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

LAK

Los Angeles Kings

0-1-0

SJS

San Jose Sharks

1-0-0

Has last change

Saturday, October 3

10:00 PM ET · SAP Center at San Jose

The short version

Before the game

Round two in San Jose

The Sharks won the first meeting this season, 5-4 in overtime in San Jose. The Sharks have won two in a row. The Kings are 0-1-1. Los Angeles has had more of the chances over recent games and San Jose has home ice. San Jose can tip it if they keep dangerous shots away.

The Sharks won the first meeting this season, 5-4 in overtime in San Jose. The Sharks have won two in a row. The Kings are 0-1-1. Los Angeles has had more of the chances over recent games and San Jose has home ice. Los Angeles can tip it if they keep the shots coming.

The Kings shoot a lot, and the Sharks give up plenty. The Sharks and the Kings sit at opposite ends for shot quality.

Who to watch

  • Haunts themArtemi Panarin has seven goals in seven games against San Jose since 2023-24, most of them with the Rangers.
  • Leads the wayMacklin Celebrini leads the Sharks with five points.

  1. The Sharks give up shots, and the Kings take them

    San Jose has been giving up shots all season, and the Kings rarely pass one up.

    The call The Kings take at least their usual 59.9 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5.

    Los Angeles 8th for shot volume (59.9 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5) · San Jose 23rd for shot suppression

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

  2. The Sharks hunt better looks than the Kings

    The Sharks are around the middle of the league for shot quality, at the dangerous end; the Kings are the league’s worst, at the hopeful end. Expect that gap to show.

    The call The Sharks’ shots are more dangerous on average than the Kings’.

    Shot quality: San Jose 14th, Los Angeles 32nd

    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 Los Angeles and San Jose play, trait by trait, on the same scales.

Los Angeles KingsSan Jose SharksLeague 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 Los Angeles, 1 for San Jose. 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

    • Los Angeles: 59.9 shot attempts per 608th of 32

      Los Angeles: 56.6 shot attempts per 6015th of 32

    • San Jose: 51.8 shot attempts per 6027th of 32

      San Jose: 52.2 shot attempts per 6019th of 32

  • Shot quality
    HopefulDangerous

    • Los Angeles: a 5.7% chance of scoring on the average shot32nd of 32

      Los Angeles: a 5.3% chance of scoring on the average shot24th of 32

    • San Jose: a 6.3% chance of scoring on the average shot14th of 32

      San Jose: a 3.7% chance of scoring on the average shot31st of 32

  • Second chances
    One-and-doneCrashers

    • Los Angeles: 10.0% of chances come from rebounds28th of 32

      Los Angeles: 2.6% of chances come from rebounds24th of 32

    • San Jose: 10.4% of chances come from rebounds10th of 32

      San Jose: 0.5% of chances come from rebounds29th of 32

  • Off-turnover offense
    PatientOpportunist

    • Los Angeles: 6.4% of chances come right after a turnover32nd of 32

      Los Angeles: 7.5% of chances come right after a turnover14th of 32

    • San Jose: 6.8% of chances come right after a turnover26th of 32

      San Jose: 2.6% of chances come right after a turnover26th of 32

  • Shots from defensemen
    Forward-ledActive D

    • Los Angeles: 30.6% of shot attempts come from defensemen31st of 32

      Los Angeles: 33.3% of shot attempts come from defensemen15th of 32

    • San Jose: 33.8% of shot attempts come from defensemen18th of 32

      San Jose: 39.5% of shot attempts come from defensemen3rd of 32

  • Shots from in close
    From distanceIn close

    • Los Angeles: 30.2% of shots come from within 20 feet17th of 32

      Los Angeles: 36.4% of shots come from within 20 feet9th of 32

    • San Jose: 30.8% of shots come from within 20 feet9th of 32

      San Jose: 14.3% of shots come from within 20 feet31st of 32

Defense

  • Shot suppression
    PorousStingy

    • Los Angeles: 56.4 shot attempts allowed per 6016th of 32

      Los Angeles: 57.7 shot attempts allowed per 6018th of 32

    • San Jose: 58.5 shot attempts allowed per 6023rd of 32

      San Jose: 58.6 shot attempts allowed per 6019th of 32

  • Quality allowed
    ExposedSheltered

    • Los Angeles: a 6.1% chance of scoring on the average shot against8th of 32

      Los Angeles: an 8.7% chance of scoring on the average shot against30th of 32

    • San Jose: a 6.3% chance of scoring on the average shot against18th of 32

      San Jose: a 6.3% chance of scoring on the average shot against18th of 32

  • Breakdowns avoided
    Fire drillComposed

    • Los Angeles: 0.40 defensive breakdowns per 6017th of 32

      Los Angeles: 1.34 defensive breakdowns per 6031st of 32

    • San Jose: 0.42 defensive breakdowns per 6021st of 32

      San Jose: 0.00 defensive breakdowns per 601st of 32

  • Goaltending
    SieveWall

    • Los Angeles: +0.02 goals saved above expected per 6029th of 32

      Los Angeles: −4.58 goals saved above expected per 6031st of 32

    • San Jose: −0.01 goals saved above expected per 6030th of 32

      San Jose: +0.98 goals saved above expected per 609th of 32

Tempo and edge

  • Pace
    SlogTrack meet

    • Los Angeles: 82.1 shots per 60, both teams combined16th of 32

      Los Angeles: 80.4 shots per 60, both teams combined16th of 32

    • San Jose: 79.1 shots per 60, both teams combined28th of 32

      San Jose: 75.5 shots per 60, both teams combined21st of 32

  • Forecheck pressure
    PassiveHounding

    • Los Angeles: forecheck score 100 (100 is league average)15th of 32Los Angeles: 21.6 forecheck plays recorded per 6017th of 32

      Los Angeles: forecheck score 107 (100 is league average)12th of 32Los Angeles: 26.8 forecheck plays recorded per 6012th of 32

    • San Jose: forecheck score 101 (100 is league average)12th of 32San Jose: 21.5 forecheck plays recorded per 6020th of 32

      San Jose: forecheck score 101 (100 is league average)15th of 32San Jose: 24.3 forecheck plays recorded per 6018th of 32

  • Physicality
    FinesseBruising

    • Los Angeles: hit score 89 (100 is league average)24th of 32Los Angeles: 23.0 hits recorded per 6026th of 32

      Los Angeles: hit score 74 (100 is league average)23rd of 32Los Angeles: 24.0 hits recorded per 6024th of 32

    • San Jose: hit score 109 (100 is league average)8th of 32San Jose: 26.6 hits recorded per 6015th of 32

      San Jose: hit score 98 (100 is league average)14th of 32San Jose: 29.4 hits recorded per 6018th of 32

  • Depth
    Top-heavyDeep

    • Los Angeles: 41.1% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six27th of 32

      Los Angeles: 41.8% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six22nd of 32

    • San Jose: 40.3% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six30th of 32

      San Jose: 40.6% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six28th of 32

Special teams

  • Power play
    HarmlessLethal

    • Los Angeles: 7.1 expected goals per 60 on the power play28th of 32

      Los Angeles: 6.8 expected goals per 60 on the power play16th of 32

    • San Jose: 7.4 expected goals per 60 on the power play17th of 32

      San Jose: 17.2 expected goals per 60 on the power play2nd of 32

  • Penalty kill
    LeakyAirtight

    • Los Angeles: 7.3 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded10th of 32

      Los Angeles: 7.9 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded22nd of 32

    • San Jose: 7.9 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded23rd of 32

      San Jose: 13.0 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded30th of 32

  • Power kill
    BunkeredPredatory

    • Los Angeles: 0.9 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded10th of 32

      Los Angeles: 1.3 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded8th of 32

    • San Jose: 0.8 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded18th of 32

      San Jose: 1.8 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded4th of 32

  • Discipline
    RecklessClean

    • Los Angeles: 0.05 more penalties taken than drawn per 6022nd of 32

      Los Angeles: 0.00 more penalties drawn than taken per 6013th of 32

    • San Jose: 0.02 more penalties drawn than taken per 6015th of 32

      San Jose: 0.95 more penalties taken than drawn per 6021st 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

San Jose 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.

Los Angeles Kings

San Jose Sharks

Who San Jose is likely to send against whom

Each strip shows how one San Jose group’s 5-on-5 time at home has been split across opponents’ four forward lines. Tonight those lines are Los Angeles’s, named in each box.

Los Angeles’s lines tonightL1 Kempe · Panarin · ByfieldL2 Zuccarello · Turcotte · LaferriereL3 Haula · Laughton · MooreL4 Armia · Lee · Helenius

San Jose forward lines against Los Angeles forward lines

  • L1Marchment · Smith · CelebriniLAK L139%LAK L225%LAK L333%LAK L44%
  • L2Wennberg · Graf · StenbergLAK L141%LAK L29%LAK L349%LAK L40%
  • L3Toffoli · Chernyshov · MisaLAK L119%LAK L264%LAK L35%LAK L411%
  • L4Goodrow · Sherwood · OstapchukLAK L122%LAK L215%LAK L323%LAK L439%

San Jose defense pairs against Los Angeles forward lines

  • P1Orlov · CagnoniLAK L119%LAK L253%LAK L316%LAK L412%
  • P2Nurse · KesselringLAK L135%LAK L217%LAK L334%LAK L414%
  • P3Trouba · AllanLAK L146%LAK L22%LAK L347%LAK L46%

Based on 1 San Jose home game this season, so treat it as a habit forming, not a certainty. Faded rows have under ten minutes. With no line matching, each group would face an opposing line about as often as that line is on the ice; a number well above that means the coach is sending that group out against it on purpose.

Special teams

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

Show

Los Angeles power play against San Jose penalty kill

  • Los Angeles power play

    7.1 expected goals per 60 · 28th of 32

  • San Jose penalty kill

    7.9 expected goals allowed per 60 · 23rd of 32

Los Angeles power play

PP161% of the time

Creates 7.2 expected goals per 60

  • B. ClarkeQuarterback
  • A. Panarinboth units
  • M. Zuccarello
  • A. KempeTrigger
  • Q. ByfieldDistributor

PP239% of the time

Creates 6.5 expected goals per 60

  • D. DoughtyQuarterback
  • A. Panarinboth units
  • A. LaferriereTrigger
  • E. Haula
  • A. Turcotte

 

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

San Jose penalty kill

Starts the kill

Second wave

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

D. Kuemper48 starts · 1263 shots, this season and last

−7.4 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.968 616 shots
Medium-danger save %
.859 468 shots
High-danger save %
.687 179 shots
Shots faced per 60
25.7
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.37
Quality starts
50%

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 chancesD. KuemperY. Askarov

Y. Askarov43 starts · 1368 shots, this season and last

−15.4 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.962 691 shots
Medium-danger save %
.858 492 shots
High-danger save %
.654 185 shots
Shots faced per 60
30.9
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.32
Quality starts
47%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • D. Kuemper: −7.4 goals saved above expected in 48 starts
    • Y. Askarov: −15.4 goals saved above expected in 43 starts
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • D. Kuemper: 25.7 shots faced per 60
    • Y. Askarov: 30.9 shots faced per 60
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • D. Kuemper: the average shot he faces has a 7.0% chance of going in
    • Y. Askarov: the average shot he faces has a 7.1% chance of going in
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • D. Kuemper: 0.37 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
    • Y. Askarov: 0.32 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • D. Kuemper: a typical wait of 77 seconds between shots
    • Y. Askarov: a typical wait of 65 seconds between shots
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • D. Kuemper: a quality start 50% of the time
    • Y. Askarov: a quality start 47% of the time

D. Kuemper, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

Y. Askarov, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

D. Kuemper1 start · 29 shots, this season

−4.5 goals saved above expected too few starts to rate

Low-danger save %
.923 13 shots
Medium-danger save %
.600 10 shots
High-danger save %
.500 6 shots
Shots faced per 60
29.3
Defensive breakdowns per 60
1.01
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 chancesD. KuemperY. Askarov

Y. Askarov1 start · 26 shots, this season

+1.0 goals saved above expected too few starts to rate

Low-danger save %
.923 13 shots
Medium-danger save %
.900 10 shots
High-danger save %
.667 3 shots
Shots faced per 60
24.7
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0
Quality starts
100%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • D. Kuemper: −4.5 goals saved above expected in 1 start (too few starts to place)
    • Y. Askarov: +1.0 goals saved above expected in 1 start (too few starts to place)
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • D. Kuemper: 29.3 shots faced per 60 (too few starts to place)
    • Y. Askarov: 24.7 shots faced per 60 (too few starts to place)
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • D. Kuemper: the average shot he faces has a 9.9% chance of going in (too few starts to place)
    • Y. Askarov: the average shot he faces has a 8.2% chance of going in (too few starts to place)
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • D. Kuemper: 1.01 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60 (too few starts to place)
    • Y. Askarov: 0 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60 (too few starts to place)
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • D. Kuemper: a typical wait of 72 seconds between shots (too few starts to place)
    • Y. Askarov: a typical wait of 95 seconds between shots (too few starts to place)
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • D. Kuemper: a quality start 0% of the time (too few starts to place)
    • Y. Askarov: a quality start 100% of the time (too few starts to place)

D. Kuemper, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

Y. Askarov, 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
Los AngelesSan JoseLeague average
  • Everyday even-strength play62%53.8%
  • Power play16.6%21.7%
  • Rebound4.8%9.1%
  • Empty net4.4%4.7%
  • Off a turnover3.5%5.1%
  • Goalie pulled4.4%2.4%
  • Shorthanded3.5%1.6%
  • Off a faceoff win0.9%1.6%

229 Los Angeles goals and 253 San Jose goals scored this season and last. Each row has its own scale.

  • Everyday even-strength play25%25%
  • Power play0%25%
  • Rebound0%0%
  • Empty net0%0%
  • Off a turnover0%25%
  • Goalie pulled25%0%
  • Shorthanded50%25%
  • Off a faceoff win0%0%

4 Los Angeles goals and 4 San Jose 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: Los Angeles Kings · San Jose Sharks