Real data. Everything on this page is computed from actual games.
Spare Line Change
Numbers from
Hits and takeaways
at

EDM

Edmonton Oilers

0-0-1

VAN

Vancouver Canucks

1-0-0

Has last change

Thursday, October 1

10:00 PM ET · Rogers Arena

The short version

Before the game

McDavid’s favourite opponent

The teams have split two meetings this season. The Oilers come in at 1-0-1, the Canucks at 1-1-0. Edmonton has controlled the play far better over recent games and Vancouver has home ice. Vancouver’s best hope is a power play that gets going, plus a big night in goal.

The teams have split two meetings this season. The Oilers come in at 1-0-1, the Canucks at 1-1-0. Edmonton has controlled the play far better over recent games and Vancouver has home ice. Anything short of a win would be a surprise, though Vancouver can make a game of it if their power play gets going.

Don’t read much into Lankinen’s record against the Oilers. The Oilers’ power play has a soft target in the Canucks’ kill.

Who to watch

  • Owns themConnor McDavid has a point in eight straight games against Vancouver, and 21 points in his last eleven against them.
  • Haunts themBrock Boeser has ten goals in twelve games against Edmonton since 2023-24.
  • Old teamVasily Podkolzin faces his old team, Vancouver.

  1. Lankinen isn’t cursed against the Oilers

    Lankinen has been shaky against the Oilers since 2023-24, well below his usual. It looks like a pattern, but across three seasons a goalie’s record against one team told us nothing about the next meeting. Expect the usual Lankinen.

    The call If Lankinen starts, his save percentage lands closer to his usual .894 than to his .855 against the Oilers.

    6 starts against Edmonton: .855 save percentage · .894 against everyone else

    Goalie starts since 2023-24 · 6 against Edmonton, 3,059 shots against everyone else

  2. Special teams lean toward the Oilers

    The Oilers’ power play is one of the league’s best, and the Canucks’ kill is near the bottom of the league. The Canucks need to stay out of the box.

    The call The Oilers’ power play creates at least their usual 9.6 expected goals per 60.

    Edmonton 1st for power play (9.6 expected goals per 60) · Vancouver 27th for penalty kill

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

  3. The Oilers should get some good looks

    The Canucks have struggled to prevent dangerous shots, and the Oilers don’t waste many.

    The call The Oilers’ average shot has at least their usual 6.5% chance of going in.

    Edmonton 8th for shot quality (a 6.5% chance of scoring on the average shot) · Vancouver 31st for preventing dangerous shots

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

  4. The Oilers’ defense joins the attack; the Canucks’ stays home

    On shots from defensemen, Edmonton is one of the league’s best and Vancouver is one of the league’s worst. That’s about as far apart as two teams get.

    The call The Oilers’ defensemen take a bigger share of the team’s shot attempts than the Canucks’.

    Shots from defensemen: Edmonton 4th, Vancouver 29th

    Style fingerprint · this season blended with last · 1 and 1 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.

Style fingerprints

How Edmonton and Vancouver play, trait by trait, on the same scales.

Edmonton OilersVancouver CanucksLeague averageLikely range

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 1 games played so far; traits that take longer to settle lean more on last season.

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

The biggest differences

Show all 18 traitsHide the full set

Offense

  • Shot volume
    SelectiveRelentless

    • Edmonton: 58.1 shot attempts per 6011th of 32

      Edmonton: 64.3 shot attempts per 604th of 32

    • Vancouver: 49.8 shot attempts per 6030th of 32

      Vancouver: 44.9 shot attempts per 6012th of 32

  • Shot quality
    HopefulDangerous

    • Edmonton: a 6.5% chance of scoring on the average shot8th of 32

      Edmonton: a 6.0% chance of scoring on the average shot7th of 32

    • Vancouver: a 6.0% chance of scoring on the average shot29th of 32

      Vancouver: a 5.1% chance of scoring on the average shot12th of 32

  • Second chances
    One-and-doneCrashers

    • Edmonton: 9.8% of chances come from rebounds31st of 32

      Edmonton: 5.4% of chances come from rebounds6th of 32

    • Vancouver: 10.5% of chances come from rebounds2nd of 32

      Vancouver: 0.0% of chances come from rebounds12th of 32

  • Off-turnover offense
    PatientOpportunist

    • Edmonton: 6.7% of chances come right after a turnover30th of 32

      Edmonton: 0.6% of chances come right after a turnover12th of 32

    • Vancouver: 6.5% of chances come right after a turnover31st of 32

      Vancouver: 9.9% of chances come right after a turnover6th of 32

  • Shots from defensemen
    Forward-ledActive D

    • Edmonton: 37.2% of shot attempts come from defensemen4th of 32

      Edmonton: 34.5% of shot attempts come from defensemen4th of 32

    • Vancouver: 31.5% of shot attempts come from defensemen29th of 32

      Vancouver: 28.6% of shot attempts come from defensemen9th of 32

  • Shots from in close
    From distanceIn close

    • Edmonton: 31.1% of shots come from within 20 feet8th of 32

      Edmonton: 29.3% of shots come from within 20 feet10th of 32

    • Vancouver: 29.4% of shots come from within 20 feet24th of 32

      Vancouver: 21.7% of shots come from within 20 feet12th of 32

Defense

  • Shot suppression
    PorousStingy

    • Edmonton: 54.5 shot attempts allowed per 609th of 32

      Edmonton: 44.9 shot attempts allowed per 604th of 32

    • Vancouver: 61.4 shot attempts allowed per 6030th of 32

      Vancouver: 64.3 shot attempts allowed per 6013th of 32

  • Quality allowed
    ExposedSheltered

    • Edmonton: a 6.5% chance of scoring on the average shot against28th of 32

      Edmonton: a 5.1% chance of scoring on the average shot against4th of 32

    • Vancouver: a 6.7% chance of scoring on the average shot against31st of 32

      Vancouver: a 6.0% chance of scoring on the average shot against8th of 32

  • Breakdowns avoided
    Fire drillComposed

    • Edmonton: 0.45 defensive breakdowns per 6029th of 32

      Edmonton: 0.00 defensive breakdowns per 601st of 32

    • Vancouver: 0.37 defensive breakdowns per 604th of 32

      Vancouver: 0.00 defensive breakdowns per 601st of 32

  • Goaltending
    SieveWall

    • Edmonton: +0.04 goals saved above expected per 6024th of 32

      Edmonton: −3.60 goals saved above expected per 6014th of 32

    • Vancouver: −0.02 goals saved above expected per 6030th of 32

      Vancouver: −1.29 goals saved above expected per 6012th of 32

Tempo and edge

  • Pace
    SlogTrack meet

    • Edmonton: 81.0 shots per 60, both teams combined20th of 32

      Edmonton: 74.6 shots per 60, both teams combined10th of 32

    • Vancouver: 82.1 shots per 60, both teams combined18th of 32

      Vancouver: 74.6 shots per 60, both teams combined10th of 32

  • Forecheck pressure
    PassiveHounding

    • Edmonton: forecheck score 103 (100 is league average)10th of 32Edmonton: 23.7 forecheck plays recorded per 606th of 32

      Edmonton: forecheck score 135 (100 is league average)2nd of 32Edmonton: 39.1 forecheck plays recorded per 602nd of 32

    • Vancouver: forecheck score 91 (100 is league average)27th of 32Vancouver: 20.0 forecheck plays recorded per 6024th of 32

      Vancouver: forecheck score 53 (100 is league average)15th of 32Vancouver: 15.4 forecheck plays recorded per 6015th of 32

  • Physicality
    FinesseBruising

    • Edmonton: hit score 98 (100 is league average)17th of 32Edmonton: 25.8 hits recorded per 6012th of 32

      Edmonton: hit score 117 (100 is league average)3rd of 32Edmonton: 43.3 hits recorded per 603rd of 32

    • Vancouver: hit score 87 (100 is league average)29th of 32Vancouver: 22.4 hits recorded per 6026th of 32

      Vancouver: hit score 30 (100 is league average)15th of 32Vancouver: 10.8 hits recorded per 6015th of 32

  • Depth
    Top-heavyDeep

    • Edmonton: 40.3% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six29th of 32

      Edmonton: 42.7% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six11th of 32

    • Vancouver: 43.0% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six8th of 32

      Vancouver: 44.1% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six7th of 32

Special teams

  • Power play
    HarmlessLethal

    • Edmonton: 9.6 expected goals per 60 on the power play1st of 32

      Edmonton: 8.6 expected goals per 60 on the power play2nd of 32

    • Vancouver: 7.5 expected goals per 60 on the power play15th of 32

      Vancouver: 3.9 expected goals per 60 on the power play11th of 32

  • Penalty kill
    LeakyAirtight

    • Edmonton: 8.1 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded28th of 32

      Edmonton: 3.9 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded5th of 32

    • Vancouver: 8.1 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded27th of 32

      Vancouver: 8.6 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded14th of 32

  • Power kill
    BunkeredPredatory

    • Edmonton: 1.0 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded7th of 32

      Edmonton: 0.0 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded11th of 32

    • Vancouver: 0.9 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded10th of 32

      Vancouver: 1.0 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded7th of 32

  • Discipline
    RecklessClean

    • Edmonton: 0.01 more penalties drawn than taken per 6014th of 32

      Edmonton: 1.94 more penalties drawn than taken per 601st of 32

    • Vancouver: 0.01 more penalties drawn than taken per 6012th of 32

      Vancouver: 1.94 more penalties taken than drawn per 6015th of 32

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.

Lines and deployment

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

How good, against the same line or pair on other teamsHow much, low to high (not good or bad)

Lines and pairs are numbered by 5-on-5 ice time together over each team’s last 10 games (1 and 1 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.

Edmonton Oilers

Vancouver Canucks

Who Vancouver is likely to send against whom

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

Special teams

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

Show

Edmonton power play against Vancouver penalty kill

  • Edmonton power play

    9.6 expected goals per 60 · 1st of 32

  • Vancouver penalty kill

    8.1 expected goals allowed per 60 · 27th of 32

Edmonton power play

PP175% of the time

Creates 6.9 expected goals per 60

  • E. BouchardQuarterback
  • L. DraisaitlDistributor
  • C. McDavidTrigger
  • Z. HymanNet-front
  • V. PodkolzinNet-front

PP225% of the time

Creates 6.3 expected goals per 60

  • J. WalmanQuarterback
  • K. Kapanen
  • I. Howard
  • R. Shea
  • T. Frederic

 

Where Edmonton’s last 140 power-play shots came from. Bigger dots are more dangerous.

Vancouver penalty kill

Starts the kill

Second wave

Spot duty

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.

Goaltending

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

Showagainst

T. Jarry31 starts · 855 shots, this season and last

−6.0 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.961 408 shots
Medium-danger save %
.830 329 shots
High-danger save %
.729 118 shots
Shots faced per 60
28
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.49
Quality starts
45%

Helping, or hung out to dry?

System and goalie both goodGoalie bailing them outGoalie giving back what the system earnsTrouble everywhereTeam allows fewer chances ← → more chancesT. JarryK. Lankinen

K. Lankinen46 starts · 1322 shots, this season and last

−17.0 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.964 635 shots
Medium-danger save %
.858 487 shots
High-danger save %
.635 200 shots
Shots faced per 60
29.9
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.41
Quality starts
43%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • T. Jarry: −6.0 goals saved above expected in 31 starts
    • K. Lankinen: −17.0 goals saved above expected in 46 starts
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • T. Jarry: 28 shots faced per 60
    • K. Lankinen: 29.9 shots faced per 60
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • T. Jarry: the average shot he faces has a 7.3% chance of going in
    • K. Lankinen: the average shot he faces has a 7.5% chance of going in
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • T. Jarry: 0.49 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
    • K. Lankinen: 0.41 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • T. Jarry: a typical wait of 69 seconds between shots
    • K. Lankinen: a typical wait of 66 seconds between shots
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • T. Jarry: a quality start 45% of the time
    • K. Lankinen: a quality start 43% of the time

T. Jarry, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

K. Lankinen, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

T. Jarry1 start · 23 shots, this season

−3.7 goals saved above expected too few starts to rate

Low-danger save %
.917 12 shots
Medium-danger save %
.667 6 shots
High-danger save %
.400 5 shots
Shots faced per 60
22.4
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.97
Quality starts
0%

Helping, or hung out to dry?

System and goalie both goodGoalie bailing them outGoalie giving back what the system earnsTrouble everywhereTeam allows fewer chances ← → more chancesT. JarryK. Lankinen

K. Lankinen1 start · 37 shots, this season

−1.3 goals saved above expected too few starts to rate

Low-danger save %
.882 17 shots
Medium-danger save %
1.000 9 shots
High-danger save %
.727 11 shots
Shots faced per 60
36
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0
Quality starts
0%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • T. Jarry: −3.7 goals saved above expected in 1 start (too few starts to place)
    • K. Lankinen: −1.3 goals saved above expected in 1 start (too few starts to place)
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • T. Jarry: 22.4 shots faced per 60 (too few starts to place)
    • K. Lankinen: 36 shots faced per 60 (too few starts to place)
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • T. Jarry: the average shot he faces has a 7.7% chance of going in (too few starts to place)
    • K. Lankinen: the average shot he faces has a 7.7% chance of going in (too few starts to place)
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • T. Jarry: 0.97 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60 (too few starts to place)
    • K. Lankinen: 0 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60 (too few starts to place)
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • T. Jarry: a typical wait of 114 seconds between shots (too few starts to place)
    • K. Lankinen: a typical wait of 62 seconds between shots (too few starts to place)
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • T. Jarry: a quality start 0% of the time (too few starts to place)
    • K. Lankinen: a quality start 0% of the time (too few starts to place)

T. Jarry, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

K. Lankinen, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

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.

Where the goals come from

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

Show goals
EdmontonVancouverLeague average
  • Everyday even-strength play54.1%51.4%
  • Power play23.5%24.1%
  • Rebound5.9%7.4%
  • Empty net5.5%3.7%
  • Off a turnover3.3%4.2%
  • Goalie pulled2.6%3.2%
  • Shorthanded1.6%3.7%
  • Off a faceoff win3.6%2.3%

307 Edmonton goals and 216 Vancouver goals scored this season and last. Each row has its own scale.

  • Everyday even-strength play40%50%
  • Power play0%16.7%
  • Rebound0%0%
  • Empty net0%0%
  • Off a turnover0%16.7%
  • Goalie pulled20%0%
  • Shorthanded0%16.7%
  • Off a faceoff win40%0%

5 Edmonton goals and 6 Vancouver goals scored this season. Each row has its own scale.

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.

Data notes

Team pages: Edmonton Oilers · Vancouver Canucks