xJawn NHL expected goals

← Games

Save a card: Summary · Full card · Game flow · STL skaters · CHI skaters · STL lines · CHI lines · Matchups

STL 2 – 4 CHI

St. Louis Blues at Chicago Blackhawks

Final · Oct 6, 2026
2026-27 · regular season
The call
STL 61.3% ✗
expected 3.35–2.67 · CHI won 2–4
actual xG
2.57–1.76
xG share, predicted → actual
STL 56% → 59%44% → 41% CHI
Today's puzzle Remember Some Guys — name the skater from the shape of his career. Three clues, one guess a day. Play →
Adjusts with rink filters

Strength and score are read from STL's side, the same minutes at both ends: PP = STL power play · PK = CHI power play · Leading = STL ahead · ST = each club's own power play.

STL attacks◀ all strengths
CHI attacksall strengths ▶
× goal• on net ◦ missed· blocked hover any attempt for the shooter, its xG and everything the model saw
How to read this map

One rink, both teams: STL attacks the left net, CHI the right. Every attempt is a Gaussian bump of height = its model xG. The controls switch the surface (xG heatmap ↔ vs league) and the markers; vs league compares this game against a typical NHL team-game under the same filter (2025-26 regular season, 1312 games), so a 5v5 view is measured against league 5v5.

A strength or score filter is read from STL's side and mirrored for CHI: “STL PP” shows STL's power-play attempts on the left and CHI's shorthanded attempts on the right — the same minutes of the game at both ends. Empty-net attempts are excluded unless you include them. The Player control narrows the map and the rows beneath it to the attempts by either club while one player was on the ice (for a goalie, while he was in net); his own attempts wear a blue ring. vs league switches off while a player is picked — the league baseline is a whole team-game, which one player's slice is not. Hover any attempt for the shooter, the result, its xG, and the inputs behind it: clock, strength, score, shot type, distance, angle, handedness, rush/rebound, what happened just before, and the goalie or the blocker.

What each side produced

all strengths · regular season
STL CHI
bars share a scale within each row · the longer bar is the row's leader
Goalson the map
2 2
Expected goals
2.57 1.76
xG%share of xG
59% 41%
High-dangerattempts ≥ 0.20 xG
1 1
Shots on goal
27 19
Attempts
60 39
xG by period · whole game 1st0.4–0.52nd0.6–1.03rd1.6–0.3

The Blackhawks beat the Blues 4–2 at home despite being out-created 2.6–1.8 in expected goals. That is a finishing-and-goaltending win. At 5v5: STL 2.0, CHI 0.9.

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

As the game went

cumulative STL − CHI xG · bands = power plays · lines = goals
1ST2ND3RD+0.5−0.5+1−1STL AHEAD ▲CHI AHEAD ▼
How to read this

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

Skaters

on-ice xG · sorted by net · one game
How to read this

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.

STL
against for own net ice time
0.50.5110Connor McMichaelF17:53+0.88Dalibor DvorskyF10:50+0.82Cam FowlerD23:05+0.65Brandon CarloD17:58+0.64Pavel BuchnevichF17:43+0.63Adam JiricekD18:12+0.48Mason McTavishF17:20+0.42Ross JohnstonF7:15+0.38Jake NeighboursF15:15+0.27Jonatan BerggrenF15:48+0.26Robert ThomasF20:31+0.21Jimmy SnuggerudF18:58+0.18Dylan HollowayF16:03+0.16Theo LindsteinD14:49-0.01Philip BrobergD22:25-0.11Pius SuterF13:18-0.14Dillon DubeF10:12-0.22Colton ParaykoD20:11-0.41
CHI
against for own net ice time
0.50.5110Ryan DonatoF9:27+0.44Nick LardisF9:39+0.41Frank NazarF19:34+0.26Teuvo TeravainenF9:31+0.19Oliver MooreF12:16+0.14Tyler BertuzziF17:50+0.13Bowen ByramD21:23+0.07Sam RinzelD17:45-0.10Patrick KaneF20:55-0.31Artyom LevshunovD18:00-0.32Anton FrondellF18:38-0.32Ian ColeD19:38-0.36Roman KantserovF20:36-0.40Ryan GreeneF14:00-0.48Alex VlasicD21:48-0.57Jordan GreenwayF12:41-0.64Cole SmithF14:39-0.81Wyatt KaiserD17:56-1.00

Lines & pairs

most-used 5v5 units · when they played · on-ice xG
How to read this

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.

STL
on ice power play penalty kill xGA xGF
FORWARD LINESL1Jonatan BerggrenConnor McMichaelMason McTavish11:20+0.13L2Robert ThomasDylan HollowayJimmy Snuggerud11:13+0.09L3Ross JohnstonDillon DubePius Suter6:13+0.38L4Pavel BuchnevichJake NeighboursDalibor Dvorsky6:12+0.22DEFENCE PAIRSD1Cam FowlerBrandon Carlo16:41+0.58D2Philip BrobergAdam Jiricek12:09+0.36D3Colton ParaykoTheo Lindstein11:37-0.011ST2ND3RD00.750.75
CHI
on ice power play penalty kill xGA xGF
FORWARD LINESL1Patrick KaneFrank NazarRoman Kantserov13:08-0.38L2Jordan GreenwayCole SmithRyan Greene8:50+0.03L3Teuvo TeravainenTyler BertuzziAnton Frondell6:32+0.23L4Ryan DonatoNick LardisOliver Moore5:39+0.51DEFENCE PAIRSD1Ian ColeAlex Vlasic18:18-0.15D2Bowen ByramArtyom Levshunov15:22+0.08D3Wyatt KaiserSam Rinzel13:53-0.291ST2ND3RD00.750.75

Matchups

5v5 · every skater against every skater, goalies first · hover a cell
STL won the chances CHI 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
HoferBerggrenMcMichaelMcTavishThomasHollowaySnuggerudJohnstonDubeSuterBuchnevichNeighboursDvorskyFowlerCarloBrobergJiricekParaykoLindsteinKnightKaneNazarKantserovGreenwaySmithGreeneTeravainenBertuzziFrondellDonatoLardisMooreColeVlasicByramLevshunovKaiserRinzelGL1L2L3L4D1D2D3GL1L2L3L4D1D2D3
How to read this

Rows are STL's skaters, columns CHI'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

xG = the chance, before it went in
TeamScorerPeriodTimexG
STLMason McTavish 1st15:38 0.05
STLConnor McMichael 3rd19:21 PP 0.14
CHISam Rinzel 2nd5:40 PP 0.47
CHIAnton Frondell 2nd7:40 0.13
CHICole Smith 3rd18:51 EN 0.46
CHIFrank Nazar 3rd19:56 EN 0.52

The prediction, scored

Before puck drop the engine made STL a 61.3% favorite, expecting a 3.35–2.67 game — CHI won 2–4, so the call missed. Every number in this section was issued before the game and is never re-graded.

pred. xGactual xG pred. 5v5actual 5v5 pred. STactual PP
STL 3.352.57 2.741.95 0.500.62
CHI 2.671.76 1.930.92 0.580.65

Predicted 5v5 / special-teams portions come from the predicted 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 columns are the card's own counts (empty-net attempts excluded); the actual PP column is power-play xG only, the same bucket the predicted map's special-teams view draws.

The pregame score grid

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

Likeliest finals (STL–CHI)probability
2–2 6.9% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
3–3 6.9% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
4–2 4.8%
3–1 4.3%
4–4 3.8% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
2–4 3.0% what happened
3.5%7.1%011.8%18.7%119.5%24.6%221.7%21.7%318.3%14.5%412.5%7.8%57.1%3.5%63.4%1.4%72.2%0.6%8+

Scoreline odds are the engine's own grid: each team's goals as a Poisson count, with the fitted adjustment for how often games end tied after regulation (ρ = 0.35), so these odds and the headline win probability come from the same numbers. The OT/SO layer is a separate fitted model and is already inside the headline win probability.

The pregame read

The engine made STL a 61.3% favorite — CHI controls 44.3% of the predicted xG. Of STL's 3.35 expected goals, 2.74 should come at 5v5 and 0.50 on the power play; CHI projects 1.93 at 5v5 and 0.58 on the power play. The logistic challenger put the home side at 36.2%, Elo at 45.9%.

Where the engine expected the goals

The predicted surface, issued before puck drop — not this game's shots (those are the card's map above). STL attacks the left net, CHI the right; each end multiplies where the attacking team generates xG this season by where its opponent concedes it, scaled so each end totals the engine's expected goals. Actual shots lays the game's unblocked attempts on top: × goals, • on net, ◦ missed.

Tale of the tape

How each team fares on its own, season to date: per-game xG rates with league rank (of 32). Rank 1 is best on every row — orange ranks sit in the top third of the league, gray in the bottom third.

STLCHI
2.82 (18th) Offense
xG for / game
1.95 (32nd)
2.57 (10th) Defense
xG against / game
3.30 (28th)
0.58 (26th) Power play
PP xG / game
0.34 (31st)
0.71 (15th) Penalty kill
PP xG conceded / game
0.44 (3rd)

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 →