Real data. Everything on this page is computed from actual games.
Last Changeworking title
Numbers from
Hits and takeaways
final

EDM5

Edmonton Oilers

ANA2

Anaheim Ducks

Wednesday, October 7

Final · Honda Center

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 (51% for Edmonton), and Edmonton came through.

Two even teams on neutral ice50%
Home ice−4 points46%
Recent chances+4 points51%
Back-to-back0 points51%
Our chance for Edmonton the morning of the game51%
Tonight's lineup+2 points
At puck drop, once the lineups were known53%

Recent chances: how much better each team’s chances have been than their opponents’ lately, with the latest games counting most. Back-to-back: playing for the second night in a row. Tonight’s lineup: whether the players who dressed were stronger or weaker than the team’s usual lineup. Only earlier games went into it, and the preview hinted at it in words without showing the number.

We had this close to even (49% for Anaheim), and it went Edmonton’s way.

Two even teams on neutral ice50%
Home ice+4 points54%
Recent chances−4 points49%
Back-to-back0 points49%
Our chance for Anaheim the morning of the game49%
Tonight's lineup−2 points
At puck drop, once the lineups were known47%

Recent chances: how much better each team’s chances have been than their opponents’ lately, with the latest games counting most. Back-to-back: playing for the second night in a row. Tonight’s lineup: whether the players who dressed were stronger or weaker than the team’s usual lineup. 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 Oilers can’t afford to cough it up

    The Ducks turn stolen pucks into chances (3rd in the league: 7.7% of their chances come right after winning the puck), and the Oilers are 29th at avoiding breakdowns. A sloppy pass or two could cost the Oilers.

    The call The Ducks get at least their usual 7.7% of their 5-on-5 chances right after winning the puck.

    Didn’t happen

    0.4% of Anaheim’s 5-on-5 chances came right after winning the puck, against their usual 7.7%.

    7.7%
    Coming in
    0.4%
    In this game
    7.3%
    League average

  2. Before the game

    Quality over quantity for the Oilers

    The Ducks have struggled to prevent dangerous shots (26th in the league), and the Oilers don’t waste many: a 6.5% chance of scoring on the average shot, 10th in the league.

    The call The Oilers’ average shot has at least their usual 6.5% chance of going in.

    Held up

    Edmonton’s average shot had a 7.5% chance of going in, against their usual 6.5%.

    6.5% a shot
    Coming in
    7.5% a shot
    In this game
    6.3% a shot
    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: 85 held up, 11 partly, 63 didn’t happen, out of 159 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.

Anaheim usually wins this one

Played out 100 times with these chances, Anaheim wins 61. The goals went the other way.

39%
Edmonton: 31 wins, plus half of the 17 ties
61%
Anaheim: 52 wins, plus half of the 17 ties

Edmonton had 33 chances worth 2.6 expected goals. Anaheim had 50 chances worth 3.2 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.

EdmontonAnaheim
Goals52
Shots on goal1931
Expected goals2.63.3
Shot attempts at 5-on-53051
Power plays1 of 42 of 5

Swing

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

The biggest swings: L. Draisaitl +2.0, C. McDavid +1.8 and E. Bouchard +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
  • C. McDavidBig night

    A goal, 2 assists, 83% of the 5-on-5 chances with him on.

    Center
    24:31
    G
    1
    A
    2
    +/−
    +4
    xGF–xGA
    1.0–0.2
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play9.3typical 8.9
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill9.3typical 5.9
    • ✓Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-54.6typical 2.9
  • R. SheaOff night
    Defense
    24:30
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.4
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    1
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill9.1typical 6.0
  • E. BouchardBig night

    2 goals, 1 assist, 81% of the 5-on-5 chances with him on.

    Defense
    23:09
    G
    2
    A
    1
    +/−
    +4
    xGF–xGA
    0.9–0.2
    Shots
    4
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play9.6typical 8.7
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill11.2typical 7.0
    • ✓Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-53typical 3
  • M. EkholmDid his job
    Defense
    21:56
    G
    0
    A
    1
    +/−
    +4
    xGF–xGA
    1.0–0.2
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill8.8typical 7.2
    • ✓Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-54.5typical 2.9
    • ✓Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.08typical 0.04
  • C. MurphyDid his job
    Defense
    19:21
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.5
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    3
    • ✕Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill14.0typical 6.6
    • ✓Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots3typical 2
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-51.8typical 2.2
  • L. Draisaitl★ Huge night

    4 assists, 83% of the 5-on-5 chances with him on.

    Center
    19:18
    G
    0
    A
    4
    +/−
    +4
    xGF–xGA
    1.0–0.2
    Shots
    2
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Power play Relied onexpected goals per 60 on the power play9.2typical 8.7
    • ✓Creating chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 with him on at 5-on-55.0typical 2.7
    • ✓Faceoffs Better than mostfaceoffs won8 of 13typical 56%
Show 10 more Edmonton playersHide the other Edmonton players
  • V. PodkolzinDid his job
    Right wing
    18:13
    G
    1
    A
    0
    +/−
    +3
    xGF–xGA
    1.0–0.2
    Shots
    3
    Hits
    5
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots1typical 1
    • ✓Hitting Better than mosthits5typical 3
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-51.0typical 2.4
  • J. WalmanMixed 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.

    Defense
    15:50
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.4–1.0
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    3
    • ✓Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-52typical 2
    • ✓Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots3typical 1
  • A. FormentonRough night

    No points, and 83% of the 5-on-5 chances went the other way with him on.

    Left wing
    15:17
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.2–0.9
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    1
    • ≈Hitting Better than mosthits1typical 2
  • M. JosephDid his job
    Right wing
    14:43
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.2–0.4
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    6
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-51.9typical 2.0
    • ✓Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots1typical 1
    • ✓Hitting Better than mosthits6typical 3
  • T. FredericDid his job
    Center
    11:33
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.4–0.3
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    6
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Hitting Better than mosthits6typical 3
  • T. EmbersonMixed night

    No points, and 80% of the 5-on-5 chances went the other way with him on, though he still did his usual jobs.

    Defense
    11:10
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.2–0.9
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    2
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Hitting Better than mosthits2typical 1
    • ✓Blocking shots Better than mostblocked shots1typical 1
    • ✕Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-55.5typical 2.3
  • I. HowardOff night
    Left wing
    10:05
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.1–0.6
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Shooting Better than mostshot attempts at 5-on-51typical 2
  • J. SamanskiOff night
    Center
    9:50
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.1–0.6
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    0
    Blocks
    0
    • ✕Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-54.9typical 2.2
  • J. DickinsonMixed night
    Center
    9:33
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.3–0.2
    Shots
    1
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    1
    • ✓Kills penalties Relied onexpected goals per 60 allowed on the penalty kill0.0typical 6.2
    • ✓Preventing chances at 5-on-5 Better than mostexpected goals per 60 allowed with him on at 5-on-51.6typical 2.4
    • ✕Faceoffs Relied onfaceoffs won4 of 11typical 49%
  • M. JonesOff night
    Left wing
    7:21
    G
    0
    A
    0
    +/−
    0
    xGF–xGA
    0.0–0.2
    Shots
    0
    Hits
    1
    Blocks
    1
    • ≈Hitting Better than mosthits1typical 2
    • ✕Getting to dangerous spots Better than mostexpected goals from his own shots at 5-on-50.00typical 0.07
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: 46 ✓, 9 ≈, 19 ✕.

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. LeviDid his job
    Goalie
    59:49
    Shots
    31
    Saves
    29
    Sv%
    .935
    xGA
    3.3
    GSAx
    +1.3
    Dangerous
    3/4
    • ✓Saving more than expected goals saved above expected+1.2typical +0.0
    • ✓Dangerous shots saves on shots with a 15%+ chance3 of 4typically saves 3 of 4
    • ✓Routine shots saves on shots under a 15% chance26 of 27typically saves 25 of 27
  • L. DostalRough night

    Pulled after 5 goals, 12 saves on 17 shots, −2.8 goals saved above expected.

    Goalie
    39:41
    Shots
    17
    Saves
    12
    Sv%
    .706
    xGA
    2.1
    GSAx
    −2.9
    Dangerous
    1/3
    • ✕Saving more than expected goals saved above expected-2.8typical +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% chance11 of 14typically saves 13 of 14

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: Edmonton Oilers · Anaheim Ducks