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

FLA

Florida Panthers

2-1-2

BUF

Buffalo Sabres

2-2-0

Has last change

Monday, October 12

1:00 PM ET · KeyBank Center

The short version

Before the game

The Panthers’ power play outclasses the Sabres’

The Panthers come in at 2-1-2, the Sabres at 2-2-0. Buffalo has controlled the play far better over recent games and has home ice. Florida can make it interesting if their penalty kill holds up.

The Panthers come in at 2-1-2, the Sabres at 2-2-0. Buffalo has controlled the play far better over recent games and has home ice. Florida’s best way through is a penalty kill that holds up.

The Panthers and the Sabres sit at opposite ends for power play.

Who to watch

  • Hot streakMatthew Tkachuk has a point in four straight games.
  • Still outJason Zucker hasn’t played yet this season.
  • Slow startSam Reinhart is still looking for his first goal of the season.

  1. The Panthers’ power play outclasses the Sabres’

    On the power play, Florida is near the top of the league and Buffalo is one of the league’s worst. That’s about as far apart as two teams get.

    The call The Panthers’ power play creates more per 60 than the Sabres’.

    Power play: Florida 8th, Buffalo 28th

    Style fingerprint · this season blended with last · 5 and 4 games this season

  2. The Panthers hit; the Sabres mostly don’t

    On physicality, Florida is the league’s best and Buffalo is around the middle of the league. That’s about as far apart as two teams get.

    The call The Panthers hit more than the Sabres in the close stretches of the game.

    Physicality: Florida 1st, Buffalo 22nd

    Style fingerprint · this season blended with last · 5 and 4 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 Florida and Buffalo play, trait by trait, on the same scales.

Florida PanthersBuffalo SabresLeague 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 5 and 4 games played so far; traits that take longer to settle lean more on last season.

This season only: 5 games for Florida, 4 for Buffalo. 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

    • Florida: 57.0 shot attempts per 6016th of 32

      Florida: 56.4 shot attempts per 6017th of 32

    • Buffalo: 57.0 shot attempts per 6015th of 32

      Buffalo: 57.1 shot attempts per 6011th of 32

  • Shot quality
    HopefulDangerous

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

      Florida: a 5.7% chance of scoring on the average shot25th of 32

    • Buffalo: a 6.5% chance of scoring on the average shot12th of 32

      Buffalo: a 7.0% chance of scoring on the average shot9th of 32

  • Second chances
    One-and-doneCrashers

    • Florida: 10.2% of chances come from rebounds19th of 32

      Florida: 7.0% of chances come from rebounds22nd of 32

    • Buffalo: 9.9% of chances come from rebounds30th of 32

      Buffalo: 7.8% of chances come from rebounds21st of 32

  • Off-turnover offense
    PatientOpportunist

    • Florida: 7.2% of chances come right after a turnover22nd of 32

      Florida: 4.1% of chances come right after a turnover28th of 32

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

      Buffalo: 4.0% of chances come right after a turnover29th of 32

  • Shots from defensemen
    Forward-ledActive D

    • Florida: 32.7% of shot attempts come from defensemen24th of 32

      Florida: 34.6% of shot attempts come from defensemen14th of 32

    • Buffalo: 32.5% of shot attempts come from defensemen25th of 32

      Buffalo: 29.1% of shot attempts come from defensemen30th of 32

  • Shots from in close
    From distanceIn close

    • Florida: 29.4% of shots come from within 20 feet26th of 32

      Florida: 24.6% of shots come from within 20 feet31st of 32

    • Buffalo: 31.0% of shots come from within 20 feet12th of 32

      Buffalo: 34.0% of shots come from within 20 feet8th of 32

Defense

  • Shot suppression
    PorousStingy

    • Florida: 51.1 shot attempts allowed per 602nd of 32

      Florida: 45.1 shot attempts allowed per 603rd of 32

    • Buffalo: 52.3 shot attempts allowed per 606th of 32

      Buffalo: 41.3 shot attempts allowed per 602nd of 32

  • Quality allowed
    ExposedSheltered

    • Florida: a 5.9% chance of scoring on the average shot against1st of 32

      Florida: a 4.5% chance of scoring on the average shot against1st of 32

    • Buffalo: a 6.2% chance of scoring on the average shot against8th of 32

      Buffalo: a 6.1% chance of scoring on the average shot against11th of 32

  • Breakdowns avoided
    Fire drillComposed

    • Florida: 0.36 defensive breakdowns per 601st of 32

      Florida: 0.00 defensive breakdowns per 601st of 32

    • Buffalo: 0.42 defensive breakdowns per 6021st of 32

      Buffalo: 0.00 defensive breakdowns per 601st of 32

  • Goaltending
    SieveWall

    • Florida: +0.04 goals saved above expected per 6028th of 32

      Florida: +0.41 goals saved above expected per 6015th of 32

    • Buffalo: +0.09 goals saved above expected per 6021st of 32

      Buffalo: −1.33 goals saved above expected per 6030th of 32

Tempo and edge

  • Pace
    SlogTrack meet

    • Florida: 79.6 shots per 60, both teams combined24th of 32

      Florida: 70.9 shots per 60, both teams combined31st of 32

    • Buffalo: 81.5 shots per 60, both teams combined21st of 32

      Buffalo: 70.9 shots per 60, both teams combined30th of 32

  • Forecheck pressure
    PassiveHounding

    • Florida: forecheck score 152 (100 is league average)1st of 32Florida: 34.1 forecheck plays recorded per 601st of 32

      Florida: forecheck score 175 (100 is league average)1st of 32Florida: 41.5 forecheck plays recorded per 601st of 32

    • Buffalo: forecheck score 93 (100 is league average)19th of 32Buffalo: 20.8 forecheck plays recorded per 6022nd of 32

      Buffalo: forecheck score 89 (100 is league average)20th of 32Buffalo: 20.8 forecheck plays recorded per 6024th of 32

  • Physicality
    FinesseBruising

    • Florida: hit score 154 (100 is league average)1st of 32Florida: 39.0 hits recorded per 601st of 32

      Florida: hit score 177 (100 is league average)1st of 32Florida: 48.4 hits recorded per 601st of 32

    • Buffalo: hit score 90 (100 is league average)22nd of 32Buffalo: 24.5 hits recorded per 6024th of 32

      Buffalo: hit score 88 (100 is league average)22nd of 32Buffalo: 25.7 hits recorded per 6023rd of 32

  • Depth
    Top-heavyDeep

    • Florida: 41.2% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six23rd of 32

      Florida: 40.9% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six25th of 32

    • Buffalo: 41.3% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six22nd of 32

      Buffalo: 40.5% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six27th of 32

Special teams

  • Power play
    HarmlessLethal

    • Florida: 7.9 expected goals per 60 on the power play8th of 32

      Florida: 7.4 expected goals per 60 on the power play13th of 32

    • Buffalo: 6.9 expected goals per 60 on the power play28th of 32

      Buffalo: 4.3 expected goals per 60 on the power play30th of 32

  • Penalty kill
    LeakyAirtight

    • Florida: 6.9 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded5th of 32

      Florida: 9.6 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded28th of 32

    • Buffalo: 7.4 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded15th of 32

      Buffalo: 6.7 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded14th of 32

  • Power kill
    BunkeredPredatory

    • Florida: 1.0 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded9th of 32

      Florida: 0.4 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded22nd of 32

    • Buffalo: 0.9 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded16th of 32

      Buffalo: 1.4 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded7th of 32

  • Discipline
    RecklessClean

    • Florida: 0.06 more penalties drawn than taken per 6012th of 32

      Florida: 1.15 more penalties drawn than taken per 604th of 32

    • Buffalo: 0.10 more penalties drawn than taken per 609th of 32

      Buffalo: 0.25 more penalties drawn than taken per 6013th 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

Buffalo 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 (5 and 4 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.

Florida Panthers

Buffalo Sabres

Worth knowing

  • Florida A. Ekblad returned in their last game after missing 2 games.
  • Buffalo J. Zucker has not played this season.
  • Buffalo J. Norris has started killing penalties: on the ice for 41% of the team’s shorthanded time in 4 games, up from 1% last season.
  • Buffalo Z. Metsa has started killing penalties: on the ice for 46% of the team’s shorthanded time in 4 games, up from 7% last season.

Who Buffalo is likely to send against whom

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

Florida’s lines tonightL1 Verhaeghe · Bennett · TkachukL2 Luostarinen · Lundell · VilmanisL3 Eller · Reinhart · TkachukL4 Hathaway · Lafferty · Imama

Buffalo forward lines against Florida forward lines

  • L1Quinn · Ostlund · BensonFLA L127%FLA L235%FLA L312%FLA L425%
  • L2Thompson · Krebs · KulichFLA L127%FLA L219%FLA L335%FLA L419%
  • L3Norris · McLeod · HeleniusFLA L147%FLA L222%FLA L312%FLA L419%
  • L4Malenstyn · Danforth · DoanFLA L117%FLA L219%FLA L339%FLA L425%

Buffalo defense pairs against Florida forward lines

  • P1Samuelsson · DahlinFLA L133%FLA L225%FLA L317%FLA L425%
  • P2Power · ZellwegerFLA L138%FLA L229%FLA L315%FLA L417%
  • P3Crevier · MetsaFLA L112%FLA L240%FLA L334%FLA L414%

Based on 3 Buffalo home games 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

Florida power play against Buffalo penalty kill

  • Florida power play

    7.9 expected goals per 60 · 8th of 32

  • Buffalo penalty kill

    7.4 expected goals allowed per 60 · 15th of 32

Florida power play

PP167% of the time

Creates 7.6 expected goals per 60

  • S. JonesQuarterback
  • M. TkachukDistributor
  • S. ReinhartTrigger
  • B. Tkachuk
  • S. Bennettboth units

PP233% of the time

Creates 7.0 expected goals per 60

  • A. EkbladQuarterback
  • S. Bennettboth unitsTrigger
  • A. LundellDistributor
  • C. Verhaeghe
  • E. LuostarinenNet-front

 

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

Buffalo 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

J. Markstrom46 starts · 1196 shots, this season and last

−8.1 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.971 615 shots
Medium-danger save %
.848 427 shots
High-danger save %
.649 154 shots
Shots faced per 60
25.7
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.24
Quality starts
43%

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 chancesJ. MarkstromA. SchmidU. LuukkonenC. Ellis

U. Luukkonen37 starts · 986 shots, this season and last

+5.7 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.976 499 shots
Medium-danger save %
.868 348 shots
High-danger save %
.719 139 shots
Shots faced per 60
26.8
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.38
Quality starts
59%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • J. Markstrom: −8.1 goals saved above expected in 46 starts
    • U. Luukkonen: +5.7 goals saved above expected in 37 starts
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • J. Markstrom: 25.7 shots faced per 60
    • U. Luukkonen: 26.8 shots faced per 60
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • J. Markstrom: the average shot he faces has a 7.1% chance of going in
    • U. Luukkonen: the average shot he faces has a 6.8% chance of going in
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • J. Markstrom: 0.24 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
    • U. Luukkonen: 0.38 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • J. Markstrom: a typical wait of 74 seconds between shots
    • U. Luukkonen: a typical wait of 75 seconds between shots
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • J. Markstrom: a quality start 43% of the time
    • U. Luukkonen: a quality start 59% of the time

J. Markstrom, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

U. Luukkonen, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

J. Markstrom4 starts · 83 shots, this season

+2.6 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.973 37 shots
Medium-danger save %
.879 33 shots
High-danger save %
.846 13 shots
Shots faced per 60
20.2
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0
Quality starts
75%

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 chancesJ. MarkstromA. SchmidU. LuukkonenC. Ellis

U. Luukkonen3 starts · 55 shots, this season

−5.4 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.952 21 shots
Medium-danger save %
.714 21 shots
High-danger save %
.615 13 shots
Shots faced per 60
18.4
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0
Quality starts
0%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • J. Markstrom: +2.6 goals saved above expected in 4 starts
    • U. Luukkonen: −5.4 goals saved above expected in 3 starts
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • J. Markstrom: 20.2 shots faced per 60
    • U. Luukkonen: 18.4 shots faced per 60
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • J. Markstrom: the average shot he faces has a 7.2% chance of going in
    • U. Luukkonen: the average shot he faces has a 7.3% chance of going in
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • J. Markstrom: 0 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
    • U. Luukkonen: 0 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • J. Markstrom: a typical wait of 71 seconds between shots
    • U. Luukkonen: a typical wait of 118 seconds between shots
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • J. Markstrom: a quality start 75% of the time
    • U. Luukkonen: a quality start 0% of the time

J. Markstrom, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

U. Luukkonen, 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
FloridaBuffaloLeague average
  • Everyday even-strength play54.1%59.9%
  • Power play20.4%17.1%
  • Rebound7.8%3.9%
  • Empty net5.5%9.3%
  • Off a turnover4.3%4.5%
  • Goalie pulled3.9%1.5%
  • Shorthanded2.4%2.7%
  • Off a faceoff win1.6%1.2%

255 Florida goals and 334 Buffalo goals scored this season and last. Each row has its own scale.

  • Everyday even-strength play55.6%80%
  • Power play11.1%0%
  • Rebound22.2%0%
  • Empty net0%0%
  • Off a turnover0%10%
  • Goalie pulled11.1%0%
  • Shorthanded0%0%
  • Off a faceoff win0%10%

9 Florida goals and 10 Buffalo 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: Florida Panthers · Buffalo Sabres