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

VGK3

Vegas Golden Knights

VAN2

Vancouver Canucks

Sunday, October 4

Final · Rogers Arena

The short version

What happened

The Golden Knights beat the Canucks

Paul Cotter opened the scoring late in the first. The game was tied twice. Marc Gatcomb scored the winner late in the second.

The score was fair. Replay this game’s chances a hundred times and the Golden Knights win nine in ten.

What it means

  • The previewOne of the preview’s two calls held.
  • RecordThe Golden Knights are now 2-1-0.

Our pre-game read

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

We gave Vegas a 82% chance, and Vegas delivered.

Two even teams on neutral ice50%
Home ice−4 points46%
Recent chances+24 points70%
Who's been playing+6 points76%
Back-to-back+5 points82%
Our chance for Vegas the morning of the game82%
Tonight's lineup0 points
At puck drop, once the lineups were known82%

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 Vancouver only a 18% chance, and it went the way we feared.

Two even teams on neutral ice50%
Home ice+4 points54%
Recent chances−24 points30%
Who's been playing−6 points24%
Back-to-back−5 points18%
Our chance for Vancouver the morning of the game18%
Tonight's lineup0 points
At puck drop, once the lineups were known18%

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, 1 partly did, and 0 didn’t happen.

  1. Before the game

    The Golden Knights’ power play has a target

    The Golden Knights’ power play is one of the league’s best, and the Canucks’ kill is one of the league’s worst. The Canucks need to stay out of the box.

    The call The Golden Knights’ power play creates at least their usual 8.7 expected goals per 60.

    Vegas 3rd for power play (8.7 expected goals per 60) · Vancouver 28th for penalty kill

    Held up

    Vegas’s power play created 13.0 expected goals per 60 in 7:53 of 5-on-4 time, against their usual 8.7, and scored 1 goal.

    Called it, and then some. Vegas’s power play created 13.0 expected goals per 60, against their usual 8.7 and a league average of 7.5. A team strays this far about once every 8 games.

    8.7 per 60
    Coming in
    13.0 per 60
    In this game
    7.5 per 60
    League average

  2. Before the game

    The Golden Knights should pile up the shots

    The Golden Knights shoot a lot, and the Canucks are the league’s worst at keeping shots down. Look for a big shot total.

    The call The Golden Knights take at least their usual 59.5 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5.

    Vegas 9th for shot volume (59.5 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5) · Vancouver 32nd for shot suppression

    Partly

    Vegas took 56.9 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5 (adjusted for score and venue), against their usual 59.5.

    59.5 per 60
    Coming in
    56.9 per 60
    In this game
    56.7 per 60
    League average

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.

Vegas earned this one

Played out 100 times with these chances, Vegas wins 91.

91%
Vegas: 87 wins, plus half of the 8 ties
9%
Vancouver: 5 wins, plus half of the 8 ties

Vegas had 34 chances worth 4.5 expected goals. Vancouver had 28 chances worth 1.6 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.

VegasVancouver
Goals32
Shots on goal2820
Expected goals4.61.6
Shot attempts at 5-on-54226
Power plays1 of 51 of 3

Swing

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

The biggest swings: V. Olofsson +1.3, M. Marner +1.1 and W. Karlsson +0.8.

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
  • S. TheodoreOff night
    Defense
    22:11
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    +2
    xGF–xGA
    0.9–0.6
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    2
    • ✕Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.01typical 0.04
    • ✓Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-53typical 3
    • ✕Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-52.3typical 2.0
  • M. MarnerDid his job
    Right wing
    21:56
    G
    1
    A
    0
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.8–0.3
    Shots
    3
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play13.6typical 8.2
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill1.0typical 5.7
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-51.3typical 2.0
  • J. EichelMixed night
    Center
    19:52
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.3
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play13.5typical 8.0
    • ✕Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-51.4typical 2.8
    • ≈Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-52typical 4
  • M. StoneDid his job
    Right wing
    19:45
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.2
    Shots
    3
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play13.5typical 8.5
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-51.0typical 1.9
    • ✓Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots1typical 1
  • N. HanifinMixed night
    Defense
    19:37
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    −1
    xGF–xGA
    1.1–0.1
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill1.0typical 5.9
    • ✓Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-53.9typical 2.5
    • ✕Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-51typical 3
  • B. McNabbMixed night
    Defense
    19:00
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    +2
    xGF–xGA
    0.9–0.5
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    2
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill4.1typical 5.7
    • ✓Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots2typical 2
    • ✕Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-52.2typical 2.0
Show 11 more Vegas playersHide the other Vegas players
  • W. KarlssonDid his job
    Center
    18:20
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    1.3–0.3
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill5.4typical 6.2
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-51.2typical 2.1
    • ✓Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-53typical 3
  • P. WotherspoonDid his job
    Defense
    17:25
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.9–0.1
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill1.3typical 6.2
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-50.5typical 2.4
  • B. HowdenDid his job
    Center
    17:16
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.9–0.3
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill1.1typical 6.0
    • ✓Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.24typical 0.12
    • –Faceoffs Relied onToo little time to judge
  • R. AnderssonMixed night
    Defense
    17:12
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    1.0–0.2
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play10.0typical 6.2
    • ✕Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.01typical 0.05
    • ≈Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-52typical 3
  • T. HertlMixed night
    Center
    16:29
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.9–0.2
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    4
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play13.7typical 8.3
    • ✕Faceoffs Better than mostfaceoffs won6 of 12typical 56%
    • ✓Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-53typical 3
  • J. LauzonDid his job
    Defense
    15:22
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    −1
    xGF–xGA
    1.1–0.1
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    5
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill1.1typical 5.9
    • ✓Hitting Better than mosthits5typical 2
    • ✓Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-54typical 2
  • V. OlofssonBig night

    A power-play goal from a player who scores in about 1 game in 6, 88% of the 5-on-5 chances with him on, on top of doing his usual jobs.

    Left wing
    14:35
    G
    1
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    1.4–0.2
    Shots
    4
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play17.9typical 6.5
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-51.1typical 2.1
  • I. BarbashevOff night
    Left wing
    13:03
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.2
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Hitting Better than mosthits0typical 2
    • ✕Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-51.7typical 2.7
  • N. DowdMixed night
    Center
    11:11
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.6–0.1
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill4.2typical 7.0
    • ✕Hitting Better than mosthits0typical 2
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-50.8typical 2.2
  • B. BowmanOff night
    Right wing
    10:41
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.9–0.2
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.03typical 0.08
  • M. GatcombBig night

    A goal from a player who scores in about 1 game in 10, on top of doing his usual jobs.

    Center
    9:07
    G
    1
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.6–0.2
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    4
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Hitting Better than mosthits4typical 4
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: 36 ✓, 10 ≈, 24 ✕.

In net

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

  • A. HillOff night
    Goalie
    60:00
    Shots
    20
    Saves
    18
    Sv%
    .900
    xGA
    1.6
    GSAx
    −0.5
    Dangerous
    1/1
    • ✕Saving more than expected goals saved above expected-0.5typical -0.3
    • –Dangerous shots Too few shots to judge
    • ✕Routine shots saves on shots under a 15% chance17 of 19typically saves 18 of 19
  • K. LankinenBig night

    25 saves on 28 shots, +1.6 goals saved above expected.

    Goalie
    57:29
    Shots
    28
    Saves
    25
    Sv%
    .893
    xGA
    4.6
    GSAx
    +1.6
    Dangerous
    5/8
    • ✓Saving more than expected goals saved above expected+1.6typical -0.2
    • ✓Dangerous shots saves on shots with a 15%+ chance5 of 8typically saves 5 of 8
    • ✓Routine shots saves on shots under a 15% chance20 of 20typically saves 19 of 20

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: Vegas Golden Knights · Vancouver Canucks