xJawn NHL expected goals

← Games

Save a card: Summary · Full card · Game flow · CHI skaters · DET skaters · CHI lines · DET lines · Matchups
Final · Oct 29, 2026
2026-27 · regular season
The call
DET 65.4% ✓
expected 2.50–3.43 · DET won 1–4
actual xG
1.64–4.96
xG share, predicted → actual
CHI 42% → 25%58% → 75% DET
Today's puzzle Remember Some Guys — name the skater from the shape of his career. Three clues, one guess a day. Play →
On the ice
Adjusts with rink filters

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

CHI attacks◀ all strengths
DET 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: CHI attacks the left net, DET 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 (2026-27 regular season, 283 games), so a 5v5 view is measured against league 5v5.

A strength or score filter is read from CHI's side and mirrored for DET: “CHI PP” shows CHI's power-play attempts on the left and DET'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 · this game
CHI DET
bars share a scale within each row · the longer bar is the row's leader
Goalson the map
1 3
Expected goals
1.64 4.96
xG%share of xG
25% 75%
High-dangerattempts ≥ 0.20 xG
1 7
Shots on goal
19 30
Attempts
46 61
xG by period · whole game 1st0.6–1.42nd0.5–1.73rd0.6–1.9

The Red Wings beat the Blackhawks 4–1 at home, and the chances agreed: DET out-created CHI 5.0–1.6 in expected goals. At 5v5: CHI 1.3, DET 4.3.

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

all situations · this game
cumulative CHI − DET xG · bands = power plays · lines = goals
1ST2ND3RD+1−1+2−2+3−3CHI AHEAD ▲DET AHEAD ▼
How to read this

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

Goals

this game
xG = the chance, before it went in
TeamScorerPeriodTimexG
CHIConnor Bedard 1st5:59 0.16
DETViktor Arvidsson 2nd7:31 0.04
DETLucas Raymond 3rd1:09 PP 0.06
DETViktor Arvidsson 3rd15:26 0.56
DETViktor Arvidsson 3rd16:45 EN 0.45
Who

Skaters

all · whole game · this game
on-ice xG for and against, his own attempts, the net
strength
period
sort
How to read this

Every skater: 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. The chart opens sorted by net, best first; pick another key to re-order it, and click the same key again to flip it. A name opens the player's page. Pick a period and every bar re-lays for that period alone on the same scale as the whole game, so the three periods add up to it; a skater who did not play in it fades to the bottom.

CHI
against for own net ice time
0.50.5111.51.5222.52.5330Oliver MooreF11:41+0.14Teuvo TeravainenF17:32+0.10Connor BedardF18:22-0.25Sam RinzelD15:43-0.54Kevin KorchinskiD13:04-0.67Ryan DonatoF12:57-0.77Jordan GreenwayF16:01-0.79Alex VlasicD18:44-0.81Anton FrondellF11:44-0.85Ryan GreeneF13:56-1.00Frank NazarF14:34-1.06Ian ColeD21:03-1.09Tyler BertuzziF14:02-1.11Cole SmithF15:46-1.16Wyatt KaiserD22:36-1.22Patrick KaneF14:23-1.23Roman KantserovF17:41-1.25Artyom LevshunovD24:24-2.42
0.50.5111.51.5222.52.50Teuvo TeravainenF12:57+0.10Oliver MooreF11:22-0.17Connor BedardF15:54-0.30Alex VlasicD14:20-0.31Sam RinzelD14:33-0.54Cole SmithF12:03-0.59Jordan GreenwayF12:25-0.64Ryan GreeneF12:25-0.64Kevin KorchinskiD13:04-0.67Ryan DonatoF12:36-0.77Anton FrondellF10:43-0.79Ian ColeD18:42-0.92Tyler BertuzziF11:40-1.17Roman KantserovF15:13-1.30Frank NazarF12:30-1.33Wyatt KaiserD19:33-1.39Patrick KaneF12:00-1.60Artyom LevshunovD21:45-2.32
0.250.250Connor BedardF1:44+0.06Roman KantserovF1:44+0.06Teuvo TeravainenF1:41+0.06Patrick KaneF1:39+0.06Tyler BertuzziF1:38+0.06Frank NazarF0:22+0.00Ryan DonatoF0:21+0.00Sam RinzelD0:19+0.00Alex VlasicD0:16+0.00Oliver MooreF0:16+0.00
0.250.250.50.50.750.750Oliver MooreF0:03+0.00Sam RinzelD0:51-0.01Frank NazarF0:58-0.03Teuvo TeravainenF2:10-0.05Anton FrondellF1:01-0.06Wyatt KaiserD3:03-0.14Jordan GreenwayF3:36-0.16Ian ColeD2:21-0.17Ryan GreeneF1:31-0.36Artyom LevshunovD2:39-0.41Alex VlasicD4:08-0.50Cole SmithF3:43-0.56
DET
against for own net ice time
0.50.5111.51.5222.52.50Viktor ArvidssonF17:07+1.97Moritz SeiderD24:17+1.93Alex DeBrincatF18:00+1.72Ben ChiarotD21:09+1.44Emmitt FinnieF18:02+1.32J.T. CompherF12:16+1.26Michael RasmussenF16:21+1.22Anton JohanssonD15:43+0.91Andreas EnglundD15:09+0.91Nate DanielsonF15:46+0.82Lucas RaymondF18:49+0.67Sheldon DriesF12:57+0.61Justin FaulkD20:26+0.47Keegan KolesarF11:31+0.42William WallinderD17:27+0.36Carter MazurF9:29+0.30Michael Brandsegg-NygårdF15:23+0.26Andrew CoppF18:08+0.07
0.50.5111.51.5220Moritz SeiderD18:12+1.49Ben ChiarotD19:09+1.49Viktor ArvidssonF12:53+1.47J.T. CompherF11:49+1.32Alex DeBrincatF13:44+1.22Anton JohanssonD15:04+1.22Andreas EnglundD14:32+1.22Michael RasmussenF13:59+1.10Emmitt FinnieF12:46+0.88Nate DanielsonF13:21+0.70Sheldon DriesF11:34+0.61Lucas RaymondF14:01+0.48Michael Brandsegg-NygårdF13:16+0.45Keegan KolesarF10:44+0.42William WallinderD17:03+0.36Justin FaulkD17:53+0.35Carter MazurF9:26+0.30Andrew CoppF14:19+0.26
0.250.250.50.50Alex DeBrincatF4:07+0.50Viktor ArvidssonF4:06+0.50Moritz SeiderD4:05+0.50Lucas RaymondF4:03+0.50Emmitt FinnieF4:02+0.50Justin FaulkD2:26+0.12Andrew CoppF2:26+0.12Nate DanielsonF2:25+0.12Michael RasmussenF2:22+0.12Michael Brandsegg-NygårdF2:07+0.12William WallinderD0:14+0.00Ben ChiarotD0:03+0.00Keegan KolesarF0:03+0.00Sheldon DriesF0:03+0.00Carter MazurF0:03+0.00
0.250.250Andrew CoppF0:49+0.00Sheldon DriesF0:45+0.00Keegan KolesarF0:44+0.00Anton JohanssonD0:39+0.00Andreas EnglundD0:37+0.00Lucas RaymondF0:09+0.00Ben ChiarotD1:23-0.06Moritz SeiderD1:23-0.06Emmitt FinnieF1:04-0.06J.T. CompherF0:27-0.06

Lines & pairs

all · whole game · this game
most-used units · when they played · on-ice xG lines are by strength · 5v5 shown
strength
period
sort
How to read this

The units that actually played together most at the chosen strength — forward lines and defence pairs at 5v5, the whole group on the ice on the power play or the kill — each with when it was on the ice at that strength across the game clock (period and power-play bands behind the strip) and on-ice xG against / for while the whole unit was out, at that strength only. Sorted by time together; pick another key to re-order, and a name opens the player's page. Pick a period and the strip veils the rest of the game while the bars re-lay for that period alone, on the whole game's scale.

CHI
on ice power play penalty kill xGA xGF
DET
on ice power play penalty kill xGA xGF

Matchups

5v5 · this game
every skater against every skater, goalies first · hover a cell
order
CHI won the chances DET 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
GibsonCoppRaymondBrandsegg-NygårdArvidssonDeBrincatFinnieCompherRasmussenDanielsonKolesarDriesMazurChiarotSeiderFaulkWallinderEnglundJohanssonGL1L2L3L4D1D2D3GL1L2L3L4D1D2D3KnightGreenwaySmithGreeneKaneNazarMooreTeravainenBedardKantserovBertuzziDonatoFrondellKaiserLevshunovColeVlasicKorchinskiRinzel
How to read this

Rows are CHI's skaters, columns DET'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.

The model

The prediction, scored

🔒 pregame · this game

Before puck drop the engine made DET a 65.4% favorite, expecting a 2.50–3.43 game — DET won 1–4, 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
CHI 2.501.64 1.671.27 0.610.06
DET 3.434.96 2.504.34 0.780.61

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

🔒 pregame · this game

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

Likeliest finals (CHI–DET)probability
2–2 6.9% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
3–3 6.6% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
2–4 5.0%
1–3 4.7%
1–4 4.0% what happened
8.4%3.3%020.7%11.1%125.6%18.9%221.2%21.4%313.2%18.6%46.7%13.0%52.8%7.6%61.0%3.7%70.4%2.4%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

🔒 pregame · this game

The engine made DET a 65.4% favorite — DET controls 57.9% of the predicted xG. Of CHI's 2.50 expected goals, 1.67 should come at 5v5 and 0.61 on the power play; DET projects 2.50 at 5v5 and 0.78 on the power play. The logistic challenger put the home side at 67.2%, Elo at 65.2%.

Why DET 65.4%
win chance× expected goals
5v5 play +8.4 DET ×1.09 · CHI ×0.92
home ice +3.6 DET ×1.08 · CHI ×1.00
goaltending +1.5 DET ×1.01 · CHI ×0.97
schedule +0.8 DET ×1.01 · CHI ×0.99
special teams +0.7 DET ×1.01 · CHI ×0.99
finishing −0.1 DET ×0.99 · CHI ×0.99

Win chance is in points toward DET (bars right of the line push toward DET, left toward CHI). Each win-chance number is one-at-a-time: that piece reset to league average (neutral ice, a typical night's rest) on both sides and the game re-priced; the pieces interact, so they don't add up to the call. The multipliers are exact: a league-average team on neutral ice, on a typical night's rest, would expect 2.88 goals in this game, and each side's expected goals is that times its column of multipliers. Special teams reads small because the engine's power-play terms fit near zero, not because special teams don't matter.

Where the engine expected the goals

🔒 pregame · this game

The predicted surface, issued before puck drop — not this game's shots (those are the card's map above). CHI attacks the left net, DET 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.

Context

Tale of the tape

season to date

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.

CHIDET
2.26 (32nd) Offense
xG for / game
3.10 (11th)
3.37 (30th) Defense
xG against / game
2.96 (16th)
0.49 (31st) Power play
PP xG / game
0.86 (7th)
0.67 (10th) Penalty kill
PP xG conceded / game
0.83 (22nd)

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 →