xJawn NHL expected goals

← Games

Save a card: Summary · Full card · Game flow · EDM skaters · ANA skaters · EDM lines · ANA lines · Matchups

EDM 5 – 2 ANA

Edmonton Oilers at Anaheim Ducks

Final · Oct 7, 2026
2026-27 · regular season
The call
EDM 50.8% ✓
expected 3.39–3.33 · EDM won 5–2
actual xG
2.59–3.20
xG share, predicted → actual
EDM 50% → 45%50% → 55% ANA
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 EDM's side, the same minutes at both ends: PP = EDM power play · PK = ANA power play · Leading = EDM ahead · ST = each club's own power play.

EDM attacks◀ all strengths
ANA 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: EDM attacks the left net, ANA 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 EDM's side and mirrored for ANA: “EDM PP” shows EDM's power-play attempts on the left and ANA'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
EDM ANA
bars share a scale within each row · the longer bar is the row's leader
Goalson the map
5 2
Expected goals
2.59 3.20
xG%share of xG
45% 55%
High-dangerattempts ≥ 0.20 xG
1 2
Shots on goal
19 31
Attempts
43 74
xG by period · whole game 1st0.9–1.62nd1.4–0.33rd0.4–1.3

The Oilers beat the Ducks 5–2 on the road in a game the chances called about even, EDM 2.6 to ANA 3.2 in expected goals. EDM scored 5 on 2.6 expected.

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

One line: cumulative EDM minus ANA expected goals. Above zero EDM is ahead on chances, below zero ANA 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.

EDM
against for own net ice time
0.50.5111.51.50Leon DraisaitlF19:18+1.29Vasily PodkolzinF18:13+1.29Evan BouchardD23:09+0.81Connor McDavidF24:31+0.68Trent FredericF11:33+0.25Kasperi KapanenF16:22+0.20Jason DickinsonF9:33+0.13Max JonesF7:21-0.13Mattias EkholmD21:56-0.15Isaac HowardF10:05-0.35Josh SamanskiF9:50-0.35Ryan SheaD24:30-0.38Mathieu JosephF14:43-0.39Ty EmbersonD11:10-0.67Jake WalmanD15:50-0.69Connor MurphyD19:21-0.71Owen MichaelsF13:41-0.89Alex FormentonF15:17-1.30
ANA
against for own net ice time
0.50.5111.51.5220Beckett SenneckeF24:58+1.57Leo CarlssonF23:36+1.41Mikael GranlundF21:33+1.15Cutter GauthierF24:10+0.86Alex KillornF9:30+0.73Pavel MintyukovD17:45+0.38Tyson HindsD11:53+0.32Anthony-John (AJ) GreerF9:18+0.25Ryan PoehlingF13:07-0.01Nikita KlepovF10:03-0.03Nikita NesterenkoF11:08-0.07Jackson LaCombeD29:18-0.11Travis MitchellD13:12-0.14Jeff MalottF9:00-0.17Tristan LuneauD21:33-0.31Noah WarrenD17:17-0.34Judd CaulfieldF10:06-0.44Tim WasheF17:19-0.59

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.

EDM
on ice power play penalty kill xGA xGF
FORWARD LINESL1Leon DraisaitlConnor McDavidVasily Podkolzin16:10+1.23L2Mathieu JosephAlex FormentonOwen Michaels7:25-0.07L3Max JonesIsaac HowardJosh Samanski5:31-0.11L4Jason DickinsonKasperi KapanenTrent Frederic5:29+0.13DEFENCE PAIRSD1Connor MurphyRyan Shea12:12-0.11D2Mattias EkholmEvan Bouchard10:32+0.62D3Jake WalmanTy Emberson9:18-0.671ST2ND3RD01.751.75
ANA
on ice power play penalty kill xGA xGF
FORWARD LINESL1Judd CaulfieldJeff MalottTim Washe8:23-0.25L2Anthony-John (AJ) GreerCutter GauthierLeo Carlsson4:54-0.28L3Ryan PoehlingNikita NesterenkoNikita Klepov4:42+0.01L4Alex KillornMikael GranlundBeckett Sennecke3:16+0.19DEFENCE PAIRSD1Jackson LaCombeTristan Luneau12:06-0.99D2Pavel MintyukovTravis Mitchell8:56-0.19D3Tyson HindsNoah Warren8:22+0.181ST2ND3RD01.251.25

Matchups

5v5 · every skater against every skater, goalies first · hover a cell
EDM won the chances ANA 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
LeviDraisaitlMcDavidPodkolzinJosephFormentonMichaelsJonesHowardSamanskiDickinsonKapanenFredericMurphySheaEkholmBouchardWalmanEmbersonDostalHussoCaulfieldMalottWashe(AJ) GreerGauthierCarlssonPoehlingNesterenkoKlepovKillornGranlundSenneckeLaCombeLuneauMintyukovMitchellHindsWarrenGL1L2L3L4D1D2D3GL1L2L3L4D1D2D3
How to read this

Rows are EDM's skaters, columns ANA'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
EDMEvan Bouchard 2nd0:11 0.01
EDMKasperi Kapanen 2nd6:30 PP 0.19
EDMEvan Bouchard 2nd14:12 0.04
EDMVasily Podkolzin 2nd16:49 0.19
EDMConnor McDavid 2nd19:08 0.05
ANABeckett Sennecke 1st4:11 PP 0.21
ANABeckett Sennecke 1st15:28 PP 0.13

The prediction, scored

Before puck drop the engine made EDM a 50.8% favorite, expecting a 3.39–3.33 game — EDM won 5–2, 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
EDM 3.392.59 2.071.62 1.210.78
ANA 3.333.20 2.061.58 1.141.57

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 — ■ EDM · ■ ANA.

Likeliest finals (EDM–ANA)probability
3–3 4.8% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
3–2 4.3%
2–3 4.3%
4–3 4.1%
3–4 4.0%
5–2 2.5% what happened
3.4%3.6%011.5%11.9%119.4%19.8%221.9%22.0%318.6%18.4%412.6%12.2%57.1%6.8%63.4%3.2%72.2%2.0%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 EDM a 50.8% favorite — ANA controls 49.6% of the predicted xG. Of EDM's 3.39 expected goals, 2.07 should come at 5v5 and 1.21 on the power play; ANA projects 2.06 at 5v5 and 1.14 on the power play. The logistic challenger put the home side at 48.3%, Elo at 52.8%.

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). EDM attacks the left net, ANA 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.

EDMANA
3.31 (6th) Offense
xG for / game
2.56 (24th)
2.52 (10th) Defense
xG against / game
3.05 (20th)
1.07 (6th) Power play
PP xG / game
1.02 (7th)
0.64 (10th) Penalty kill
PP xG conceded / game
0.96 (23rd)

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 →