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

WPG3

Winnipeg Jets

DET2

Detroit Red Wings

Sunday, October 4

Final · Little Caesars Arena

The short version

What happened

Skinner steals one in Detroit

Cole Perfetti opened the scoring midway through the first. Kyle Connor added two power-play goals.

The Red Wings had the better of the play. Replay the chances a hundred times and the Red Wings win about four in five. Stuart Skinner made the difference in net, stopping 34 of 36.

What it means

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

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 (53% for Winnipeg), and Winnipeg came through.

Two even teams on neutral ice50%
Home ice−4 points46%
Recent chances+4 points50%
Who's been playing+2 points53%
Back-to-back0 points53%
Our chance for Winnipeg the morning of the game53%
Tonight's lineup+2 points
At puck drop, once the lineups were known54%

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 (47% for Detroit), and it went Winnipeg’s way.

Two even teams on neutral ice50%
Home ice+4 points54%
Recent chances−4 points50%
Who's been playing−2 points47%
Back-to-back0 points47%
Our chance for Detroit the morning of the game47%
Tonight's lineup−2 points
At puck drop, once the lineups were known46%

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 Jets’ defense joins the attack; the Red Wings’ stays home

    The Jets are one of the league’s best for shots from defensemen, at the active D end; the Red Wings are around the middle of the league, at the forward-led end. Expect that gap to show.

    The call The Jets’ defensemen take a bigger share of the team’s shot attempts than the Red Wings’.

    Shots from defensemen: Winnipeg 5th, Detroit 22nd

    Held up

    On share of 5-on-5 shot attempts taken by defensemen, Winnipeg had 33% and Detroit 30%. Coming in, Winnipeg was at 37% and Detroit at 34%.

    WPG 37% · DET 34%
    Coming in
    WPG 33% · DET 30%
    In this game

  2. Before the game

    Sheltered against exposed

    On preventing dangerous shots, Winnipeg is around the middle of the league and Detroit is one of the league’s worst. That’s about as far apart as two teams get.

    The call The Jets prevent dangerous shots better than the Red Wings do.

    Preventing dangerous shots: Winnipeg 16th, Detroit 28th

    Didn’t happen

    On how dangerous the average shot allowed was, Winnipeg had 6.9% a shot and Detroit 5.7% a shot. Coming in, Winnipeg was at 6.3% a shot and Detroit at 6.5% a shot.

    WPG 6.3% a shot · DET 6.5% a shot
    Coming in
    WPG 6.9% a shot · DET 5.7% a shot
    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.

Detroit usually wins this one

Played out 100 times with these chances, Detroit wins 76. The goals went the other way.

24%
Winnipeg: 17 wins, plus half of the 13 ties
76%
Detroit: 70 wins, plus half of the 13 ties

Winnipeg had 38 chances worth 2.6 expected goals. Detroit had 55 chances worth 4.3 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.

WinnipegDetroit
Goals32
Shots on goal2736
Expected goals2.64.3
Shot attempts at 5-on-53353
Power plays3 of 31 of 5

Swing

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

The biggest swings: M. Brandsegg-Nygård +1.4, E. Finnie +1.3 and J. Morrissey +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
  • N. PionkMixed night
    Defense
    23:53
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    −1
    xGF–xGA
    0.7–1.3
    Shots
    3
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    4
    • ✕Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play0.8typical 6.3
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill9.3typical 6.3
    • ✓Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-53typical 3
  • J. MorrisseyBig night

    2 assists.

    Defense
    21:33
    G
    0
    A
    2
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    1.0–0.8
    Shots
    7
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    2
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play17.0typical 6.5
    • ✓Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-53.7typical 2.2
    • ✓Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.15typical 0.04
  • D. DeMeloOff night
    Defense
    20:53
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    −1
    xGF–xGA
    0.9–1.7
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    1
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill10.0typical 6.6
    • ✕Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-56.2typical 2.3
  • M. FerraroOff night
    Defense
    20:17
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.1–0.4
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    3
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill8.3typical 6.9
    • ✕Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots0typical 2
    • ✕Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-50.3typical 2.1
  • K. ConnorBig night

    2 goals, 1 assist.

    Left wing
    20:05
    G
    2
    A
    1
    +/−
    −1
    xGF–xGA
    1.2–1.4
    Shots
    5
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play16.4typical 6.8
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill0.9typical 6.2
    • ✓Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.32typical 0.13
  • D. SambergOff night
    Defense
    19:50
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.5–0.6
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    2
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill9.5typical 6.8
    • ≈Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-52.6typical 2.2
Show 9 more Winnipeg playersHide the other Winnipeg players
  • M. ScheifeleMixed night
    Center
    18:06
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    −1
    xGF–xGA
    0.9–1.5
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play16.5typical 6.8
    • ✓Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-54.2typical 2.3
    • ✕Faceoffs Relied onfaceoffs won5 of 12typical 48%
  • M. BarronOff night
    Center
    17:46
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.5
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    6
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill14.5typical 6.8
    • ✕Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-51typical 3
    • ✕Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots0typical 1
  • C. PerfettiBig night

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

    Center
    17:10
    G
    1
    A
    2
    +/−
    −1
    xGF–xGA
    0.9–1.4
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play16.4typical 6.2
    • ✕Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-56.8typical 2.2
    • ✓Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-55typical 3
  • A. LowryOff night
    Center
    15:17
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.2
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill15.8typical 6.3
    • ✕Faceoffs Better than mostfaceoffs won7 of 19typical 54%
    • ≈Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots0typical 1
  • G. VilardiMixed night
    Center
    14:41
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.2–0.6
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play16.6typical 6.7
    • ✕Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-51.0typical 2.4
    • ✓Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.10typical 0.09
  • I. RosenOff night
    Right wing
    12:54
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.2–0.5
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play0.9typical 5.7
  • A. IafalloDid his job
    Left wing
    11:44
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.2
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    3
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill1.0typical 6.4
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-51.2typical 2.3
  • N. NiederreiterOff night
    Right wing
    11:15
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.1–0.2
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play0.9typical 6.1
  • T. BauerDid his job
    Defense
    8:35
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.0–0.2
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    2
    • ✓Hitting Better than mosthits2typical 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: 37 ✓, 3 ≈, 28 ✕.

In net

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

  • S. SkinnerBig night

    34 saves on 36 shots, +2.3 goals saved above expected.

    Goalie
    60:00
    Shots
    36
    Saves
    34
    Sv%
    .944
    xGA
    4.3
    GSAx
    +2.3
    Dangerous
    1/3
    • ✓Saving more than expected goals saved above expected+2.3typical +0.2
    • ✕Dangerous shots saves on shots with a 15%+ chance1 of 3typically saves 2 of 3
    • ✓Routine shots saves on shots under a 15% chance33 of 33typically saves 31 of 33
  • J. GibsonMixed night
    Goalie
    57:11
    Shots
    27
    Saves
    24
    Sv%
    .889
    xGA
    2.6
    GSAx
    −0.4
    Dangerous
    1/2
    • ✕Saving more than expected goals saved above expected-0.4typical +0.2
    • –Dangerous shots Too few shots to judge
    • ✓Routine shots saves on shots under a 15% chance23 of 25typically saves 23 of 25

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: Winnipeg Jets · Detroit Red Wings