Motion-blurred skater in a Vancouver Canucks sweater
Breakdown · SEA at VAN · Preseason

Canucks run the Kraken off the ice on the underlying numbers

The verdict · earned

The Canucks earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.

SEA 3 · VAN 4
Preseason · exhibition

Split squads and prospects, not the club that will take the ice in October. The shots and grades below describe this game only: nothing here counts toward season records, form, rankings or player numbers.

◆ By the ModelSep 27, 12:16 AMxG: xgboost-0.765Edited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

The Canucks beat the Kraken 4-3. The underlying numbers confirmed it.

Vancouver controlled the game so thoroughly that Seattle's three goals required significant luck. The Kraken generated only 2.23 expected goals but scored 3 — a 0.77-goal overperformance that masked what was a clear dominance by the home team.

The Canucks held 52% of shot attempts and converted that advantage into a 62–38 split in expected goals. Vancouver's attack was built on speed: the team scored four goals from 27 rush chances, a conversion rate that explained the edge despite Seattle's competent power play.

Where Seattle lost the game. Transition defense was the weakness. The Kraken surrendered 27 rush shots worth 2.68 expected goals and allowed four of the five goals off the rush — benching gaps opened every period.

Where Vancouver won it. J. DeBrusk's go-ahead slap shot at 18:22 of the third was the moment. He finished with 1 goal and 2 assists. E. Pettersson added a goal and an assist off the rush in the second, and the power play converted twice on 12 chances.

The scoreline flattered Seattle. The Kraken's power play was crisp, but they gave up more than they got.

The goals

  • SEA 1–0, 02:13 of the first on the power play. B. Montour, slap shot from 56 feet, a 3% chance by the model, past K. Lankinen. Assists: M. Beniers, K. Kakko. Win probability moved 14 points.
  • SEA 2–0, 07:51 of the first. B. McMann, wrist shot from 27 feet, an 8% chance by the model (a rebound), past K. Lankinen. Assists: C. Fleury, B. Montour. 3 seconds after a SEA shot by C. Fleury. Win probability moved 13 points.
  • VAN 2–1, 11:15 of the first on the power play. B. Boeser, tip-in from 9 feet, a 10% chance by the model (off the rush), past J. Daccord. Assists: J. DeBrusk, F. Hronek. Win probability moved 14 points.
  • VAN 2–2, 02:31 of the second. E. Pettersson, backhander from 9 feet, a 19% chance by the model (off the rush), past J. Daccord. Assists: J. Lekkerimäki, J. DeBrusk. 2 seconds after a VAN takeaway by J. DeBrusk. Win probability moved 20 points.
  • SEA 3–2, 01:29 of the third. B. Catton, backhander from 6 feet, a 24% chance by the model (off the rush), past K. Lankinen. Assists: R. Winterton, S. Wright. 10 seconds after a SEA giveaway by V. Dunn. Win probability moved 27 points.
  • VAN 3–3, 11:05 of the third on the power play. Z. Buium, wrist shot from 11 feet, a 16% chance by the model (off the rush), past J. Daccord. Assists: L. Karlsson, T. Willander. Win probability moved 34 points.
  • VAN 3–4, 18:22 of the third. J. DeBrusk, slap shot from 11 feet, an 11% chance by the model (off the rush), past J. Daccord. Assists: B. Boeser, E. Pettersson. Win probability moved 42 points.

What the numbers can't tell you. Whether the finishing was luck or skill, why the benches were run the way they were, who was hurt, and anything said in the room. That is the beat's story, and it is worth reading.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Preseason · Sep 26
SEA
3
VAN
4

Canucks run the Kraken off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 2.2 – 3.7Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Canucks earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
SEA
2.23
VAN
3.69
38% of the chances62%

The board read SEA 3, VAN 4. The chances read SEA 2.2, VAN 3.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
VAN
+0.3
goals above expected
VAN3.69 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
SEA2.23 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored

Both sides finished close to what their chances were worth. This one was earned on the ice.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
The swing
+42
win-probability points
52% → 95% for VAN
VAN 100%the game, start to finish
SEA 100%P1 · P2 · P3
VANP3 18:22

J. DeBrusk makes it 3–4.

In-game win model · fitted on 5,248 games
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 02:13SEAB. MontourPP3%1–0
  2. P1 07:51SEAB. McMann8%2–0
  3. P1 11:15VANB. BoeserPP10%2–1
  4. P2 02:31VANE. Pettersson19%2–2
  5. P3 01:29SEAB. Catton24%3–2
  6. P3 11:05VANZ. BuiumPP16%3–3
  7. P3 18:22VANJ. DeBrusk11%3–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
SEA
33 shots
3
Final
76 shots
VAN
43 shots
4
SEA attackVAN attack
SEA VAN Goal
33
shots · 3 in
43
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
SEAVAN
1 / 2
0.44 xG
High danger
1 / 4
1.10 xG
1 / 14
1.51 xG
Medium
3 / 23
2.26 xG
1 / 26
0.28 xG
Low
0 / 32
0.33 xG

High-danger looks: SEA 1 of 2, VAN 1 of 4.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
D-
K. Lankinen
−0.8
VAN · 25/28 · 59:47
Best save · a 20% chance, wrist from 32 ft · P3 10:08
D-
J. Daccord
−0.8
SEA · 26/30 · 58:47
Best save · a 22% chance, snap from 19 ft · P3 13:57
Best skater on the ice
A+
VAN
J. DeBrusk
L · impact 2.39
15:05
Ice time
1–2
G – A
0.11
Own xG
68%
xG share
Impact · top 4
J. DeBrusk2.4A+
E. Pettersson2.2A+
B. Boeser1.9A+
L. Karlsson1.5A
Report card
SEAVAN
OffenseC-A
DefenseFC+
TransitionD-A-
Special teamsA+A+
GoaltendingC-D+
DisciplineDB
LuckC+C-
Seven dimensions, A+ to F · basis on the breakdown
Why it went the way it went
Why VAN won
  1. 01Dangerous off the rush
  2. 02Power play cashed in
  3. 03Won on the merits
Why SEA lost
  1. 01Rush defense leaked all night
  2. 02Paraded to the penalty box
  3. 03Ran hot in front of the net
Our storyline model · reasoning on the breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Canucks run the Kraken off the ice on the underlying numbers

A model, not a newsroom. Every number on these frames comes from the NHL's play-by-play and our own models. Nothing was watched, guessed or heard from anyone.

Read the full breakdown
backcheckreport.com
01 / 12 · Final
Every goal, in order

How it happened

NHL play-by-play
1stshots 8–4
  1. 02:13SEAB. Montourpower play(M. Beniers, K. Kakko)1–0

    Slap shot from 56 feet, a 3% chance, a shot that rarely goes in, past K. Lankinen. Win probability moved 14 points.On the ice: F. Gaudreau, R. Lindgren, C. Fleury, J. Melanson, O. Fisker Molgaard · against J. DeBrusk, E. Pettersson, J. Lekkerimäki, E. Pettersson, T. Willander

  2. 07:51SEAB. McMann(C. Fleury, B. Montour)2–0

    Wrist shot from 27 feet, an 8% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (a rebound), past K. Lankinen. 3s after a SEA shot by C. Fleury. Win probability moved 13 points.On the ice: J. Eberle, J. Eberle, C. Stephenson, R. Lindgren, C. Fleury, B. McMann · against B. Boeser, F. Hronek, M. Rossi, L. Ohgren, Z. Buium

  3. 11:15VANB. Boeserpower play(J. DeBrusk, F. Hronek)2–1

    Tip-in from 9 feet, a 10% chance (off the rush), past J. Daccord. Win probability moved 14 points.On the ice: L. Schenn, B. Gallagher, P. Cotter, A. Bains, E. Pettersson · against A. Larsson, F. Gaudreau, V. Dunn, J. Melanson, O. Fisker Molgaard

2ndshots 12–11
  1. 02:31VANE. Pettersson(J. Lekkerimäki, J. DeBrusk)2–2

    Backhander from 9 feet, a 19% chance (off the rush), past J. Daccord. 2s after a VAN takeaway by J. DeBrusk. Win probability moved 20 points.On the ice: L. Schenn, B. Gallagher, P. Cotter, A. Bains, E. Pettersson · against F. Gaudreau, F. Gaudreau, B. Montour, B. Montour, R. Evans, R. Evans, J. Melanson, J. Melanson, O. Fisker Molgaard, O. Fisker Molgaard

3rdshots 8–15
  1. 01:29SEAB. Catton(R. Winterton, S. Wright)3–2

    Backhander from 6 feet, a 24% chance (off the rush), past K. Lankinen. 10s after a SEA giveaway by V. Dunn. Win probability moved 27 points.On the ice: F. Gaudreau, R. Lindgren, C. Fleury, J. Melanson, O. Fisker Molgaard · against L. Schenn, B. Gallagher, P. Cotter, A. Bains, E. Pettersson

  2. 11:05VANZ. Buiumpower play(L. Karlsson, T. Willander)3–3

    Wrist shot from 11 feet, a 16% chance (off the rush), past J. Daccord. Win probability moved 34 points.On the ice: B. Gallagher, F. Hronek, D. O'Connor, E. Pettersson, M. Sasson · against A. Larsson, J. McCann, V. Dunn, K. Kakko, M. Beniers

  3. 18:22VANJ. DeBrusk(B. Boeser, E. Pettersson)3–4

    Slap shot from 11 feet, an 11% chance (off the rush), past J. Daccord. Win probability moved 42 points.On the ice: L. Schenn, J. Oleksiak, L. Karlsson, D. O'Connor, M. Sasson · against J. McCann, B. Montour, K. Kakko, M. Beniers, R. Evans

score reads SEA–VAN

Source · NHL play-by-play (api-web.nhle.com)
Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.69
VAN chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.3
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
0.996
VAN puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
58.4%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.23Expected goals3.69
VAN 62% of the chance quality
28Shots on goal30
2High-danger chances4
42All attempts (Corsi)59
Adjusted for score: SEA 40% · VAN 60%
Faceoffs · VAN won71%off75%neu39%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
SEA1 / 2 · 0.44 xG
VAN1 / 4 · 1.10 xG
Medium dangermid-range
SEA1 / 14 · 1.51 xG
VAN3 / 23 · 2.26 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
SEA1 / 26 · 0.28 xG
VAN0 / 32 · 0.33 xG

VAN went 3-for-23 from medium danger on 2.26 expected goals — 0.7 above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play
The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
SEA
3 G · 2.23 xG · +0.8
VAN
4 G · 3.69 xG · +0.3
012345

SEA finished +0.8 against expected, VAN +0.3.

Source · Backcheck xG model
Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
SEA
SNAP0/9
WRIST1/11
SLAP1/5
BACKHAND1/5
TIP IN0/0
DEFLECTED0/2
WRAP AROUND0/1
OTHER0/9
VAN
SNAP0/15
WRIST1/9
SLAP1/9
BACKHAND1/2
TIP IN1/7
DEFLECTED0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/16
SEA
VAN
Off the rush
1 G on 19
1.62 xG
4 G on 27
2.68 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 5
0.41 xG
0 G on 4
0.21 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: SEA went 0-for-9, VAN 0-for-15. VAN scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
New to these numbers?

Two things happened in this game: who created the better chances, and who put the puck in the net. They are not the same thing, and this page separates them on purpose.

The one to watch is expected goals— the best single read on who deserved to win. When it disagrees with the scoreboard, that disagreement is usually the story. Nothing here is a projection; every figure is computed from this game's play-by-play. Full glossary →

xG
Expected goals. Every shot scored by how often that exact look goes in. 2.5 xG means the chances were worth about two and a half goals.
HD
High-danger chances — shots from the slot and the crease, where shots actually become goals.
Corsi
Every shot attempt, including the ones that missed or got blocked. A rough read on who had the puck.
Adj.
Score-adjusted. Teams that trail shoot more and teams that lead sit back, so this corrects the attempt count for the scoreboard.
GSAx
Goals saved above expected. A positive number means the goalie stopped more than an average goalie would have on those shots.
PDO
Shooting % plus save % — a luck gauge. It sits near 1.000 over a season, so a game far from it usually means the bounces decided it.
Shot by shot

In the net

Graded on goals saved above expected
J. Daccord
SEA · 26/30 · .867
started · 58:47 · loss
-0.8
saved above expected
D-
the night
Attempts faced
42
Avg chance faced
7.6%
Stopped vs expected
0.905 vs 0.924
Rebounds allowed
4
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/30.6-0.4
Medium3/232.3-0.7
Low0/160.3+0.3
Shorthanded2/81.0-1.0
Tips & deflections1/80.7-0.3
The save
22% chance stopped, a snap from 19 ft · P3 13:57
The one to have back
10% chance went in, a tip-in from 9 ft · P1 11:15

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

K. Lankinen
VAN · 25/28 · .893
started · 59:47 · win
-0.8
saved above expected
D-
the night
Attempts faced
33
Avg chance faced
6.8%
Stopped vs expected
0.909 vs 0.932
Rebounds allowed
5 · 1 scored on
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/20.4-0.6
Medium1/141.5+0.5
Low1/170.3-0.7
Shorthanded1/10.0-1.0
Tips & deflections0/20.2+0.2
The save
20% chance stopped, a wrist from 32 ft · P3 10:08
The one to have back
3% chance went in, a slap from 56 ft · P1 02:13

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

Every skater who dressed

Who played

Rated on what they produced and how fast

Best skater on the ice by our rating: J. DeBrusk (VAN), 15:05 of ice, 1-2, 68% of the expected goals while he was out.

SEA18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
B. CattonC12:071-072A
B. MontourD24:171-144A
S. WrightC13:060-149A
M. BeniersC13:360-142B
C. FleuryD15:570-140B
R. WintertonC10:400-143B
K. KakkoR13:080-147C
B. McMannC20:271-032C
J. MelansonR13:460-058C
R. EvansD19:430-049D
F. GaudreauC14:330-026D
O. Fisker MolgaardC16:210-040D
J. McCannL12:570-016D
C. StephensonC20:220-029F
R. LindgrenD17:490-032F
J. EberleR16:350-036F
V. DunnD20:490-019F
A. LarssonD18:490-021F
VAN18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
J. DeBruskL15:051-268A+
E. PetterssonC17:511-170A+
B. BoeserR17:151-154A+
L. KarlssonC17:300-180A
Z. BuiumD19:231-057A
J. LekkerimäkiR12:400-157B
D. O'ConnorL18:400-073B
M. SassonC16:200-083B
F. HronekD23:390-164B
T. WillanderD20:010-148C
B. GallagherR11:420-056C
E. PetterssonD16:550-057C
J. OleksiakD19:570-071C
M. RossiC15:510-058C
L. SchennD16:310-059D
L. OhgrenL16:170-049D
A. BainsL11:240-053D
P. CotterL10:390-048D

xG% = share of expected goals while on the ice · PD/PT = penalties drawn / taken · “in N min” = a per-60 rate far above the raw total. Impact = 0.75 G + 0.7 A1 + 0.55 A2 + 0.075 SOG + 0.05 BLK + 0.15 penalties drawn − 0.15 taken + 0.01 faceoff wins − 0.01 losses + 0.3 individual xG + 0.5 on-ice xG for − 0.5 on-ice xG against. Rating = 65% impact + 35% impact per 60, as a percentile among the skaters in this game.

Scratched, SEA: P. Grubauer, G. Olofsson, M. Stephens, J. Mahura, C. Douglas, M. Samoskevich and 25 more. Scratched, VAN: C. Driedger, M. MacEachern, T. Demko, G. Brisebois, F. Chytil, A. Thomas and 28 more. Referees Kelly Sutherland and Ben Betker; linesmen Caleb Apperson and Kiel Murchison.

Graded against a league-average game

Report card

Seven dimensions · A+ to F
DimensionSEAVAN
Offense
▸Basis

SEA Created 2.23 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 2 high-danger shots (0.44 xG) and 19 rush shots (1.62 xG).

VAN Created 3.69 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 4 high-danger shots (1.10 xG) and 27 rush shots (2.68 xG).

C-
71
A
93
Defense
▸Basis

SEA Allowed 3.69 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 4 high-danger shots (1.10 xG) and 27 rush shots (2.68 xG).

VAN Allowed 2.23 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 2 high-danger shots (0.44 xG) and 19 rush shots (1.62 xG).

F
57
C+
79
Transition
▸Basis

SEA Rush shots 19–27, rush xG 1.62–2.68 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

VAN Rush shots 27–19, rush xG 2.68–1.62 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

D-
60
A-
90
Special teams
▸Basis

SEA 1-for-2 on the power play (50%; league ≈21%) with 0.03 PP xG.

VAN 2-for-4 on the power play (50%; league ≈21%) with 0.98 PP xG.

A+
99
A+
100
Goaltending
▸Basis

SEA -0.31 goals saved above expected on 30 shots against.

VAN -0.77 goals saved above expected on 28 shots against.

C-
72
D+
67
Discipline
▸Basis

SEA Took 5 penalties for 13 PIM vs 3 for 9 on the other side.

VAN Took 3 penalties for 9 PIM vs 5 for 13 on the other side.

D
65
B
85
Luck

Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

▸Basis

SEA Finishing +0.77 goals vs xG plus -0.31 GSAx of save luck = +0.46 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

VAN Finishing +0.31 goals vs xG plus -0.77 GSAx of save luck = -0.46 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

C+
79
C-
71
Source · NHL play-by-play · xG engine · luck graded separately
What the model flagged
WARNINGSEA

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 27 rush shots worth 2.68 xG (4 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.

STRENGTHVAN

Dangerous off the rush

4 goals on 27 rush shots worth 2.68 xG.

STRENGTHVAN

Power play cashed in

2-for-4 on the power play (50%) on 0.98 PP xG.

WARNINGVAN

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 19 rush shots worth 1.62 xG (1 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.

STRENGTHSEA

Dangerous off the rush

1 goals on 19 rush shots worth 1.62 xG.

STRENGTHSEA

Power play cashed in

1-for-2 on the power play (50%) on 0.03 PP xG.

76 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
SEA
33 shots
3
Final
76 shots
VAN
43 shots
4
SEA attackVAN attack
SEA VAN Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — SEA left, VAN right — the way you would watch it. A dot's size is how dangerous the look was, from distance and angle; it is a proxy for shot quality, not the xG model the article is written from. Hover a dot for the shooter and the clock.

Ranked from the box score

Three stars

Points first
Three stars · computed, not voted
J. DeBrusk
#74 · L · VAN
1 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 15:05 on ice · +1
B. Montour
#62 · D · SEA
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 24:17 on ice
E. Pettersson
#40 · C · VAN
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 17:51 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Sep 26
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
Preseason · exhibition

Split squads and prospects, not the club that will take the ice in October. The rates below are last season's; this exhibition will not count toward season records, form, rankings or player numbers.

◆ By the ModelSep 26, 1:42 PMEdited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

This projects as a genuine coin flip. Seattle and Vancouver both draw 3.2 expected goals. The Canucks hold exactly 50% win probability.

Underneath, the balance is sharp. Vancouver trails 44.0% in expected goal share despite leading 46.9% in shot attempts, a gap signaling volume masking lower efficiency. The Canucks' 0.974 puck-luck mark runs well below neutral, the kind of cold streak due for regression. Seattle's 1.011 puck-luck sits on the flip side, masking underlying softness.

Jake DeBrusk carries the Canucks' offense at 1.26 expected goals per hour, posting 3 goals and 19 assists. He operates at 1.4% shooting, well below his historical average—a drought inbound for reversal. Jared McCann runs a comparable 1.19 rate for Seattle with 8 goals and 20 assists, hitting at a standard 6.8% shooting clip. Jordan Eberle anchors Seattle's depth at 1.14 expected goals per hour, backing 16 goals and 29 assists with elevated 9.5% shooting. Brock Boeser mirrors that profile for Vancouver at 0.93 expected goals per hour, posting 10 goals and 26 assists on 6.0% shooting.

The goaltending tells a cleaner story. P. Grubauer has run 90.9% save percentage across 32 starts. He holds a +13.2 goals-above-expected mark. N. Tolopilo has posted 88.1% save percentage over 21 starts. He carries a −8.2 goals-above-expected mark. That 21.4-goal edge belongs to Grubauer.

Kevin Lankinen, Vancouver's backup, has bled −16.8 goals across 47 games, a liability if he draws work. Seattle's defensive liability focuses on Kaapo Kakko; Vancouver's on Victor Mancini. Both are edge risks, not foundational ones.

The models call this even because the numbers genuinely split it. Identical expected goal projections, canceling shot volumes, and a goaltending edge offset by luck regression owed Vancouver produce the rare true coin flip.

Season rates in this preview are from 2025-26 — this season's sample isn't live yet.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

VAN 50%
50%
VAN
Model favorite
50%
50%
SEA50VAN

VAN by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score SEA 3.2–3.2 VAN; 16% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season rates · 5v5

Tale of the tape

NHL stats API · our xG
SEA← edge
edge →VAN
45.7%44.0%
46.0%46.9%
2.782.78
3.293.54
2.732.56
3.133.83
1.0110.974

SEA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.011 vs 0.974) says SEA has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · No games yet
SEA
0-0-0
+0 GD · 0d rest
VAN
0-0-0
+0 GD · 0d rest
1.011
SEA PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.974
VAN PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

WARNINGVAN

Kevin Lankinen has leaked goals all season

Kevin Lankinen: -16.8 GSAx over 47 games.

Shoot from everywhere — volume beats a cold crease.

STRENGTHVAN

Jake DeBrusk drives the Canucks offense

Jake DeBrusk: 3G 19A, 1.26 xG/60, 8 high-danger goals.

TACTICALVAN

Shutdown Assignment: Canucks

Highest individual xG/60 on SEA. Gets 24 HD shots. Limit slot access.

Key matchup: Neutralize Jared McCann (8G, 1.19 xG/60, 9 HD goals)

TACTICALSEA

Shutdown Assignment: Kraken

Highest individual xG/60 on VAN. Gets 43 HD shots. Limit slot access.

Key matchup: Neutralize Jake DeBrusk (3G, 1.26 xG/60, 8 HD goals)

Regression watch
  • The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Things to watch
  • Goalie matchup: P. Grubauer (+13.2 GSAx in 32 GP, 90.9% SV) vs N. Tolopilo (-8.2 GSAx in 21 GP, 88.1% SV).
  • P. Grubauer has the GSAx edge — 21.4 goals above his counterpart this season.
  • The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
SEA
preseason · vs CGY · Thu, Sep 24
Expected in goal
P. Grubauer
1 day rest.914 last start65:00 played
Backup Joey Daccord · -0.1 GSAx this season
Forwards · 12
  • J. Eberle16:07
  • C. Stephenson15:59
  • M. Beniers19:37
  • M. Samoskevich18:30
  • J. McCann16:56
  • B. Catton16:37
  • C. Douglas05:21
  • S. Wright16:42
  • B. Meyers13:58
  • B. McMann16:50
  • O. Fisker Molgaard12:35
  • K. Kakko15:06
Defence · 6
  • A. Larsson18:42
  • J. Mahura18:32
  • V. Dunn21:12
  • R. Evans25:45
  • V. Ottavainen10:23
  • B. Montour28:10
VAN
preseason · vs EDM · Thu, Sep 24
Expected in goal
N. Tolopilo
1 day rest.857 last start40:00 played
N. Tolopilo started last game and was relieved by C. Driedger (18:28 of it).
Backup Kevin Lankinen · -16.8 GSAx this season
Forwards · 12
  • B. Boeser19:03
  • B. Gallagher12:03
  • D. O'Connor15:21
  • M. Rossi19:23
  • E. Pettersson20:48
  • P. Cotter12:03
  • J. DeBrusk17:00
  • F. Chytil04:54
  • B. Cootes11:14
  • J. Lekkerimäki11:45
  • L. Ohgren20:24
  • L. Karlsson18:00
Defence · 6
  • L. Schenn14:50
  • J. Oleksiak17:02
  • Z. Buium25:05
  • F. Hronek24:22
  • G. Brisebois14:38
  • V. Mancini17:37

Lineups are the players who dressed in each club's last game, with their minutes; clubs confirm tonight's at warm-up. Every player this preview names was in that lineup.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG
SEA
Jared McCann8G 20A
1.19 xG/60 · 9 HD · 6.8% sh
Jordan Eberle16G 29A
1.14 xG/60 · 13 HD · 9.5% sh
VAN
Jake DeBrusk3G 19A
1.26 xG/60 · 8 HD · 1.4% sh
Filip Chytil3G 0A
0.98 xG/60 · 1 HD · 12.5% sh
Keep going

Where to next