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

VGK6

Vegas Golden Knights

SEA2

Seattle Kraken

Tuesday, October 6

Final · Climate Pledge Arena

The short version

What happened

The Golden Knights roll past the Kraken

Victor Olofsson scored twice, opening the scoring midway through the first. Tomas Hertl added two power-play goals. Four different Golden Knights scored. Seattle pulled Joey Daccord after five goals.

The score was fair. Replay this game’s chances a hundred times and the Golden Knights win about seven in ten. By our Swing measure, Jack Eichel had the best night of anyone.

What it means

  • The previewTwo of the preview’s three calls held.
  • RecordThe Golden Knights are now 3-1-0.

Our pre-game read

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

We gave Vegas a 72% chance, and Vegas delivered.

Two even teams on neutral ice50%
Home ice−4 points46%
Recent chances+24 points70%
Who's been playing+2 points72%
Back-to-back0 points72%
Our chance for Vegas the morning of the game72%
Tonight's lineup−1 points
At puck drop, once the lineups were known71%

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 Seattle only a 28% 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−2 points28%
Back-to-back0 points28%
Our chance for Seattle the morning of the game28%
Tonight's lineup+1 points
At puck drop, once the lineups were known29%

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

  1. Before the game

    The matchup inside the matchup

    The Golden Knights are one of the league’s best for chance quality, and the Kraken are one of the league’s best at preventing dangerous shots. We’ll side with the Golden Knights.

    The call The Golden Knights’ chances are more dangerous than the league average (a 6.3% chance of scoring on the average shot) against the Kraken.

    Vegas 5th for chance quality (a 6.7% chance of scoring on the average shot) · Seattle 2nd for preventing dangerous shots

    Didn’t happen

    On chance quality, Vegas had 6.1% a shot. The league average is 6.3% a shot, and they came in at 6.7% a shot.

    6.7% a shot
    Coming in
    6.1% a shot
    In this game
    6.3% a shot
    League average

  2. Before the game

    The Kraken can’t afford to take penalties

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

    The call The Golden Knights’ power play creates at least their usual 8.9 expected goals per 60.

    Vegas 2nd for power play (8.9 expected goals per 60) · Seattle 27th for penalty kill

    Held up

    Vegas’s power play created 11.8 expected goals per 60 in 5:50 of 5-on-4 time, against their usual 8.9, and scored 2 goals.

    Called it, and then some. 2 power-play goals on 3 chances.

    8.9 per 60
    Coming in
    11.8 per 60
    In this game
    7.5 per 60
    League average

  3. Before the game

    The Golden Knights are going to test the Kraken’s goalie early and often

    Seattle has been giving up shots all season, and the Golden Knights rarely pass one up.

    The call The Golden Knights take at least their usual 59.2 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5.

    Vegas 9th for shot volume (59.2 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5) · Seattle 32nd for shot suppression

    Held up

    Vegas took 69.0 shot attempts per 60 at 5-on-5 (adjusted for score and venue), against their usual 59.2.

    59.2 per 60
    Coming in
    69.0 per 60
    In this game
    56.9 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 74.

74%
Vegas: 66 wins, plus half of the 15 ties
26%
Seattle: 19 wins, plus half of the 15 ties

Vegas had 44 chances worth 3.9 expected goals. Seattle had 30 chances worth 2.4 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.

VegasSeattle
Goals62
Shots on goal2827
Expected goals3.92.5
Shot attempts at 5-on-54535
Power plays2 of 31 of 4

Swing

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

The biggest swings: J. Eichel +2.0, T. Hertl +1.6 and M. Stone +1.5.

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. HanifinOff night
    Defense
    21:05
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.5–0.7
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill2.7typical 5.9
    • ✕Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-51.8typical 2.6
    • ✕Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-51typical 3
  • P. WotherspoonOff night
    Defense
    20:17
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.7–1.0
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill4.7typical 6.2
    • ✕Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-53.9typical 2.4
  • B. McNabbDid his job
    Defense
    19:37
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    +2
    xGF–xGA
    0.9–0.1
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill4.7typical 5.7
    • ≈Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots1typical 2
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-50.4typical 2.0
  • S. TheodoreDid his job
    Defense
    19:05
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    +2
    xGF–xGA
    1.1–0.1
    Shots
    4
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.11typical 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-50.4typical 2.0
  • W. KarlssonRough night

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

    Center
    18:44
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.9
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill4.3typical 6.2
    • ✓Faceoffs Better than mostfaceoffs won9 of 13typical 59%
    • ✕Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-54.1typical 2.1
  • J. Eichel★ Huge night

    A goal, 3 assists, 93% of the 5-on-5 chances with him on.

    Center
    18:20
    G
    1
    A
    3
    +/−
    +2
    xGF–xGA
    0.8–0.1
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play14.8typical 8.1
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill3.5typical 6.1
    • ✓Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-54.1typical 2.8
Show 12 more Vegas playersHide the other Vegas players
  • R. AnderssonOff night
    Defense
    17:24
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.8–1.0
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play9.4typical 6.2
    • ✕Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.00typical 0.05
    • ✕Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-50typical 3
  • M. MarnerRough night

    No points, and 72% of the 5-on-5 chances went the other way with him on.

    Right wing
    16:32
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.8
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play14.9typical 8.2
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill0.9typical 5.6
    • ✕Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-54.8typical 2.0
  • T. Hertl★ Huge night

    2 goals, 2 assists.

    Center
    16:04
    G
    2
    A
    2
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.7–0.3
    Shots
    3
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play15.0typical 8.3
    • ≈Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-52typical 3
    • ✓Faceoffs Better than mostfaceoffs won9 of 13typical 56%
  • J. LauzonDid his job
    Defense
    16:00
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.4–0.7
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    7
    Blocks
    2
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill1.2typical 5.8
    • ✓Hitting Better than mosthits7typical 3
    • ≈Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-52typical 3
  • M. StoneBig night

    A shorthanded goal, 1 assist, 100% of the 5-on-5 chances with him on.

    Right wing
    15:51
    G
    1
    A
    1
    +/−
    +2
    xGF–xGA
    0.8–0.0
    Shots
    4
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    2
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play14.9typical 8.6
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill3.7typical 6.2
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-50.0typical 1.9
  • B. HowdenMixed night

    No points, and 72% of the 5-on-5 chances went the other way with him on, though he still did his usual jobs.

    Center
    15:51
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.4–1.1
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ≈Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill6.3typical 6.0
    • ✓Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.38typical 0.11
    • –Faceoffs Better than mostToo little time to judge
  • I. BarbashevDid his job
    Left wing
    15:30
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.8–0.0
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-53.3typical 2.7
    • ✓Hitting Better than mosthits2typical 2
  • B. BowmanOff night
    Right wing
    15:06
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.4–0.6
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.00typical 0.10
  • N. DowdOff night
    Center
    13:50
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.5–0.7
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    2
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill2.1typical 6.9
    • ✕Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-53.7typical 2.2
    • ✕Faceoffs Relied onfaceoffs won4 of 17typical 48%
  • T. ConnellyOff night
    Left wing
    11:41
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.7–0.2
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    1
    • ✕Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.00typical 0.08
    • ✕Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-50typical 2
  • V. OlofssonBig night

    2 goals.

    Left wing
    10:48
    G
    2
    A
    0
    +/−
    +1
    xGF–xGA
    0.7–0.1
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play11.6typical 6.6
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-50.4typical 2.1
  • M. GatcombMixed night
    Center
    9:09
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.4–0.5
    Shots
    3
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    1
    • ≈Hitting Better than mosthits1typical 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: 43 ✓, 12 ≈, 31 ✕.

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.

  • C. HartDid his job
    Goalie
    60:00
    Shots
    27
    Saves
    25
    Sv%
    .926
    xGA
    2.5
    GSAx
    +0.5
    Dangerous
    4/4
    • ✓Saving more than expected goals saved above expected+0.5typical -0.0
    • ✓Dangerous shots saves on shots with a 15%+ chance4 of 4typically saves 3 of 4
    • ✓Routine shots saves on shots under a 15% chance21 of 23typically saves 21 of 23
  • J. DaccordRough night

    Pulled after 5 goals, 16 saves on 21 shots, −2.7 goals saved above expected.

    Goalie
    39:53
    Shots
    21
    Saves
    16
    Sv%
    .762
    xGA
    2.3
    GSAx
    −2.7
    Dangerous
    1/4
    • ✕Saving more than expected goals saved above expected-2.7typical +0.5
    • ✕Dangerous shots saves on shots with a 15%+ chance1 of 4typically saves 3 of 4
    • ✕Routine shots saves on shots under a 15% chance15 of 17typically saves 16 of 17
  • P. GrubauerDid his job
    Goalie
    20:00
    Shots
    7
    Saves
    6
    Sv%
    .857
    xGA
    1.6
    GSAx
    +0.6
    Dangerous
    4/5
    • –Saving more than expected Too few shots to judge
    • ✓Dangerous shots saves on shots with a 15%+ chance4 of 5typically saves 3 of 5
    • –Routine shots Too few shots to judge

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 · Seattle Kraken