Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Anaheim Ducks sweater
← Fri, Oct 9 · the slate
Breakdown · ANA at WPG

Ducks run the Jets off the ice on the underlying numbers

FinalFri, Oct 9
ANAAnaheim Ducks5WPGWinnipeg Jets1
The verdict · earned

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

ANA 5 · WPG 1
◆ By the ModelOct 9, 10:42 PMxG: 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

Anaheim beat Winnipeg 5-1 and didn't need many chances to prove it. The Ducks were clinical in the slot, relentless off the rush, and suffocating in transition. Winnipeg never got traction.

Winnipeg held 48% of shot attempts, but Anaheim's chance quality was so far superior that volume didn't matter. The Ducks shot at 0.093 expected goals per attempt to Winnipeg's 0.041, and finished with 62% of expected goals to Winnipeg's 38%.

L. Dostal's defense was razor-sharp. He went 15 for 16 at a 0.938 save percentage, stopping 1.2 goals above expected. C. Stevenson couldn't keep up, going 12 for 16 at a 0.750 save percentage.

The Ducks' edge lived in the danger zones. They were 4–7 on high-danger chances (57%) and turned rush pressure into three goals on 19 rush attempts. Winnipeg couldn't generate the same looks.

Three Stars

  • #45 B. Sennecke (ANA) — 2A in 17:03
  • #64 M. Granlund (ANA) — 1G, 1A in 16:31
  • #42 T. Washe (ANA) — 1G, 1A in 15:14

The goals

  • ANA 1–0, 14:41 of the first. J. Caulfield, snap shot from 10 feet, a 20% chance by the model (a rebound), past C. Stevenson. Assists: J. Malott, T. Washe. 3 seconds after an ANA shot by J. Malott. Win probability moved 17 points.
  • ANA 2–0, 05:20 of the second. T. Washe, snap shot from 17 feet, a 23% chance by the model (off the rush), past C. Stevenson. Assists: J. Malott, J. Caulfield. Win probability moved 16 points.
  • ANA 3–0, 04:25 of the third. S. Colangelo, snap shot from 9 feet, a 26% chance by the model (off the rush), past C. Stevenson. Assists: B. Sennecke. 10 seconds after a WPG giveaway by M. Scheifele. Win probability moved 6 points.
  • WPG 3–1, 10:36 of the third. K. Connor, wrist shot from 18 feet, a 20% chance by the model (off the rush), past L. Dostal. Assists: M. Scheifele, D. DeMelo.
  • ANA 4–1, 14:06 of the third. M. Granlund, wrist shot from 51 feet, a 1% chance by the model, past C. Stevenson. Assists: N. Warren, J. LaCombe.
  • ANA 5–1, 19:19 of the third into an empty net. N. Nesterenko, wrist shot from 12 feet, a 100% chance by the model (off the rush). Assists: B. Sennecke, M. Granlund. 5 seconds after an ANA blocked shot by N. Pionk.

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 · Oct 9
ANA
5
WPG
1

Ducks run the Jets off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 3.6 – 2.2Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Ducks earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
ANA
3.63
WPG
2.18
63% of the chances38%

The board read ANA 5, WPG 1. The chances read ANA 3.6, WPG 2.2.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
ANA
+1.4
goals above expected
ANA3.63 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
WPG2.18 expected · 1 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
+17
win-probability points
46% → 64% for ANA
WPG 100%the game, start to finish
ANA 100%P1 · P2 · P3
ANAP1 14:41

J. Caulfield makes it 1–0.

In-game win model · fitted on 5,248 games
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 14:41ANAJ. Caulfield20%1–0
  2. P2 05:20ANAT. Washe23%2–0
  3. P3 04:25ANAS. Colangelo26%3–0
  4. P3 10:36WPGK. Connor20%3–1
  5. P3 14:06ANAM. Granlund1%4–1
  6. P3 19:19ANAN. NesterenkoEN100%5–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
ANA
30 shots
5
Final
62 shots
WPG
32 shots
1
ANA attackWPG attack
ANA WPG Goal
30
shots · 5 in
32
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
ANAWPG
4 / 7
2.41 xG
High danger
1 / 1
0.20 xG
0 / 9
0.98 xG
Medium
0 / 15
1.68 xG
1 / 23
0.24 xG
Low
0 / 37
0.31 xG

The Ducks buried 4 of 7 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
L. Dostal
+1.2
ANA · 15/16 · 60:00
Best save · a 17% chance, snap from 23 ft · P2 01:08
F
C. Stevenson
−1.6
WPG · 12/16 · 56:08
Best save · a 32% chance, snap from 10 ft · P2 10:27
Best skater on the ice
A+
ANA
J. Malott
L · impact 1.83
9:26
Ice time
0–2
G – A
0.15
Own xG
76%
xG share
Impact · top 4
J. Malott1.8A+
J. Caulfield1.8A+
B. Sennecke1.6A+
T. Washe1.5A
Report card
ANAWPG
OffenseA+C-
DefenseC+F
TransitionB+D
Special teamsD-F
GoaltendingB+C-
DisciplineD-A-
LuckAD
Seven dimensions, A+ to F · basis on the breakdown
Why it went the way it went
Why ANA won
  1. 01Dangerous off the rush
  2. 02Clinical in the slot
  3. 03Won on the merits
Why WPG lost
  1. 01Rush defense leaked all night
  2. 02PDO ran cold
  3. 03C. Stevenson was beaten from the slot
Our storyline model · reasoning on the breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Ducks run the Jets 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 4–7
  1. 14:41ANAJ. Caulfield(J. Malott, T. Washe)1–0

    Snap shot from 10 feet, a 20% chance (a rebound), past C. Stevenson. 3s after an ANA shot by J. Malott. Win probability moved 17 points.On the ice: M. Granlund, N. Nesterenko, T. Hinds, C. Gauthier, T. Luneau · against M. Scheifele, H. Fleury, K. Connor, N. Pionk, C. Perfetti

2ndshots 5–6
  1. 05:20ANAT. Washe(J. Malott, J. Caulfield)2–0

    Snap shot from 17 feet, a 23% chance (off the rush), past C. Stevenson. Win probability moved 16 points.On the ice: J. LaCombe, S. Colangelo, T. Hinds, L. Carlsson, B. Sennecke · against D. DeMelo, A. Lowry, D. Samberg, A. Iafallo, I. Rosen

3rdshots 8–3
  1. 04:25ANAS. Colangelo(B. Sennecke)3–0

    Snap shot from 9 feet, a 26% chance (off the rush), past C. Stevenson. 10s after a WPG giveaway by M. Scheifele. Win probability moved 6 points.On the ice: S. Colangelo, P. Mintyukov, L. Carlsson, T. Mitchell, B. Sennecke · against D. DeMelo, A. Lowry, D. Samberg, A. Iafallo, I. Rosen

  2. 10:36WPGK. Connor(M. Scheifele, D. DeMelo)3–1

    Wrist shot from 18 feet, a 20% chance (off the rush), past L. Dostal.On the ice: A. Lowry, M. Ferraro, A. Iafallo, N. Pionk, I. Rosen · against M. Granlund, N. Nesterenko, C. Gauthier, P. Mintyukov, T. Mitchell

  3. 14:06ANAM. Granlund(N. Warren, J. LaCombe)4–1

    Wrist shot from 51 feet, a 1% chance, a shot that rarely goes in, past C. Stevenson.On the ice: M. Granlund, N. Nesterenko, T. Hinds, C. Gauthier, T. Luneau · against D. DeMelo, G. Vilardi, D. Samberg, M. Barron, V. Björck

  4. 19:19ANAN. Nesterenkoempty net(B. Sennecke, M. Granlund)5–1

    Wrist shot from 12 feet, a 100% chance, a near-certain one (off the rush). 5s after an ANA block.

score reads ANA–WPG

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.63
ANA chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.4
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.109
ANA puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
42.4%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.63Expected goals2.18
ANA 63% of the chance quality
17Shots on goal16
7High-danger chances1
39All attempts (Corsi)53
Adjusted for score: ANA 37% · WPG 63%
Faceoffs · WPG won60%off56%neu31%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
ANA4 / 7 · 2.41 xG
WPG1 / 1 · 0.20 xG
Medium dangermid-range
ANA0 / 9 · 0.98 xG
WPG0 / 15 · 1.68 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
ANA1 / 23 · 0.24 xG
WPG0 / 37 · 0.31 xG

WPG went 0-for-15 from medium danger on 1.68 expected goals — 1.7 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
ANA
5 G · 3.63 xG · +1.4
WPG
1 G · 2.18 xG · -1.2
0123456

ANA finished +1.4 against expected, WPG -1.2.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
ANA
WRIST2/8
SNAP3/11
TIP IN0/5
SLAP0/2
BACKHAND0/4
OTHER0/9
WPG
WRIST1/15
SNAP0/9
TIP IN0/2
SLAP0/5
BACKHAND0/1
OTHER0/21
ANA
WPG
Off the rush
3 G on 19
3.10 xG
1 G on 20
1.86 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 1
0.20 xG
0 G on 2
0.15 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: ANA went 2-for-8, WPG 1-for-15. ANA scored 3 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
L. Dostal
ANA · 15/16 · .938
started · 60:00 · win
+1.2
saved above expected
B+
the night
Attempts faced
31
Avg chance faced
7.0%
Stopped vs expected
0.968 vs 0.930
Rebounds allowed
2
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/10.2-0.8
Medium0/151.7+1.7
Low0/150.3+0.3
Shorthanded0/80.9+0.9
Tips & deflections0/10.1+0.1
The save
17% chance stopped, a snap from 23 ft · P2 01:08
The one to have back
20% chance went in, a wrist from 18 ft · P3 10:36

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

C. Stevenson
WPG · 12/16 · .750
started · 56:08 · loss
-1.6
saved above expected
F
the night
Attempts faced
27
Avg chance faced
8.9%
Stopped vs expected
0.852 vs 0.911
Rebounds allowed
1 · 1 scored on
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger3/51.2-1.8
Medium0/91.0+1.0
Low1/130.2-0.8
Shorthanded0/30.3+0.3
Tips & deflections0/40.3+0.3
The save
32% chance stopped, a snap from 10 ft · P2 10:27
The one to have back
1% chance went in, a wrist from 51 ft · P3 14:06

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. Malott (ANA), 9:26 of ice, 0-2, 76% of the expected goals while he was out.

ANA18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
J. MalottL9:260-276A+
J. CaulfieldR9:341-176A+
B. SenneckeR17:030-270A+
T. WasheC15:141-146A
M. GranlundC16:311-144A
S. ColangeloR10:351-072A
N. NesterenkoC11:581-029A
J. LaCombeD27:020-168B
N. WarrenD24:120-155B
A. GreerL12:330-081B
L. CarlssonC16:250-078B
T. HindsD13:480-067C
A. KillornL18:420-061C
C. GauthierL18:200-047C
P. MintyukovD21:240-039D
R. PoehlingC17:200-062D
T. LuneauD14:220-043D
T. MitchellD17:310-051D
WPG18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
K. ConnorL23:561-054A
M. ScheifeleC22:180-164B
G. VilardiC18:360-062B
I. RosenR14:560-046B
C. PerfettiC22:200-064C
M. FerraroD19:580-054C
D. DeMeloD21:400-130C
M. BarronC14:120-050C
N. PionkD25:020-056C
A. LowryC13:280-044D
D. SambergD22:060-027D
T. BauerD8:240-033D
V. BjörckC17:330-027D
A. IafalloL14:430-036F
H. FleuryD15:260-019F
C. KoepkeL7:320-06F
V. NamestnikovC11:150-02F
B. LambertC8:270-05F

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, ANA: N. Jensen, F. Vatrano, N. Klepov. Scratched, WPG: N. Niederreiter, J. Morrissey, J. St. Ivany. Referees Wes McCauley and Jake Brenk; linesmen Trent Knorr and Jesse Marquis.

Graded against a league-average game

Report card

Seven dimensions · A+ to F
DimensionANAWPG
Offense
▸Basis

ANA Created 3.63 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 7 high-danger shots (2.41 xG) and 19 rush shots (3.10 xG).

WPG Created 2.18 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 1 high-danger shots (0.20 xG) and 20 rush shots (1.86 xG).

A+
99
C-
71
Defense
▸Basis

ANA Allowed 2.18 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 1 high-danger shots (0.20 xG) and 20 rush shots (1.86 xG).

WPG Allowed 3.63 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 7 high-danger shots (2.41 xG) and 19 rush shots (3.10 xG).

C+
79
F
51
Transition
▸Basis

ANA Rush shots 19–20, rush xG 3.10–1.86 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

WPG Rush shots 20–19, rush xG 1.86–3.10 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

B+
87
D
63
Special teams
▸Basis

ANA 0-for-1 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 0.34 PP xG.

WPG 0-for-4 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 0.62 PP xG.

D-
62
F
54
Goaltending
▸Basis

ANA +1.18 goals saved above expected on 16 shots against.

WPG -0.37 goals saved above expected on 16 shots against.

B+
87
C-
71
Discipline
▸Basis

ANA Took 5 penalties for 13 PIM vs 2 for 7 on the other side.

WPG Took 2 penalties for 7 PIM vs 5 for 13 on the other side.

D-
60
A-
90
Luck

Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

▸Basis

ANA Finishing +1.37 goals vs xG plus +1.18 GSAx of save luck = +2.55 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

WPG Finishing -1.18 goals vs xG plus -0.37 GSAx of save luck = -1.55 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

A
95
D
63
Source · NHL play-by-play · xG engine · luck graded separately
What the model flagged
WARNINGWPG

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 19 rush shots worth 3.10 xG (3 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

STRENGTHANA

Dangerous off the rush

3 goals on 19 rush shots worth 3.10 xG.

LUCKWPG

PDO ran cold

Single-game PDO of 0.891 — the bounces went against them tonight.

LUCKANA

PDO ran hot

Single-game PDO of 1.109 — the bounces went their way tonight.

STRENGTHANA

Clinical in the slot

4 goals on 7 high-danger shots (57% conversion on 2.41 xG).

WARNINGANA

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 20 rush shots worth 1.86 xG (1 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

62 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
ANA
30 shots
5
Final
62 shots
WPG
32 shots
1
ANA attackWPG attack
ANA WPG Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — ANA left, WPG 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
B. Sennecke
#45 · R · ANA
0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 17:03 on ice · +3
M. Granlund
#64 · C · ANA
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 16:31 on ice · +2
T. Washe
#42 · C · ANA
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 15:14 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Fri, Oct 9
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Model draft
◆ By the ModelOct 9, 9:16 AMRaw model copyDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

The model projects a ANA 3.2 - 3.4 WPG game with the Jets at 52% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

Keys to the game

  • The Jets own the underlying play . The Jets own the underlying play — 51.5% 5v5 xG vs 44.9%.
  • The Ducks drive Corsi at 48.6% . The Ducks drive Corsi at 48.6% — expect territorial tilt.
  • Goalie Weakness: Jets. Below-average on high-danger saves. Prioritize quality over quantity.

Season 5v5 Numbers

MetricANAWPG
xG%44.9%51.5%
Corsi%48.6%44.9%
PDO0.9671.017

Where the Edges Live

  • The Jets own the underlying play — 51.5% 5v5 xG vs 44.9%.
  • The Ducks drive Corsi at 48.6% — expect territorial tilt.

Regression Watch

  • The Jets' PDO is 1.017 — running hot, expect some regression.
  • The Ducks' PDO is 0.967 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Goaltending Matchup

  • Goalie matchup: L. Dostal (-1.5 GSAx in 3 GP, 87.2% SV) vs S. Skinner (+2.3 GSAx in 3 GP, 92.0% SV).

Players to Watch

Key Matchups

ANA

  • Most goals from slot (7G on 39 shots, 18%) — deny that lane

WPG

  • Their goalie (Stuart Skinner) leaks HD — 71.4% HD SV. Get to the slot.
  • Most goals from slot (7G on 53 shots, 13%) — deny that lane

Data: NHL API, Backcheck xG model

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

WPG 53%
53%
WPG
Model favorite
47%
53%
ANA50WPG

WPG by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score ANA 3.2–3.4 WPG; 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
ANA← edge
edge →WPG
44.9%51.5%
48.6%44.9%
2.523.56
3.103.35
3.003.00
3.332.50
0.9671.017

WPG holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.967 vs 1.017) says WPG has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 3–4
ANA
2-1-0
-1 GD · 1d rest
WPG
3-0-1
+2 GD · 1d rest
0.967
ANA PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.017
WPG PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

TACTICAL

The Jets own the underlying play

The Jets own the underlying play — 51.5% 5v5 xG vs 44.9%.

TACTICAL

The Ducks drive Corsi at 48.6%

The Ducks drive Corsi at 48.6% — expect territorial tilt.

TACTICALWPG

Goalie Weakness: Jets

Below-average on high-danger saves. Prioritize quality over quantity.

Their goalie (Stuart Skinner) leaks HD — 71.4% HD SV. Get to the slot.

WARNINGWPG

Regression watch: Jets

The Jets' PDO is 1.017 — running hot, expect some regression.

Weight the underlying numbers over the recent results.

Where the edges live
  • The Jets own the underlying play — 51.5% 5v5 xG vs 44.9%.
  • The Ducks drive Corsi at 48.6% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Jets' PDO is 1.017 — running hot, expect some regression.
  • The Ducks' PDO is 0.967 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Things to watch
  • The Jets own the underlying play — 51.5% 5v5 xG vs 44.9%.
  • The Ducks drive Corsi at 48.6% — expect territorial tilt.
  • Goalie matchup: L. Dostal (-1.5 GSAx in 3 GP, 87.2% SV) vs S. Skinner (+2.3 GSAx in 3 GP, 92.0% SV).
  • The Jets' PDO is 1.017 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
ANA
vs EDM · Wed, Oct 7
Expected in goal
L. Dostal
1 day rest.706 last start39:41 played
L. Dostal started last game and was relieved by V. Husso (15:58 of it).
Backup Ville Husso · +0.3 GSAx this season
Forwards · 12
  • N. Nesterenko11:08
  • A. Killorn09:30
  • A. Greer09:18
  • R. Poehling13:07
  • J. Caulfield10:06
  • J. Malott09:00
  • N. Klepov10:03
  • T. Washe17:19
  • B. Sennecke24:58
  • C. Gauthier24:10
  • M. Granlund21:33
  • L. Carlsson23:36
Defence · 6
  • J. LaCombe29:18
  • T. Mitchell13:12
  • N. Warren17:17
  • T. Hinds11:53
  • T. Luneau21:33
  • P. Mintyukov17:45
WPG
vs COL · Wed, Oct 7
Expected in goal
S. Skinner
1 day rest.941 last start60:00 played
Backup Clay Stevenson · +0.3 GSAx this season
Forwards · 12
  • V. Namestnikov11:52
  • A. Iafallo15:24
  • G. Vilardi14:21
  • A. Lowry14:49
  • I. Rosen10:15
  • M. Barron17:25
  • C. Koepke12:46
  • M. Scheifele22:18
  • V. Björck13:40
  • K. Connor19:55
  • C. Perfetti19:02
  • B. Lambert09:36
Defence · 6
  • D. DeMelo20:38
  • N. Pionk23:10
  • J. St. Ivany14:16
  • M. Ferraro23:36
  • J. Morrissey09:32
  • D. Samberg25:25

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.

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page