Carolina Hurricanes
3-1-1
All Hurricanes playersResults and schedule
Recent results
Coming up
Style fingerprint
How Carolina plays, trait by trait, against the rest of the league.
Real numbers through Oct 10: 5 games this season, blended with last season. Traits that take longer to settle lean more on last season.
Real numbers through Oct 10, from this season’s 5 games only. Expect these to swing a lot this early, which is why the likely ranges are so wide.
Offense
- Shot volumeSelectiveRelentless
65.8 shot attempts per 603rd of 32
62.7 shot attempts per 608th of 32
- Shot qualityHopefulDangerous
a 6.6% chance of scoring on the average shot9th of 32
a 7.3% chance of scoring on the average shot4th of 32
- Second chancesOne-and-doneCrashers
10.3% of chances come from rebounds15th of 32
17.1% of chances come from rebounds5th of 32
- Off-turnover offensePatientOpportunist
7.8% of chances come right after a turnover2nd of 32
5.5% of chances come right after a turnover22nd of 32
- Shots from defensemenForward-ledActive D
38.0% of shot attempts come from defensemen1st of 32
37.9% of shot attempts come from defensemen5th of 32
- Shots from in closeFrom distanceIn close
29.7% of shots come from within 20 feet22nd of 32
34.2% of shots come from within 20 feet7th of 32
Defense
- Shot suppressionPorousStingy
44.6 shot attempts allowed per 601st of 32
40.2 shot attempts allowed per 602nd of 32
- Quality allowedExposedSheltered
a 7.2% chance of scoring on the average shot against32nd of 32
an 8.1% chance of scoring on the average shot against32nd of 32
- Breakdowns avoidedFire drillComposed
0.43 defensive breakdowns per 6023rd of 32
0.27 defensive breakdowns per 6010th of 32
- GoaltendingSieveWall
+0.08 goals saved above expected per 6022nd of 32
−0.25 goals saved above expected per 6021st of 32
Tempo and edge
- PaceSlogTrack meet
81.4 shots per 60, both teams combined20th of 32
73.4 shots per 60, both teams combined27th of 32
- Forecheck pressurePassiveHounding
forecheck score 124 (100 is league average)2nd of 3228.8 forecheck plays recorded per 602nd of 32
forecheck score 129 (100 is league average)3rd of 3232.4 forecheck plays recorded per 603rd of 32
- PhysicalityFinesseBruising
hit score 116 (100 is league average)6th of 3230.5 hits recorded per 605th of 32
hit score 129 (100 is league average)3rd of 3237.3 hits recorded per 603rd of 32
- DepthTop-heavyDeep
44.0% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six3rd of 32
44.3% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six6th of 32
Special teams
- Power playHarmlessLethal
8.3 expected goals per 60 on the power play6th of 32
10.0 expected goals per 60 on the power play3rd of 32
- Penalty killLeakyAirtight
6.8 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded3rd of 32
4.2 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded3rd of 32
- Power killBunkeredPredatory
1.5 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded1st of 32
1.6 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded5th of 32
- DisciplineRecklessClean
0.05 more penalties drawn than taken per 6012th of 32
0.58 more penalties drawn than taken per 607th of 32
Forecheck pressure and physicality are shown as arena-adjusted scores; switch “Hits and takeaways” to Raw in the settings to see the numbers as recorded. How the arena adjustment works.
Key players
Who Carolina leans on, and what they do best.

- Most ice time
- L2 · Carrier, Svechnikov
- PP1
- Kills penalties
- Tough minutes

- 2nd in ice time
- L1 · Hall, Stankoven
- PP1
- Hittingbottom 8%

- L1 · Hall, Blake
- PP2
- Kills penalties
- Creating his own chancestop 15%
- Shorthanded threattop 22%
- Distance skatedtop 8%
- Faceoffsbottom 15%

- L2 · Carrier, Aho
- PP1
- Tough minutes

- Most ice time
- P1 · Walker
- PP2
- Kills penalties
- Tough minutes
- Shorthanded threat3rd
- TakeawaysTop 5
- Top speedtop 6%
- Shot blockingbottom 16%

- 2nd in ice time
- P2 · Chatfield
- Kills penalties
- Tough minutes
- Staying out of the box3rd
- Preventing chancesTop 5
- TakeawaysTop 5
- Finishingbottom 14%
- Creating chancestop 19%
- Shot blockingtop 24%
- Hardest shottop 11%
- Distance skatedbottom 10%
The 4 forwards and 2 defensemen with the most ice time a game (at least half the games played). Tags show how each is used; rows show his clearest strengths, and a weak spot in grey, as a percentile against his position. Point at anything for details. All Hurricanes players.
OutSeth Jarvis off the NHL roster
Show the full roster · 27 playersHide the full roster
Forwards
- 20Sebastian AhoC5 GP · 4 G · 4 A · 19:32
- 53Jackson BlakeRW5 GP · 0 G · 5 A · 18:13
- 22Logan StankovenC5 GP · 4 G · 0 A · 18:02
- 37Andrei SvechnikovRW5 GP · 3 G · 3 A · 17:18
- 11Jordan StaalC5 GP · 0 G · 0 A · 15:50
- 27Nikolaj EhlersLW5 GP · 0 G · 2 A · 15:49
- 48Jordan MartinookLW5 GP · 0 G · 0 A · 14:55
- 71Taylor HallLW5 GP · 2 G · 2 A · 14:04
- 77Mark JankowskiLW5 GP · 2 G · 1 A · 13:07
- 50Eric RobinsonLW5 GP · 1 G · 1 A · 11:48
- 28William CarrierLW5 GP · 0 G · 3 A · 11:13
- 82Jesperi KotkaniemiC3 GP · 0 G · 1 A · 10:32
- 44Nicolas DeslauriersLW2 GP · 0 G · 0 A · 7:13
- Cayden PrimeauOff the NHL roster
- Seth JarvisCOff the NHL roster
Defense
- 19K'Andre MillerD5 GP · 1 G · 1 A · 22:38
- 74Jaccob SlavinD5 GP · 0 G · 2 A · 21:38
- 26Sean WalkerD5 GP · 0 G · 4 A · 20:50
- 5Jalen ChatfieldD5 GP · 0 G · 1 A · 20:13
- 4Shayne GostisbehereD5 GP · 1 G · 3 A · 18:55
- 6Mike ReillyD3 GP · 0 G · 0 A · 12:33
- 62Charles Alexis LegaultDOff the NHL roster
- Alexander NikishinDOff the NHL roster
- Joel NystromDOff the NHL roster
- 8Juuso VälimäkiD
Goalies
- 32Brandon BussiG3 GP · .851
- 52Pyotr KochetkovG2 GP · .895
As of Oct. 10. Injury details come from the NHL.com Status Report when it names a player; otherwise we only say what the rosters show.
Lines
Who plays together at 5-on-5, and how each group is doing.
Lines and pairs are numbered by 5-on-5 ice time together over the team’s last 10 games (5 so far this season), with each older game counting half as much as the one after it, so the latest combinations come first. With so few games, each group’s results are pulled toward the average for its line number.
Worth knowing
- S. Jarvis has not played this season. He is a top-six forward. W. Carrier has taken his spot beside S. Aho and A. Svechnikov.
- L. Stankoven has started killing penalties: on the ice for 30% of the team’s shorthanded time in 5 games, up from 1% last season.
- L19:28 a gamein 4 of last 5
- Creates
- 3.44
- Allows
- 2.38
- Share
- 59.1%
- Off. zone draws
- 73%
- L29:15 a gamein 3 of last 5
- Creates
- 3.49
- Allows
- 1.97
- Share
- 63.9%
- Off. zone draws
- 25%
- L37:50 a gamein 4 of last 5
- Creates
- 2.17
- Allows
- 2.39
- Share
- 47.7%
- Off. zone draws
- 52%
- L47:33 a gamein 3 of last 5
M. JankowskiE. RobinsonJ. Kotkaniemi
- Creates
- 2.53
- Allows
- 2.61
- Share
- 49.3%
- Off. zone draws
- 83%
- P114:02 a game
- Creates
- 2.63
- Allows
- 2.42
- Share
- 52.0%
- Off. zone draws
- 58%
- P213:38 a game
- Creates
- 3.14
- Allows
- 2.31
- Share
- 57.6%
- Off. zone draws
- 57%
- P310:12 a gamein 3 of last 5
- Creates
- 2.90
- Allows
- 2.57
- Share
- 53.0%
- Off. zone draws
- 86%
Last game
Against Vancouver Canucks, the team used the same lines and pairs as above.
Who plays against whom
Which opposing lines each Carolina group has actually been out against at 5-on-5.
Standing out in all games
- Staal, Martinook, Ehlers (L3) have spent 50% of their time against opponents’ first lines. With no line matching it would be about 32%.
- Hall, Stankoven, Blake (L1) have spent 45% of their time against opponents’ second lines. With no line matching it would be about 29%.
- Jankowski, Robinson, Kotkaniemi (L4) have spent 35% of their time against opponents’ fourth lines. With no line matching it would be about 22%.
Forward lines against opposing forward lines
- L1Hall · Stankoven · BlakeOpp. L118%Opp. L245%Opp. L314%Opp. L422%
- L2Carrier · Aho · SvechnikovOpp. L139%Opp. L226%Opp. L316%Opp. L419%
- L3Staal · Martinook · EhlersOpp. L150%Opp. L215%Opp. L316%Opp. L419%
- L4Jankowski · Robinson · KotkaniemiOpp. L116%Opp. L226%Opp. L323%Opp. L435%
Defense pairs against opposing forward lines
- P1Walker · MillerOpp. L136%Opp. L229%Opp. L313%Opp. L422%
- P2Slavin · ChatfieldOpp. L138%Opp. L223%Opp. L317%Opp. L422%
- P3Reilly · GostisbehereOpp. L110%Opp. L234%Opp. L326%Opp. L430%
Standing out at home
- Staal, Martinook, Ehlers (L3) have spent 57% of their time against opponents’ first lines. With no line matching it would be about 34%.
- Hall, Stankoven, Blake (L1) have spent 48% of their time against opponents’ second lines. With no line matching it would be about 28%.
- Reilly, Gostisbehere (P3) have spent 33% of their time against opponents’ third lines. With no line matching it would be about 22%.
Forward lines against opposing forward lines
- L1Hall · Stankoven · BlakeOpp. L119%Opp. L248%Opp. L319%Opp. L414%
- L2Carrier · Aho · SvechnikovOpp. L133%Opp. L234%Opp. L318%Opp. L416%
- L3Staal · Martinook · EhlersOpp. L157%Opp. L29%Opp. L322%Opp. L412%
- L4Jankowski · Robinson · KotkaniemiOpp. L122%Opp. L211%Opp. L337%Opp. L430%
Defense pairs against opposing forward lines
- P1Walker · MillerOpp. L135%Opp. L230%Opp. L316%Opp. L419%
- P2Slavin · ChatfieldOpp. L138%Opp. L222%Opp. L323%Opp. L418%
- P3Reilly · GostisbehereOpp. L113%Opp. L232%Opp. L333%Opp. L423%
Standing out on the road
- Walker, Miller (P1) have spent 40% of their time against opponents’ first lines. With no line matching it would be about 29%.
Forward lines against opposing forward lines
- L1Hall · Stankoven · BlakeOpp. L116%Opp. L237%Opp. L32%Opp. L445%
- L2Carrier · Aho · SvechnikovOpp. L156%Opp. L26%Opp. L313%Opp. L425%
- L3Staal · Martinook · EhlersOpp. L134%Opp. L229%Opp. L30%Opp. L437%
- L4Jankowski · Robinson · KotkaniemiOpp. L14%Opp. L252%Opp. L31%Opp. L443%
Defense pairs against opposing forward lines
- P1Walker · MillerOpp. L140%Opp. L227%Opp. L34%Opp. L428%
- P2Slavin · ChatfieldOpp. L137%Opp. L228%Opp. L30%Opp. L435%
- P3Reilly · GostisbehereOpp. L14%Opp. L239%Opp. L37%Opp. L450%
Each strip adds to 100%: it shows how one Carolina group’s 5-on-5 time is split across the opponent’s four forward lines, numbered the same way as above. Sized by ice time, a wider box means more time against that line; even columns line the boxes up so you can compare groups straight down. At home the coach changes last and picks these matchups; on the road the other coach does. Faded rows have under ten minutes.
What “with no line matching” means: if a coach just rolled his lines and took whoever was out there, each of his groups would face the opponent’s first line about as often as that line is on the ice. If opposing first lines play a third of the time against Carolina, every Carolina group would see them for about a third of its shifts. A number well above that means the coach is sending that group out against them on purpose; well below means he is keeping it away.
Special teams
Who Carolina sends out with a man up and a man down.
Each power-play unit is built around its quarterback, the defenseman running it, plus the four players most often out with him over the last 10 games (5 so far). Power-play units’ expected goals per 60 are pulled toward league average while samples are small. Penalty kills are too loose for fixed units (the most common foursome covers only about a tenth of a typical team’s shorthanded time), so penalty killers are grouped by when they go on: the ones who start kills, the second wave who come on after the first change, and spot duty. Point at a power-play name to see his shots on the map.
Worth knowing
- J. Staal is sent out to take power-play faceoffs, then changes. He has taken 68% of the team’s power-play draws but stays on for about 20 seconds at a time, against 61 for the regulars, and is most often replaced by N. Ehlers (15 of 18 changes).
Power play
PP171% of the time
Creates 8.9 expected goals per 60
- S. GostisbehereQuarterback
- J. Blakeboth units
- S. Aho
- A. SvechnikovTrigger
- N. Ehlers(J. Staal)both unitsDistributor
PP229% of the time
Creates 7.8 expected goals per 60
- K. MillerQuarterback
- J. Blakeboth unitsTrigger
- N. Ehlers(J. Staal)both unitsDistributor
- L. StankovenNet-front
- T. HallNet-front
Penalty kill
Kills allow 6.8 expected goals per 60, 3rd of 32 (this season and last).
Kills allow 4.2 expected goals per 60, 3rd of 32 this season.
Starts the kill
- J. Staal18 of 19 kills · 0:52 a kill · takes the draw
- J. Martinook18 of 19 kills · 0:47 a kill
- J. SlavinD19 of 19 kills · 1:04 a kill
- J. ChatfieldD16 of 19 kills · 1:05 a kill
Second wave
- M. Jankowski16 of 19 kills · 0:44 a kill
- L. Stankoven18 of 19 kills · 0:32 a kill
- S. Aho16 of 19 kills · 0:33 a kill
- E. Robinson11 of 19 kills · 0:40 a kill
- S. WalkerD18 of 19 kills · 0:55 a kill
- K. MillerD17 of 19 kills · 0:53 a kill
Spot duty
- M. ReillyD4 of 19 kills · 0:30 a kill
- C. LegaultD3 of 19 kills · 0:27 a kill
- What the tags mean
- Quarterbackthe defenseman who runs the unit from the blue line.
- Triggerthe unit’s main shooter, with the most dangerous power-play shots on the team over this season and last.
- Distributorthe main passer, with the most first assists on the team’s power-play goals over this season and last.
- Net-frontparks in front of the net. At least 40% of his power-play shots come from within 15 feet.
- Pointa second defenseman on the unit, alongside the quarterback.
Goalies
Is he stopping more than he should, and what is his team asking him to face?
B. Bussi42 starts · 980 shots faced, this season and last
+1.0 goals saved above expected

- Low-danger save %
- .976 461 shots
- Medium-danger save %
- .874 350 shots
- High-danger save %
- .692 169 shots
- Shots faced per 60
- 23.1
- Defensive breakdowns per 60
- 0.26
- Quality starts
- 52%
Night to night: goals saved above expected in each start
Helping, or hung out to dry?
Show the full picture for B. BussiHide the full picture
- Stopping more than expectedSieveWall
+1.0 goals saved above expected in 42 starts
- How busy he isQuietUnder siege
23.1 shots faced per 60
- How dangerous the shots areShelteredExposed
the average shot he faces has a 7.5% chance of going in
- Breakdowns in front of himRareConstant
0.26 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
- Waiting between shotsSteady workLong waits
a typical wait of 84 seconds between shots; 26% come after three quiet minutes
- Night-to-night steadinessStreakySteady
a quality start 52% of the time
- Really bad starts
- 29%
- Overall save %
- .891
B. Bussi3 starts · 67 shots faced, this season
−2.3 goals saved above expected

- Low-danger save %
- .933 30 shots
- Medium-danger save %
- .909 22 shots
- High-danger save %
- .600 15 shots
- Shots faced per 60
- 21.7
- Defensive breakdowns per 60
- 0.32
- Quality starts
- 33%
Night to night: goals saved above expected in each start
Helping, or hung out to dry?
Show the full picture for B. BussiHide the full picture
- Stopping more than expectedSieveWall
−2.3 goals saved above expected in 3 starts
- How busy he isQuietUnder siege
21.7 shots faced per 60
- How dangerous the shots areShelteredExposed
the average shot he faces has a 8.2% chance of going in
- Breakdowns in front of himRareConstant
0.32 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
- Waiting between shotsSteady workLong waits
a typical wait of 106 seconds between shots; 24% come after three quiet minutes
- Night-to-night steadinessStreakySteady
a quality start 33% of the time
- Really bad starts
- 67%
- Overall save %
- .851
P. Kochetkov10 starts · 227 shots faced, this season and last
+0.9 goals saved above expected

- Low-danger save %
- .991 113 shots
- Medium-danger save %
- .911 79 shots
- High-danger save %
- .571 35 shots
- Shots faced per 60
- 22.3
- Defensive breakdowns per 60
- 0.49
- Quality starts
- 50%
Night to night: goals saved above expected in each start
Helping, or hung out to dry?
Show the full picture for P. KochetkovHide the full picture
- Stopping more than expectedSieveWall
+0.9 goals saved above expected in 10 starts
- How busy he isQuietUnder siege
22.3 shots faced per 60
- How dangerous the shots areShelteredExposed
the average shot he faces has a 7.1% chance of going in
- Breakdowns in front of himRareConstant
0.49 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
- Waiting between shotsSteady workLong waits
a typical wait of 75 seconds between shots; 26% come after three quiet minutes
- Night-to-night steadinessStreakySteady
a quality start 50% of the time
- Really bad starts
- 30%
- Overall save %
- .899
P. Kochetkov2 starts · 38 shots faced, this season
+1.0 goals saved above expected

- Low-danger save %
- 1.000 18 shots
- Medium-danger save %
- .875 16 shots
- High-danger save %
- .500 4 shots
- Shots faced per 60
- 18.6
- Defensive breakdowns per 60
- 0
- Quality starts
- 100%
Night to night: goals saved above expected in each start
Helping, or hung out to dry?
Show the full picture for P. KochetkovHide the full picture
- Stopping more than expectedSieveWall
+1.0 goals saved above expected in 2 starts
- How busy he isQuietUnder siege
18.6 shots faced per 60
- How dangerous the shots areShelteredExposed
the average shot he faces has a 8.6% chance of going in
- Breakdowns in front of himRareConstant
0 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
- Waiting between shotsSteady workLong waits
a typical wait of 88 seconds between shots; 24% come after three quiet minutes
- Night-to-night steadinessStreakySteady
a quality start 100% of the time
- Really bad starts
- 0%
- Overall save %
- .895
Expected-goal models can’t see passes before a shot, so a goalie whose team gives up a lot of cross-ice passes will look worse here than he really is. Ratings compare him with goalies who have at least 10 starts over two seasons, or 2 this season.
Where the goals come from
How Carolina’s goals are scored and allowed, against the league average, and how much of any difference luck alone could explain.
More than luck would explain: fewer of Carolina’s goals come from faceoff wins.
- Everyday even-strength play55.9%209 of 374
- Power play20.6%77 of 374
- Rebound5.9%22 of 374
- Empty net6.4%24 of 374
- Off a turnover5.1%19 of 374
- Goalie pulled2.7%10 of 374
- Shorthanded2.9%11 of 374
- Off a faceoff win0.5%2 of 374
374 goals this season and last. Each row has its own scale, so a small source is not squeezed against the left edge.
More than luck would explain: more of Carolina’s goals come from the power play.
- Everyday even-strength play44.4%8 of 18
- Power play38.9%7 of 18
- Rebound0%0 of 18
- Empty net5.6%1 of 18
- Off a turnover0%0 of 18
- Goalie pulled0%0 of 18
- Shorthanded5.6%1 of 18
- Off a faceoff win5.6%1 of 18
18 goals this season, too few to say much: most of any gap from the league is luck. Each row has its own scale, so a small source is not squeezed against the left edge.
More than luck would explain: more of the goals Carolina allows come from everyday even-strength play and play with the goalie pulled.
- Everyday even-strength play59.5%172 of 289
- Power play18.3%53 of 289
- Rebound6.2%18 of 289
- Empty net4.8%14 of 289
- Off a turnover4.8%14 of 289
- Goalie pulled4.2%12 of 289
- Shorthanded1.4%4 of 289
- Off a faceoff win0.7%2 of 289
289 goals this season and last. Each row has its own scale, so a small source is not squeezed against the left edge.
More than luck would explain: more of the goals Carolina allows come from rebounds.
- Everyday even-strength play57.1%8 of 14
- Power play14.3%2 of 14
- Rebound21.4%3 of 14
- Empty net0%0 of 14
- Off a turnover0%0 of 14
- Goalie pulled7.1%1 of 14
- Shorthanded0%0 of 14
- Off a faceoff win0%0 of 14
14 goals this season, too few to say much: most of any gap from the league is luck. Each row has its own scale, so a small source is not squeezed against the left edge.
Every goal counts once, in the first of these that applies: empty net, power play, shorthanded, goalie pulled, then rebound, turnover, faceoff win, and everyday play. These mixes are mostly luck: over three seasons, teams’ goals came from much the same places, and most of the differences here didn’t last.