32

    Utah: nothing to show yet this season

• Forecheck pressure
  PassiveHounding

  • Chicago: forecheck score 86 (100 is league average)32nd of 32Chicago: 18.4 forecheck plays recorded per 6030th of 32

    Chicago: forecheck score 101 (100 is league average)8th of 32Chicago: 26.0 forecheck plays recorded per 608th of 32

  • Utah: forecheck score 96 (100 is league average)18th of 32Utah: 20.3 forecheck plays recorded per 6022nd of 32

    Utah: nothing to show yet this season

Forecheck pressure and physicality are arena-adjusted scores; switch “Hits and takeaways” to Raw in the settings to see the numbers as recorded. How the arena adjustment works.

Utah is at home, so their coach changes last and chooses who plays against whom.

Lines and pairs are numbered by 5-on-5 ice time together over each team’s last 10 games (1 and 0 so far), with each older game counting half as much as the one after it, so the latest combinations come first. With so few games, each group’s results are pulled toward the average for its line number.

Who Utah is likely to send against whom

Utah has not played at home yet this season, so there is no matching habit to show.

Each power play set against the penalty killers it will face.

Units and penalty-kill roles use each team’s last 10 games; power-play role tags use this season and last, counting only games with the player’s current team; the map shows the last 140 power-play shots. Point at a power-play name to see his shots on the map.

Is each goalie stopping more than he should, and what is his team asking him to face?

S. Knight56 starts · 1619 shots, this season and last

+14.9 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %

.980 804 shots

Medium-danger save %

.857 582 shots

High-danger save %

.742 233 shots

Shots faced per 60

29

Defensive breakdowns per 60

0.39

Quality starts

50%

Helping, or hung out to dry?

Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison

• Stopping more than expected
  SieveWall
  • S. Knight: +14.9 goals saved above expected in 56 starts
• How busy he is
  QuietUnder siege
  • S. Knight: 29 shots faced per 60
• How dangerous the shots are
  ShelteredExposed
  • S. Knight: the average shot he faces has a 7.0% chance of going in
• Breakdowns in front of him
  RareConstant
  • S. Knight: 0.39 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
• Waiting between shots
  Steady workLong waits
  • S. Knight: a typical wait of 70 seconds between shots
• Night-to-night steadiness
  StreakySteady
  • S. Knight: a quality start 50% of the time

S. Knight, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

S. Knight1 start · 36 shots, this season

−0.6 goals saved above expected too few starts to rate

Low-danger save %

1.000 16 shots

Medium-danger save %

.882 17 shots

High-danger save %

.333 3 shots

Shots faced per 60

36.1

Defensive breakdowns per 60

0

Quality starts

0%

Helping, or hung out to dry?

Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison

• Stopping more than expected
  SieveWall
  • S. Knight: −0.6 goals saved above expected in 1 start (too few starts to place)
• How busy he is
  QuietUnder siege
  • S. Knight: 36.1 shots faced per 60 (too few starts to place)
• How dangerous the shots are
  ShelteredExposed
  • S. Knight: the average shot he faces has a 6.9% chance of going in (too few starts to place)
• Breakdowns in front of him
  RareConstant
  • S. Knight: 0 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60 (too few starts to place)
• Waiting between shots
  Steady workLong waits
  • S. Knight: a typical wait of 67 seconds between shots (too few starts to place)
• Night-to-night steadiness
  StreakySteady
  • S. Knight: a quality start 0% of the time (too few starts to place)

S. Knight, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

The menus list every goalie on each team, busiest this season first; the site does not yet know who will start. Expected-goal models can’t see passes before a shot, so a goalie whose team gives up many cross-ice passes looks worse here than he really is.

How each team’s goals are scored, or allowed, against the league average.

These mixes are mostly luck: over three seasons, teams’ goals came from much the same places, and most of the differences here didn’t last. Each team page shows how much luck alone can move each row.

• Sources. Game data from the NHL; expected goals from this site’s own model, cross-checked against MoneyPuck.com.
• Early season. Chicago has played 1 games and Utah 0, so most numbers blend this season with last. The season switch at the top shows this season alone.
• Percentiles and ranks compare a team or player with the rest of the league: 90 means better than 90% of the league at that thing.
• Blind spots. Public game data doesn’t record passes before a shot, where defenders are standing, or rushes up the ice, so the site shows none of those.
• Hits, giveaways and takeaways depend on each arena’s scorer; anything built on them is arena-adjusted. How it works.
• Key players for each side are on the team pages.

Team pages: Chicago Blackhawks · Utah Mammoth