xJawn NHL expected goals

← League

Philadelphia Flyers

Metropolitan · 43-27-12, 98 pts

82 GP · 2nd Metropolitan
2025-26 · regular season
Adjusts with rink filters
shots for◀ 5v5 offense
shots against5v5 defense ▶
How to read this map

One rink, both ends: what PHI generates on the left, what it concedes on the right. Every attempt is a Gaussian bump of height = its model xG, summed per game. The controls switch the surface (xG heatmapvs league, the league baseline at the same strength) and the markers: × goal · on net · missed · small blocked.

The page opens at 5v5; empty-net attempts are excluded throughout, and the strength buckets segregate them anyway — which is why the empty-net control greys out unless the view can actually contain one. Everything inside the outlined box moves with the filters; everything below it does not.

Observed production

5v5 · regular season
for against
axis spans ±31% of league average · centre = average · right = more
Goalsteam
161 38th pctl149 16th pctl
Shotsteam
1,574 6th pctl1,576 13th pctl
Attemptsteam
3,328 6th pctl3,644 28th pctl
xGteam
156.0 28th pctl150.6 16th pctl
xGF%share of team xG
50.9%63rd pctl
0% 50% = even split · gray = league middle 50% / 90% 100%

Percentiles and the gray spread rank against all 32 teams recomputed under the current filter — every bar and band here moves together, so a slice never ranks against a different slice's league.

Rolling xGF%

5v5 · regular season
Per-game chance share, smoothed. drag the slider to set the window

Model estimates

🔒 full season · 5v5
Season-long ratings — the filters above don't apply here. goals vs league average · bar grows from average
Shootingour skaters · on our shots
+4.122nd pctl
3,328 attempts · 100% by rated shooters
Savingour goalies · on shots faced
Samuel Ersson -2.67 G · 1,336 shotsDan Vladar +1.45 G · 2,231 shotsAleksei Kolosov -0.21 G · 77 shots
-1.43rd pctl
Dan Vladar 2,231 · Samuel Ersson 1,336 · Aleksei Kolosov 77 shots faced
Shooting againsttheir skaters · on shots faced
-7.991st pctl
sign-flipped — positive means they shot worse than average
Saving againsttheir goalies · on our shots
-8.531st pctl
negative means their goalies stopped more than average
−23league average+23

These four are not centred at zero: the league average of each sits well away from it, and the two against columns barely vary between teams, since every team faces roughly average opposition. So the level of a bar is not the signal — its rank is. They are shown because they genuinely move adjusted xGF% below, and folding them into the two own-team rows would have hidden half of that.

Adjusted xGF%skill-weighted chance share
shooting +0.65 ppsaving against -1.37 ppshooting against -1.27 ppsaving -0.22 pp
48.7%31st pctl · -2.22 pp
0% 50% = even split · gray = league middle 50% / 90% 100%
How it's built, and what it isn't
unadjusted 50.9% +shooting +0.65+saving against -1.37+shooting against -1.27+saving -0.22 = adjusted 48.7%

How it's builtEvery 5v5 shot is re-scored with σ(logit(xG) + shooter − goalie) and both ends re-summed. Both skill terms land on every shot — one team's for side, the other's against side — so the league share still averages 50%. The two moves are taken in that order and sum exactly to the total; shares don't decompose additively, so a side-by-side split would not close.

What it isn'tA descriptive re-score of shots already taken, not a forecast. Against future goal share the combined adjustment is indistinguishable from plain xGF% (+0.019 r, p = 0.192); only the shooting half shows a small honest lift (+0.026, p = 0.020), and the saving half contributes nothing forward-looking. The premise underneath is itself unestablished — xGF% over GF% is +0.040, p = 0.246. Read it as what this roster's skill was worth on these shots — nothing more.

The four segments are the four rows above, in order. They are four and not two because η puts both rating terms on every shot: the shots we took carry our shooters and the opposing goalie, and the shots we faced carry their shooters and ours. Over a full season the two “against” terms would sit near league average and contribute nothing — but the ratings are not centred at zero this season, so they do move the number, and hiding them inside a single “shots faced” figure would have left half the adjustment unexplained.

Season context

descriptive · not modeled
How the season was played, not how well. Not a modeled component: each is its own metric (a rate, a TOI share, or opponents' net xG-RAPM), shown with a league percentile only where one exists, never added together. Not a grade.
Ice timeshare by strength
5v5 79%PPPK
-0.2PP − PK min/60
Score stateTOI by game state
trail 35%tied 36%lead 30%
balanced
Goalie workloadstarter's share of shots
61%of 5v5 shots against
Schedule strengthopponents' net xG-RAPM
not available in the pipeline
0league average100 pctl
Full table · all numbers
FamilyStatValue (current slice)
Observed ◆ filtered Goals for / against 161 / 149
Observed ◆ filtered xG for / against 156.0 / 150.6
Observed ◆ filtered Shots for / against 1,574 / 1,576
Observed ◆ filtered Attempts for / against 3,328 / 3,644
Modeled 🔒 5v5 Shooting — our skaters · on our shots +4.1 G 22nd pctl
Modeled 🔒 5v5 Saving — our goalies · on shots faced -1.4 G 3rd pctl
Modeled 🔒 5v5 Shooting against — their skaters · on shots faced -7.9 G 91st pctl
Modeled 🔒 5v5 Saving against — their goalies · on our shots -8.5 G 31st pctl
Modeled 🔒 5v5Unadjusted xGF%50.9%
Modeled 🔒 5v5↳ shooting shift+0.65 pp
Modeled 🔒 5v5↳ saving against shift-1.37 pp
Modeled 🔒 5v5↳ shooting against shift-1.27 pp
Modeled 🔒 5v5↳ saving shift-0.22 pp
Modeled 🔒 5v5Adjusted xGF% 48.7% 31st pctl
ContextIce time — share by strength-0.2
ContextScore state — TOI by game statebalanced
ContextGoalie workload — starter's share of shots61%
ContextSchedule strength — opponents' net xG-RAPM

Observed values reflect the active rink filters; modeled values are fixed at their full-season 5v5 fit.

Modeled ratings come from joint__baseline_xg__42ccb89b (as of 2026-06-14) — a separate surface from the box-score xG model badged in the footer.