xJawn NHL expected goals

← Games

LAK @ COL

2026-09-30 · final 4–8 · what happened, next to what the engine said before puck drop

The call
COL 64.1% ✓
expected 2.55–3.41 · COL won 4–8
actual xG
2.84–3.44
xG share, predicted → actual
LAK 43% → 45%55% → 57% COL
Today's puzzle Remember Some Guys — name the skater from the shape of his career. Three clues, one guess a day. Play →

What happened

LAK attacks the left net, COL the right — every unblocked attempt the game produced: × goals, • on net, ◦ missed (hover a marker for the shooter and its xG). To compare against the pregame call, switch the Surface to the engine's predicted-xG map — the shots land on top of where the engine expected the game to be played.

Save a card: Summary · Full card · Game flow · LAK skaters · COL skaters · LAK lines · COL lines · Matchups
LAKCOL
2.84
Expected goals
3.44
1.73
5v5 xG
2.50
1.02
Power-play xG
0.93
0
High-dangerattempts ≥ 0.20 xG
2
31
Shots on goal
29
62
Attempts
50
xG by period 1st1.3–0.72nd1.2–1.73rd0.4–1.0

The Avalanche beat the Kings 8–4 at home in a game the chances called about even, LAK 2.8 to COL 3.4 in expected goals. COL scored 8 on 3.4 expected.

Counts come from the shot table behind the maps: empty-net attempts and the shootout are excluded, so the goals in the map can trail the official final by an empty-netter or the shootout's deciding goal. Same numbers, same grammar as the post-game cards.

As the game went

One line: cumulative LAK minus COL expected goals. Above zero LAK is ahead on chances, below zero COL is. Shaded bands are power plays in the side's colour; vertical lines are goals.

1ST2ND3RD+0.5−0.5+1−1LAK AHEAD ▲COL AHEAD ▼

Skaters

Every skater, sorted by net on-ice expected goals: on-ice xG against to the left of zero, for to the right, his own attempts as the solid bar, a hash at the net. The slim track under the name is ice time.

LAK skaters

on ice, against on ice, for own attempts net ice time
0.50.5111.51.5220Brandt ClarkeD18:57+1.27Mats ZuccarelloF17:59+0.88Artemi PanarinF20:16+0.57Quinton ByfieldF18:59+0.45Alex LaferriereF15:31+0.43Andre LeeF7:56+0.35Adrian KempeF19:23+0.33Alex TurcotteF15:35+0.28Samuel HeleniusF6:59+0.20Joel ArmiaF12:55+0.17Joel EdmundsonD15:34+0.13Mikey AndersonD19:21-0.19Cody CeciD19:24-0.40Scott LaughtonF15:07-1.12Trevor MooreF14:56-1.12Erik HaulaF15:26-1.31Drew DoughtyD22:41-1.33Brian DumoulinD16:30-1.56

COL skaters

on ice, against on ice, for own attempts net ice time
0.50.5111.51.50Jaden SchwartzF12:49+1.14Nicolas RoyF12:12+0.89Nazem KadriF17:57+0.87Artturi LehkonenF19:27+0.55Sam MalinskiD14:27+0.41Martin NecasF19:11+0.33Brett KulakD19:44+0.30Gabriel LandeskogF17:52+0.26Nathan MacKinnonF17:44+0.18Parker KellyF12:53+0.17Josh MansonD14:31+0.15Devon ToewsD20:04+0.01Cale MakarD18:14-0.04Brock NelsonF19:14-0.05Brent BurnsD15:23-0.17Noah JuulsenD11:15-0.21Fedor SvechkovF15:28-0.36T.J. HughesF13:35-0.45

Lines

The forward lines and defence pairs that actually played together most at 5v5, each with when it was on the ice across the game clock (period and power-play bands behind the strip) and on-ice xG against/for while the whole unit was out.

LAK lines

on the ice together LAK power play penalty kill xG against xG for net
FORWARD LINESL1Adrian KempeArtemi PanarinQuinton Byfield16:50+0.41L2Mats ZuccarelloAlex TurcotteAlex Laferriere10:39+0.16L3Erik HaulaScott LaughtonTrevor Moore8:06-1.03L4Joel ArmiaAndre LeeSamuel Helenius6:17+0.20DEFENCE PAIRSD1Cody CeciMikey Anderson15:39-0.38D2Drew DoughtyBrian Dumoulin13:48-1.43D3Joel EdmundsonBrandt Clarke10:52+0.331ST2ND3RD01.751.75

COL lines

on the ice together COL power play penalty kill xG against xG for net
FORWARD LINESL1Artturi LehkonenNathan MacKinnonMartin Necas9:11+0.02L2Nazem KadriBrock NelsonGabriel Landeskog8:02-0.22L3Nicolas RoyParker KellyFedor Svechkov2:59-0.09SPARET.J. Hughes13:35-0.45SPAREJaden Schwartz12:49+1.14DEFENCE PAIRSD1Devon ToewsCale Makar10:18-0.26D2Brent BurnsJosh Manson9:42+0.24D3Brett KulakSam Malinski7:13+0.37SPARENoah Juulsen11:15-0.211ST2ND3RD01.51.5

Matchups

5v5 · every skater against every skater, goalies first · hover a cell
LAK won the chances COL won them full colour = a margin of 0.75 xG or more taller = more time together (full height at 12:00) on together, dead even never on together G = goalie: his row or column is each skater against the whole other team
KuemperKempePanarinByfieldZuccarelloTurcotteLaferriereHaulaLaughtonMooreArmiaLeeHeleniusCeciAndersonDoughtyDumoulinEdmundsonClarkeBlackwoodLehkonenMacKinnonNecasKadriNelsonLandeskogRoyKellySvechkovHughesSchwartzToewsMakarBurnsMansonKulakMalinskiJuulsenGL1L2L3L4D1D2D3GL1L2L3FD1D2D3D
How to read this

Rows are LAK's skaters, columns COL's, grouped the way they played: forward lines (L1 = the line that played together most), then defence pairs. Each cell covers the five-on-five time those two players shared the ice. Its colour is the club that out-chanced the other in that time — expected goals for minus against — and the stronger the colour, the bigger the margin. Each cell is also raised: the taller the block, the longer the two shared the ice, up to full height at 12:00 of five-on-five time. A grey cell means they met and it came out even; an open, flat one means they never met at five-on-five.

The first row and column are the goalies. A goalie is in net for every five-on-five second, so a skater's cell against the other side's goalie is all of that skater's five-on-five time against that team — the rest of his row or column added up — and the corner where the two goalies meet is the game's five-on-five. Those cells cover far more time than any pair, so they reach full colour sooner and stand at full height, a wall along each edge of the grid. A goalie change adds a second goalie row or column, each covering his own time.

Linemates share the ice, so a line against a line reads as a block. The margin is a total, not a rate: a long matchup has room to build a big gap and a thirty-second one does not — which is what the height is there to show: a tall, strong cell is the game's story; a short, strong one is a moment. Hover (or tap) any cell for the exact time together, the xG each way, attempts and goals. One game — a strong cell is what happened, not what would happen again.

Goals

TeamScorerPeriodStrengthxG
LAKBrian Dumoulin 1 5v5 0.01
COLBrock Nelson 1 PP 0.08
COLParker Kelly 1 5v5 0.09
LAKJoel Armia 2 PK 0.03
LAKTrevor Moore 2 PK 0.06
COLNathan MacKinnon 2 PP 0.16
COLNathan MacKinnon 2 5v5 0.07
COLNicolas Roy 2 5v5 0.19
COLArtturi Lehkonen 2 PP 0.19
LAKArtemi Panarin 3 PP 0.04
COLGabriel Landeskog 3 5v5 0.08
COLArtturi Lehkonen 3 PP 0.19

The prediction, scored

Before puck drop the engine made COL a 64.1% favorite, expecting a 2.55–3.41 game — COL won 4–8, so the call landed. Every number in this section was issued before the game and is never re-graded.

pred. xGactual xG pred. 5v5actual 5v5 pred. STactual PP
LAK 2.552.84 1.611.73 1.111.02
COL 3.413.44 2.682.50 1.090.93

Predicted 5v5 / special-teams portions come from the map's strength splits (one shared scale per team pins the all-strengths total to its expected goals), so they don't sum exactly — the remainder is 4v4, 3v3, and other mixed states. The actual PP column is power-play xG only, the same bucket the map's special-teams view draws.

The pregame score grid

The likeliest finals the engine saw before the game, with what actually happened marked — ■ LAK · ■ COL.

Likeliest finals (LAK–COL)probability
2–3 5.5%
2–2 4.9% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
2–4 4.7%
3–3 4.7% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
1–3 4.3%
4–8 0.2% what happened
7.8%3.3%019.9%11.3%125.4%19.2%221.6%21.8%313.8%18.6%47.0%12.7%53.0%7.2%61.1%3.5%70.5%2.3%8+

Scoreline odds treat the two teams' totals as independent — the engine's known simplification (it slightly under-counts regulation ties; the correlation term is registered v1.1 work). The OT/SO layer is a separate fitted model and is already inside the headline win probability.

The pregame read

The engine made COL a 64.1% favorite — COL controls 57.2% of the predicted xG. Of LAK's 2.55 expected goals, 1.61 should come at 5v5 and 1.11 on the power play; COL projects 2.68 at 5v5 and 1.09 on the power play. The logistic challenger put the home side at 66.5%, Elo at 67.8%.

Tale of the tape

How each team fares on its own, season to date: per-game xG rates with league rank (of 15). Rank 1 is best on every row — orange ranks sit in the top third of the league, gray in the bottom third.

LAKCOL
2.84 (6th) Offense
xG for / game
3.44 (5th)
3.44 (12th) Defense
xG against / game
2.84 (10th)
1.02 (4th) Power play
PP xG / game
0.93 (5th)
0.93 (11th) Penalty kill
PP xG conceded / game
1.02 (12th)

Season-to-date form as of the site's latest build, shown for context — the ratings the engine actually used were its own as-of-game-day state. Replay this matchup in the lab →