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

SEA6

Seattle Kraken

CGY1

Calgary Flames

Thursday, October 1

Final · Scotiabank Saddledome

The short version

What happened

The Kraken roll past the Flames

The Kraken had this one put away early. Jordan Eberle opened the scoring midway through the first. Six different Kraken scored.

The score was fair. Replay this game’s chances a hundred times and the Kraken win about four in five.

What it means

  • The previewOne of the preview’s two calls held.
  • RecordThe Kraken 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 had this close to even (47% for Seattle), and Seattle came through.

Two even teams on neutral ice50%
Home ice−4 points46%
Recent chances0 points47%
Who's been playing+1 points47%
Back-to-back0 points47%
Our chance for Seattle the morning of the game47%
Tonight's lineup+5 points
At puck drop, once the lineups were known52%

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 had this close to even (53% for Calgary), and it went Seattle’s way.

Two even teams on neutral ice50%
Home ice+4 points54%
Recent chances0 points53%
Who's been playing−1 points53%
Back-to-back0 points53%
Our chance for Calgary the morning of the game53%
Tonight's lineup−5 points
At puck drop, once the lineups were known48%

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

    The Kraken can’t afford to cough it up

    The Kraken give up more dangerous chances after losing the puck than most, and the Flames pounce.

    The call The Flames get at least their usual 7.5% of their 5-on-5 chances right after winning the puck.

    Calgary 9th for chances off turnovers (7.5% of their chances come right after winning the puck) · Seattle 25th for avoiding breakdowns

    Held up

    15.5% of Calgary’s 5-on-5 chances came right after winning the puck, against their usual 7.5%.

    7.5%
    Coming in
    15.5%
    In this game
    7.2%
    League average

  2. Before the game

    The Kraken’s defense joins the attack; the Flames’ stays home

    The Kraken are near the top of the league for shots from defensemen, at the active D end; the Flames are near the bottom of the league, at the forward-led end. Expect that gap to show.

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

    Shots from defensemen: Seattle 7th, Calgary 26th

    Didn’t happen

    On share of 5-on-5 shot attempts taken by defensemen, Seattle had 27% and Calgary 35%. Coming in, Seattle was at 36% and Calgary at 32%.

    SEA 36% · CGY 32%
    Coming in
    SEA 27% · CGY 35%
    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: 94 held up, 12 partly, 64 didn’t happen, out of 170 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.

Seattle earned this one

Played out 100 times with these chances, Seattle wins 75.

75%
Seattle: 68 wins, plus half of the 14 ties
25%
Calgary: 18 wins, plus half of the 14 ties

Seattle had 44 chances worth 4.1 expected goals. Calgary had 40 chances worth 2.5 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.

SeattleCalgary
Goals61
Shots on goal3225
Expected goals4.12.5
Shot attempts at 5-on-54557
Power plays1 of 50 of 1

Swing

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

The biggest swings: J. Eberle +1.6, R. Evans +1.2 and J. McCann +1.1.

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
  • B. MontourDid his job
    Defense
    24:11
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    +2
    xGF–xGA
    1.4–0.4
    Shots
    4
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    2
    • ✕Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play3.9typical 5.8
    • ✓Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-54typical 4
    • ✓Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.12typical 0.06
  • V. DunnBig night

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

    Defense
    20:37
    G
    1
    A
    2
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    1.0–0.6
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play10.6typical 7.1
    • ✓Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-53.8typical 2.1
    • ✕Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-52typical 3
  • A. LarssonDid his job
    Defense
    18:48
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    1.1–0.8
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    5
    Blocks
    2
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill0.0typical 7.5
    • ✓Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots2typical 2
  • J. McCannMixed night

    3 assists. A good scoresheet, but his usual jobs went quiet.

    Left wing
    17:54
    G
    0
    A
    3
    +/−
    +2
    xGF–xGA
    0.4–0.3
    Shots
    4
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play10.7typical 7.1
    • ✕Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-52.3typical 2.3
  • J. EberleDid his job
    Right wing
    17:52
    G
    1
    A
    0
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    1.4–0.4
    Shots
    4
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play11.6typical 7.1
    • ✓Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-56.6typical 2.1
  • C. StephensonMixed night

    A goal from a player who scores in about 1 game in 5, 73% of the 5-on-5 chances with him on, so it counts for more.

    Center
    16:59
    G
    1
    A
    0
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    1.3–0.5
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play11.2typical 7.2
    • ✕Faceoffs Better than mostfaceoffs won10 of 20typical 52%
    • –Kills penalties Relied onToo little time to judge
Show 9 more Seattle playersHide the other Seattle players
  • M. BeniersMixed night

    A goal, 1 assist. A good scoresheet, but his usual jobs went quiet.

    Center
    16:58
    G
    1
    A
    1
    +/−
    +2
    xGF–xGA
    0.4–0.5
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    3
    • ✕Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play2.6typical 7.0
    • ✕Faceoffs Relied onfaceoffs won7 of 17typical 48%
  • K. KakkoMixed night

    A goal, 1 assist. A good scoresheet, but his usual jobs went quiet.

    Right wing
    16:49
    G
    1
    A
    1
    +/−
    +3
    xGF–xGA
    0.5–0.5
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    1
    • ✕Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-52.1typical 2.1
  • R. WintertonOff night
    Center
    16:17
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.9–0.8
    Shots
    3
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    1
    • ✕Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-53.0typical 2.3
  • B. McMannDid his job
    Center
    16:05
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    1.5–0.6
    Shots
    3
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-54typical 3
  • S. WrightDid his job
    Center
    15:55
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.7–0.6
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    1
    • ✕Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play2.0typical 5.7
    • ✓Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots1typical 1
  • R. LindgrenDid his job
    Defense
    14:28
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    +2
    xGF–xGA
    0.7–0.9
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    2
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill0.0typical 6.9
  • J. MahuraDid his job
    Defense
    14:28
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.7–1.2
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    4
    • ✓Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots4typical 1
  • F. GaudreauBig night

    A goal from a player who scores in about 1 game in 8, on top of doing his usual jobs.

    Center
    13:58
    G
    1
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.6–1.1
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    2
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill2.7typical 7.2
    • ✓Faceoffs Relied onfaceoffs won6 of 11typical 44%
  • J. MelansonDid his job
    Right wing
    9:31
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.5–0.6
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    3
    Blocks
    1
    • ≈Hitting Better than mosthits3typical 5
    • ✓Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.25typical 0.08
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: 32 ✓, 3 ≈, 20 ✕.

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.

  • J. DaccordDid his job
    Goalie
    59:30
    Shots
    25
    Saves
    24
    Sv%
    .960
    xGA
    2.5
    GSAx
    +1.5
    Dangerous
    4/4
    • ✓Saving more than expected goals saved above expected+1.5typical +0.5
    • ✓Dangerous shots saves on shots with a 15%+ chance4 of 4typically saves 3 of 4
    • ✓Routine shots saves on shots under a 15% chance20 of 21typically saves 20 of 21
  • D. WolfOff night
    Goalie
    59:50
    Shots
    32
    Saves
    26
    Sv%
    .812
    xGA
    4.1
    GSAx
    −1.9
    Dangerous
    3/6
    • ✕Saving more than expected goals saved above expected-1.9typical +0.2
    • ✕Dangerous shots saves on shots with a 15%+ chance3 of 6typically saves 4 of 6
    • ✕Routine shots saves on shots under a 15% chance23 of 26typically saves 24 of 26

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: Seattle Kraken · Calgary Flames