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

SEA

Seattle Kraken

3-2-0

TBL

Tampa Bay Lightning

3-1-0

Has last change

Thursday, October 15

7:00 PM ET · Benchmark International Arena

The short version

Before the game

Strength against strength

The Lightning have won three straight. The Kraken are 3-2-0. Tampa Bay has controlled the play far better over recent games and has home ice. Seattle’s only real way in is pouncing on loose pucks, and they would need a near-perfect night.

The Lightning have won three straight. The Kraken are 3-2-0. Tampa Bay has controlled the play far better over recent games and has home ice. Seattle could still pull it off if they pounce on loose pucks, but they might need a miracle.

It’s strength against strength: the Lightning for chance quality, the Kraken at preventing dangerous shots. At home, Jon Cooper likes to pick matchups, so watch who goes out against the Kraken’s first line.

Who to watch

  • Owns themBrandon Hagel has a point in six straight games against Seattle, and 13 points in his last six against them.
  • Hot streakNikita Kucherov has a point in every game this season.

  1. Strength against strength

    The Lightning are near the top of the league for chance quality, and the Kraken are near the top of the league at preventing dangerous shots. We’ll side with the Kraken’s defense.

    The call The Kraken keep the Lightning’s chances less dangerous than the league average (a 6.3% chance of scoring on the average shot).

    Tampa Bay 8th for chance quality (a 6.6% chance of scoring on the average shot) · Seattle 6th for preventing dangerous shots

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

  2. The Lightning will send McDonagh and Cernak at Eberle

    At home, the Lightning keep sending McDonagh and Cernak out against opponents’ first lines, far more often than chance would. That’s Jon Cooper picking a defense pair for the other team’s top line. Tonight the Kraken’s first line is Eberle, Stephenson and McMann.

    The call The Lightning’s P2 (McDonagh and Cernak) spends at least 51% of its 5-on-5 time against the Kraken’s first line.

    At home: 51% of this group’s 5-on-5 time against first lines, about 32% with no line matching

    Who plays against whom · Tampa Bay home games this season · 3 games, 41 minutes for this group at 5-on-5

  3. The Lightning are going to test the Kraken’s goalie early and often

    Few teams shoot like the Lightning, and the Kraken are the league’s worst at keeping shots away. It could be a long night in the Kraken’s end.

    The call The Lightning take at least their usual 64.9 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5.

    Tampa Bay 4th for shot volume (64.9 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5) · Seattle 32nd for shot suppression

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

Seattle KrakenTampa Bay LightningLeague 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 Seattle, 4 for Tampa Bay. 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

    • Seattle: 52.3 shot attempts per 6025th of 32

      Seattle: 53.1 shot attempts per 6023rd of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 64.9 shot attempts per 604th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 70.1 shot attempts per 603rd of 32

  • Shot quality
    HopefulDangerous

    • Seattle: a 6.4% chance of scoring on the average shot16th of 32

      Seattle: a 6.9% chance of scoring on the average shot11th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: a 6.6% chance of scoring on the average shot8th of 32

      Tampa Bay: a 6.6% chance of scoring on the average shot17th of 32

  • Second chances
    One-and-doneCrashers

    • Seattle: 10.3% of chances come from rebounds11th of 32

      Seattle: 9.7% of chances come from rebounds16th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 10.4% of chances come from rebounds9th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 6.9% of chances come from rebounds22nd of 32

  • Off-turnover offense
    PatientOpportunist

    • Seattle: 7.4% of chances come right after a turnover16th of 32

      Seattle: 7.7% of chances come right after a turnover17th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 6.7% of chances come right after a turnover29th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 4.1% of chances come right after a turnover27th of 32

  • Shots from defensemen
    Forward-ledActive D

    • Seattle: 34.1% of shot attempts come from defensemen19th of 32

      Seattle: 31.6% of shot attempts come from defensemen24th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 35.8% of shot attempts come from defensemen9th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 36.8% of shot attempts come from defensemen5th of 32

  • Shots from in close
    From distanceIn close

    • Seattle: 29.7% of shots come from within 20 feet22nd of 32

      Seattle: 33.5% of shots come from within 20 feet12th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 31.5% of shots come from within 20 feet6th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 33.8% of shots come from within 20 feet10th of 32

Defense

  • Shot suppression
    PorousStingy

    • Seattle: 64.7 shot attempts allowed per 6032nd of 32

      Seattle: 69.5 shot attempts allowed per 6031st of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 51.5 shot attempts allowed per 605th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 50.6 shot attempts allowed per 609th of 32

  • Quality allowed
    ExposedSheltered

    • Seattle: a 6.0% chance of scoring on the average shot against6th of 32

      Seattle: a 6.3% chance of scoring on the average shot against17th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: a 6.2% chance of scoring on the average shot against11th of 32

      Tampa Bay: a 6.0% chance of scoring on the average shot against9th of 32

  • Breakdowns avoided
    Fire drillComposed

    • Seattle: 0.44 defensive breakdowns per 6029th of 32

      Seattle: 0.73 defensive breakdowns per 6025th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 0.41 defensive breakdowns per 6019th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 0.00 defensive breakdowns per 601st of 32

  • Goaltending
    SieveWall

    • Seattle: +0.12 goals saved above expected per 6011th of 32

      Seattle: +0.64 goals saved above expected per 609th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: +0.19 goals saved above expected per 605th of 32

      Tampa Bay: +0.45 goals saved above expected per 6013th of 32

Tempo and edge

  • Pace
    SlogTrack meet

    • Seattle: 83.5 shots per 60, both teams combined9th of 32

      Seattle: 87.7 shots per 60, both teams combined5th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 81.6 shots per 60, both teams combined17th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 84.1 shots per 60, both teams combined8th of 32

  • Forecheck pressure
    PassiveHounding

    • Seattle: forecheck score 81 (100 is league average)30th of 32Seattle: 18.2 forecheck plays recorded per 6031st of 32

      Seattle: forecheck score 74 (100 is league average)30th of 32Seattle: 18.2 forecheck plays recorded per 6030th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: forecheck score 94 (100 is league average)17th of 32Tampa Bay: 21.4 forecheck plays recorded per 6019th of 32

      Tampa Bay: forecheck score 92 (100 is league average)19th of 32Tampa Bay: 22.4 forecheck plays recorded per 6018th of 32

  • Physicality
    FinesseBruising

    • Seattle: hit score 89 (100 is league average)24th of 32Seattle: 23.5 hits recorded per 6026th of 32

      Seattle: hit score 86 (100 is league average)23rd of 32Seattle: 25.1 hits recorded per 6024th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: hit score 89 (100 is league average)23rd of 32Tampa Bay: 25.0 hits recorded per 6023rd of 32

      Tampa Bay: hit score 84 (100 is league average)25th of 32Tampa Bay: 26.0 hits recorded per 6022nd of 32

  • Depth
    Top-heavyDeep

    • Seattle: 43.4% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six8th of 32

      Seattle: 44.2% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six7th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 40.2% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six30th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 39.8% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six30th of 32

Special teams

  • Power play
    HarmlessLethal

    • Seattle: 7.2 expected goals per 60 on the power play23rd of 32

      Seattle: 7.1 expected goals per 60 on the power play16th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 7.3 expected goals per 60 on the power play19th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 6.0 expected goals per 60 on the power play24th of 32

  • Penalty kill
    LeakyAirtight

    • Seattle: 8.3 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded28th of 32

      Seattle: 7.3 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded18th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 7.2 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded8th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 6.2 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded9th of 32

  • Power kill
    BunkeredPredatory

    • Seattle: 0.5 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded32nd of 32

      Seattle: 0.3 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded23rd of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 0.9 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded17th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 1.3 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded8th of 32

  • Discipline
    RecklessClean

    • Seattle: 0.07 more penalties drawn than taken per 6011th of 32

      Seattle: 0.40 more penalties drawn than taken per 609th of 32

    • Tampa Bay: 0.12 more penalties drawn than taken per 606th of 32

      Tampa Bay: 2.00 more penalties drawn than taken per 601st 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

Tampa Bay 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.

Seattle Kraken

Tampa Bay Lightning

Worth knowing

  • Tampa Bay E. Lilleberg has been a scratch for the last 3 games. He is a top-four defenseman. M. Crozier has taken his spot beside C. D'Astous.
  • Tampa Bay J. Carlson is no longer killing penalties: 0% of the team’s shorthanded time in 4 games, down from 47% last season.

Who Tampa Bay is likely to send against whom

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

Seattle’s lines tonightL1 Eberle · Stephenson · McMannL2 McCann · Beniers · SamoskevichL3 Kakko · Wright · CattonL4 Gaudreau · Winterton · Meyers

Tampa Bay forward lines against Seattle forward lines

  • L1Guentzel · Cirelli · HagelSEA L118%SEA L220%SEA L318%SEA L444%
  • L2Kucherov · Point · GoncalvesSEA L15%SEA L232%SEA L333%SEA L430%
  • L3Girgensons · Holmberg · MikheyevSEA L167%SEA L24%SEA L34%SEA L425%
  • L4SEA L1–SEA L2–SEA L3–SEA L4–

Tampa Bay defense pairs against Seattle forward lines

  • P1Carlson · MoserSEA L110%SEA L233%SEA L331%SEA L426%
  • P2McDonagh · CernakSEA L151%SEA L211%SEA L312%SEA L426%
  • P3D'Astous · CrozierSEA L123%SEA L216%SEA L323%SEA L438%

Based on 3 Tampa Bay 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

Seattle power play against Tampa Bay penalty kill

  • Seattle power play

    7.2 expected goals per 60 · 23rd of 32

  • Tampa Bay penalty kill

    7.2 expected goals allowed per 60 · 8th of 32

Seattle power play

PP160% of the time

Creates 6.4 expected goals per 60

  • B. MontourQuarterback
  • B. Catton
  • K. KakkoNet-front
  • M. BeniersTrigger
  • S. Wright

PP240% of the time

Creates 8.2 expected goals per 60

  • V. DunnQuarterback
  • J. McCannDistributor
  • J. EberleTrigger
  • B. McMann
  • C. Stephenson

 

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

Tampa Bay 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. Daccord47 starts · 1388 shots, this season and last

+0.5 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.970 764 shots
Medium-danger save %
.861 446 shots
High-danger save %
.674 178 shots
Shots faced per 60
29.2
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.44
Quality starts
55%

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. DaccordP. GrubauerA. VasilevskiyD. Hildeby

A. Vasilevskiy60 starts · 1545 shots, this season and last

+25.8 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.968 775 shots
Medium-danger save %
.886 534 shots
High-danger save %
.780 236 shots
Shots faced per 60
25.7
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.47
Quality starts
73%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • J. Daccord: +0.5 goals saved above expected in 47 starts
    • A. Vasilevskiy: +25.8 goals saved above expected in 60 starts
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • J. Daccord: 29.2 shots faced per 60
    • A. Vasilevskiy: 25.7 shots faced per 60
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • J. Daccord: the average shot he faces has a 6.6% chance of going in
    • A. Vasilevskiy: the average shot he faces has a 7.0% chance of going in
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • J. Daccord: 0.44 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
    • A. Vasilevskiy: 0.47 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • J. Daccord: a typical wait of 69 seconds between shots
    • A. Vasilevskiy: a typical wait of 76 seconds between shots
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • J. Daccord: a quality start 55% of the time
    • A. Vasilevskiy: a quality start 73% of the time

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

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

A. Vasilevskiy, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

J. Daccord3 starts · 79 shots, this season

+0.2 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.979 47 shots
Medium-danger save %
.913 23 shots
High-danger save %
.556 9 shots
Shots faced per 60
29.7
Defensive breakdowns per 60
1.13
Quality starts
67%

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. DaccordP. GrubauerA. VasilevskiyD. Hildeby

A. Vasilevskiy3 starts · 60 shots, this season

+0.7 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.933 30 shots
Medium-danger save %
.900 20 shots
High-danger save %
.800 10 shots
Shots faced per 60
20.5
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0
Quality starts
67%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • J. Daccord: +0.2 goals saved above expected in 3 starts
    • A. Vasilevskiy: +0.7 goals saved above expected in 3 starts
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • J. Daccord: 29.7 shots faced per 60
    • A. Vasilevskiy: 20.5 shots faced per 60
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • J. Daccord: the average shot he faces has a 5.5% chance of going in
    • A. Vasilevskiy: the average shot he faces has a 6.8% chance of going in
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • J. Daccord: 1.13 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
    • A. Vasilevskiy: 0 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • J. Daccord: a typical wait of 93 seconds between shots
    • A. Vasilevskiy: a typical wait of 96 seconds between shots
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • J. Daccord: a quality start 67% of the time
    • A. Vasilevskiy: a quality start 67% of the time

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

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

A. Vasilevskiy, 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
SeattleTampa BayLeague average
  • Everyday even-strength play57.1%57.1%
  • Power play18.8%17.9%
  • Rebound9%7.1%
  • Empty net6.9%8%
  • Off a turnover5.7%4.8%
  • Goalie pulled2%1.9%
  • Shorthanded0.4%1.6%
  • Off a faceoff win0%1.6%

245 Seattle goals and 312 Tampa Bay goals scored this season and last. Each row has its own scale.

  • Everyday even-strength play71.4%63.6%
  • Power play19%9.1%
  • Rebound4.8%0%
  • Empty net0%18.2%
  • Off a turnover4.8%0%
  • Goalie pulled0%0%
  • Shorthanded0%0%
  • Off a faceoff win0%9.1%

21 Seattle goals and 11 Tampa Bay 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: Seattle Kraken · Tampa Bay Lightning