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

LAK4

Los Angeles Kings

COL8

Colorado Avalanche

Wednesday, September 30

Final · Ball Arena

The short version

What happened

The Avalanche roll past the Kings

Brock Nelson opened the scoring early in the first. Nathan MacKinnon and Artturi Lehkonen added two each. Six different Avalanche scored.

The chances were closer than the score. By our Swing measure, Nicolas Roy had the best night of anyone.

What it means

  • The previewOne of the preview’s two calls held.
  • RecordThe Avalanche are now 1-0-0.

Our pre-game read

The win chance our model worked out before the game, kept off the site until now.

We gave Los Angeles only a 36% chance, and it went the way we feared.

Two even teams on neutral ice50%
Home ice−4 points46%
Recent chances−11 points35%
Who's been playing+1 points36%
Back-to-back0 points36%
Our chance for Los Angeles the morning of the game36%
Tonight's lineup−1 points
At puck drop, once the lineups were known35%

Recent chances: how much better each team’s chances have been than their opponents’ lately, with the latest games counting most. Who’s been playing: whether the players who dressed last time were stronger or weaker than the ones behind those recent games, so a star who is out or back counts straight away. Back-to-back: playing for the second night in a row. Tonight’s lineup: any change in who dressed since the last game. Only earlier games went into it, and the preview hinted at it in words without showing the number.

We gave Colorado a 64% chance, and Colorado delivered.

Two even teams on neutral ice50%
Home ice+4 points54%
Recent chances+11 points65%
Who's been playing−1 points64%
Back-to-back0 points64%
Our chance for Colorado the morning of the game64%
Tonight's lineup+1 points
At puck drop, once the lineups were known65%

Recent chances: how much better each team’s chances have been than their opponents’ lately, with the latest games counting most. Who’s been playing: whether the players who dressed last time were stronger or weaker than the ones behind those recent games, so a star who is out or back counts straight away. Back-to-back: playing for the second night in a row. Tonight’s lineup: any change in who dressed since the last game. Only earlier games went into it, and the preview hinted at it in words without showing the number.

What the preview said, and what happened

Of the 2 calls the preview made, 1 held up, 0 partly did, and 1 didn’t happen.

  1. Before the game

    Something has to give

    The Kings are one of the league’s best for shot volume, and the Avalanche are one of the league’s best at keeping shots away. We think the Kings still get theirs.

    The call The Kings take more than the league-average 56.3 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5 against the Avalanche.

    Los Angeles 4th for shot volume (60.8 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5) · Colorado 5th for keeping shots away

    Held up

    On 5-on-5 shot attempts, Los Angeles had 56.6 per 60. The league average is 56.3 per 60, and they came in at 60.8 per 60.

    60.8 per 60
    Coming in
    56.6 per 60
    In this game
    56.3 per 60
    League average

  2. Before the game

    The Avalanche’s defense joins the attack; the Kings’ stays home

    The Avalanche are one of the league’s best for shots from defensemen, at the active D end; the Kings are the league’s worst, at the forward-led end. Expect that gap to show.

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

    Shots from defensemen: Colorado 2nd, Los Angeles 32nd

    Didn’t happen

    On share of 5-on-5 shot attempts taken by defensemen, Colorado had 25% and Los Angeles 33%. Coming in, Colorado was at 40% and Los Angeles at 30%.

    COL 40% · LAK 30%
    Coming in
    COL 25% · LAK 33%
    In this game

Each call is checked by a rule set before the game. Held up: the team reached their usual level. Partly: they fell short of their usual level but still beat the league average. When a call says one team will come out ahead, held up means they won by at least half their usual gap, and partly means they won by less. One game is a small sample, so a miss doesn’t mean the preview was wrong about the team.

Read the full preview as it stood at puck drop.

This season so far: 87 held up, 11 partly, 62 didn’t happen, out of 160 graded calls. See the track record.

Run it back

We replayed this game’s chances 100 times. Here is how often each team came out ahead.

Colorado earned this one

Played out 100 times with these chances, Colorado wins 62.

38%
Los Angeles: 30 wins, plus half of the 17 ties
62%
Colorado: 53 wins, plus half of the 17 ties

Los Angeles had 44 chances worth 2.7 expected goals. Colorado had 33 chances worth 3.4 expected goals.

How it works: every shot in regulation that was on target or missed the net goes in as often as our expected-goals model says it should, and the game is played out 100 times that way. A rebound scramble counts as one chance, and empty-net shots are left out. A replay tied after regulation counts as half a win each, since overtime and shootouts are close to coin flips.

It doesn’t know about goalies, finishing skill or passes before a shot. It also favours the team that was chasing, because a team with a lead tends to sit back. Over the last three seasons, teams it gave 80% or more won about two games in three.

What the preview didn’t see coming

The parts of this game furthest from how these teams usually play, biggest first.

Broke the pattern: a team did the opposite of their usual habit. Further than usual: a usual habit, taken much further. Closer than usual: a usual strength or weakness that mostly disappeared. Out of character: a usually average team, far from average. Each is measured against the teams’ numbers before the game.

The numbers

How the game went, beyond the score.

Los AngelesColorado
Goals48
Shots on goal3129
Expected goals2.73.5
Shot attempts at 5-on-54540
Power plays0 of 44 of 4

Swing

How far each player swung tonight’s result, for his team or against it.

The biggest swings: N. Roy +1.4, A. Lehkonen +1.2 and P. Kelly +1.0.

Showhighlighting

The number is roughly in goals: what he added to his team tonight, or cost it. Tap a player to see where it came from. The label beside it is his report card from “Did they do their job?” below; L1 to L4 and P1 to P3 are tonight’s lines and pairs.

How Swing is worked outHide how Swing is worked out

Scoresheet: each goal is shared 40% to the scorer, 35% to the first assist and 25% to the second, plus a quarter of the expected goals of his own shots. A penalty drawn adds 0.16 and one taken costs 0.16, what a power play is worth on average; each faceoff won or lost moves it by 0.006.

5-on-5 counts most: expected goals for minus against with him on, half compared with league average (adjusted for score and venue) and half compared with his own team when he was on the bench, plus a smaller amount for actual goals. A player on a losing team can score well if his line held its own. Special teams: power-play and penalty-kill time compared with a league-average unit.

Company kept (counted inside 5-on-5): from every player’s 5-on-5 impact over the two seasons before, a player out with strong linemates against weak opponents gives a little back, and the reverse earns a little. Goalies: goals saved above expected. Empty-net shots and shootouts are left out. One game is a small sample: this says who swung this result, not who is better.

Did they do their job?

What each player is relied on for or better than most at, and whether he delivered.

Show
  • D. DoughtyOff night
    Defense
    22:41
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    −2
    xGF–xGA
    0.2–1.4
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    2
    • ✕Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play3.9typical 6.1
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill7.3typical 6.7
  • A. PanarinDid his job
    Left wing
    20:16
    G
    1
    A
    0
    +/−
    −2
    xGF–xGA
    0.5–0.7
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play8.1typical 7.4
    • ≈Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-52.3typical 2.3
  • C. CeciOff night
    Defense
    19:24
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    +3
    xGF–xGA
    0.7–0.8
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    1
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill9.2typical 6.3
  • A. KempeOff night
    Right wing
    19:23
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    −2
    xGF–xGA
    0.5–0.8
    Shots
    3
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play8.5typical 6.5
    • ✕Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-52typical 4
  • M. AndersonDid his job
    Defense
    19:21
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.8–0.5
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    2
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill9.2typical 6.9
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-51.9typical 2.1
  • Q. ByfieldDid his job
    Right wing
    18:59
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    −2
    xGF–xGA
    0.6–0.6
    Shots
    3
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    2
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play7.5typical 6.4
    • ✓Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-52.5typical 2.4
    • ✓Faceoffs Relied onfaceoffs won14 of 16typical 46%
Show 12 more Los Angeles playersHide the other Los Angeles players
  • B. ClarkeDid his job
    Defense
    18:57
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.7–0.2
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    2
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play8.8typical 6.5
    • ✓Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots2typical 2
    • ✓Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-53.0typical 2.3
  • M. ZuccarelloDid his job
    Right wing
    17:59
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    +2
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.2
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play8.4typical 7.5
  • B. DumoulinMixed night

    A goal from a player who scores in about 1 game in 29, so it counts for more.

    Defense
    16:30
    G
    1
    A
    0
    +/−
    −1
    xGF–xGA
    0.4–1.7
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    2
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill7.7typical 5.6
  • A. TurcotteDid his job
    Center
    15:35
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.2–0.3
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots1typical 1
    • ✓Faceoffs Better than mostfaceoffs won10 of 12typical 53%
    • ✕Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-51.1typical 2.3
  • J. EdmundsonOff night
    Defense
    15:34
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.6–0.2
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill11.5typical 6.8
    • ✕Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-51typical 3
  • A. LaferriereBig night

    2 assists. A strong game, even though his usual jobs were quieter.

    Right wing
    15:31
    G
    0
    A
    2
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.3
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    5
    Blocks
    1
    • ✕Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play5.8typical 6.5
    • ≈Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-52typical 3
    • ✓Hitting Better than mosthits5typical 2
  • E. HaulaOff night
    Left wing
    15:26
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    −1
    xGF–xGA
    0.2–1.4
    Shots
    3
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill9.6typical 6.1
    • ✕Faceoffs Relied onfaceoffs won4 of 11typical 49%
  • S. LaughtonRough night

    No points, and 73% of the 5-on-5 chances went the other way with him on.

    Center
    15:07
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.5–1.4
    Shots
    3
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    1
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill7.4typical 7.0
    • ✓Faceoffs Better than mostfaceoffs won8 of 14typical 57%
    • ✕Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-57.0typical 2.3
  • T. MooreBig night

    A shorthanded goal.

    Left wing
    14:56
    G
    1
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.5–1.4
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    1
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill7.7typical 5.8
    • ✓Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-53typical 3
  • J. ArmiaMixed night

    A shorthanded goal. A good scoresheet, but his usual jobs went quiet.

    Right wing
    12:55
    G
    1
    A
    0
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.5–0.2
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    1
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill7.6typical 6.1
  • A. LeeDid his job
    Left wing
    7:56
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.5–0.2
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Hitting Better than mosthits1typical 1
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-51.3typical 2.0
  • S. HeleniusDid his job
    Center
    6:59
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.2
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    3
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Hitting Better than mosthits3typical 2
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-51.5typical 2.1
How the cards are gradedHide how the cards are graded

✓ a typical night for him in the ice time he got (the level he reaches in about half his games). ≈ beat an average player at his position, a typical power play or kill, or his own team with him off the ice. ✕ neither. Power-play and penalty-kill results count half, since five players share them.

Huge night: a hat trick or four or more points. Big night: two or more points, or a goal from a player who scores in fewer than one game in five on top of doing his jobs. Rough night: no points while the other team had 70% or more of the 5-on-5 chances with him on (xGF–xGA). Plus-minus never sets the level. A shorthanded goal counts as two points. Points never fully cover for jobs that went badly: with his jobs off, a huge night reads big and a big night reads mixed.

Judged only from games before this one; 5-on-5 rates adjusted for score and venue. One game is a small sample: even a strong player misses a typical night about half the time. Both teams: 35 ✓, 6 ≈, 36 ✕.

Somewhere new

Things they aren’t known for, far beyond their usual pace.

A night this big would happen less than one game in fifty at his usual pace, and is at least twice what an average player at his position would manage.

In net

Each goalie’s night: the goals he stopped beyond what the shots were worth, and the dangerous and routine saves.

  • D. KuemperRough night

    21 saves on 29 shots, −4.5 goals saved above expected.

    Goalie
    59:25
    Shots
    29
    Saves
    21
    Sv%
    .724
    xGA
    3.5
    GSAx
    −4.5
    Dangerous
    3/6
    • ✕Saving more than expected goals saved above expected-4.5typical +0.1
    • ✕Dangerous shots saves on shots with a 15%+ chance3 of 6typically saves 4 of 6
    • ✕Routine shots saves on shots under a 15% chance18 of 23typically saves 21 of 23
  • M. BlackwoodOff night
    Goalie
    60:00
    Shots
    31
    Saves
    27
    Sv%
    .871
    xGA
    2.7
    GSAx
    −1.3
    Dangerous
    2/2
    • ✕Saving more than expected goals saved above expected-1.3typical +0.2
    • –Dangerous shots Too few shots to judge
    • ✕Routine shots saves on shots under a 15% chance25 of 29typically saves 27 of 29

Every goalie has the same three jobs, judged against his own earlier starts (✓) and an average goalie (≈). Huge night: a shutout on 25 or more shots, or 3+ goals saved above expected. Big night: any other shutout, or 1.5+. Rough night: 2+ goals worse than expected, or pulled early after three or more.

Empty-net shots are left out. Expected-goal models can’t see passes before a shot, so a goalie beaten by cross-ice passes looks worse here than he really was.

Team pages: Los Angeles Kings · Colorado Avalanche