Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Detroit Red Wings sweater
← Mon, Oct 26 · the slate
Breakdown · DET at EDM

Red Wings edge the Oilers in a shootout

Final / OTMon, Oct 26
DETDetroit Red Wings4EDMEdmonton Oilers3
The verdict · stolen

The Red Wings stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 2.65–3.29 and won anyway.

DET 4 · EDM 3
◆ By the ModelOct 27, 12:40 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 Red Wings beat the Oilers 4-3 in a shootout, and Edmonton has a real complaint. The Oilers controlled most of the five-on-five play and still lost.

The cleanest measure of that is expected goals, the model's estimate of how dangerous each shot was. Edmonton held 55% of expected goals at five-on-five. Over the full game, the Oilers finished with 3.29 expected goals to the Red Wings' 2.65. The Red Wings scored 1.35 more goals than their chances said they should have, which is a variance warning: their finishing ran ahead of their shots. The power play did the rest, with 2 power-play goals on 14 power-play shots.

Edmonton opened the scoring when V. Podkolzin deflected a shot past M. Postava at 06:10 of the first. V. Arvidsson answered on the power play at 08:35 of the second, with a snap shot from 28 feet past T. Jarry. I. Howard put Edmonton back ahead on another power-play snap shot at 04:18 of the third, and E. Finnie tied it at 04:48. C. Dach's tip-in at 16:32 gave the Oilers the lead again. Then D. Larkin's power-play wrist shot at 18:43 made it 3-3. That was the largest swing in the goal list, a 43-point move in win probability.

The shootout turned on Lucas Raymond's wrist shot from the slot.

Both teams scored 3 goals off the rush, Edmonton on 31 chances and the Red Wings on 25. Edmonton also created 3 rebound chances and scored on none of them. Goaltending was close. M. Postava (DET) stopped 25 of 28 shots, a save percentage of 0.893. T. Jarry (EDM) stopped 26 of 29, a save percentage of 0.897.

The goals

  • EDM 0–1, 06:10 of the first. V. Podkolzin, deflection from 8 feet, a 9% chance by the model (off the rush), past M. Postava. Assists: L. Draisaitl, C. McDavid. Win probability moved 14 points.
  • DET 1–1, 08:35 of the second on the power play. V. Arvidsson, snap shot from 28 feet, an 8% chance by the model (off the rush), past T. Jarry. Assists: L. Raymond, A. DeBrincat. Win probability moved 20 points.
  • EDM 1–2, 04:18 of the third on the power play. I. Howard, snap shot from 24 feet, a 20% chance by the model (off the rush), past M. Postava. Assists: K. Kapanen, C. Dach. Win probability moved 27 points.
  • DET 2–2, 04:48 of the third. E. Finnie, wrist shot from 8 feet, a 20% chance by the model (off the rush), past T. Jarry. Assists: V. Arvidsson. 1 second after a DET takeaway by V. Arvidsson. Win probability moved 27 points.
  • EDM 2–3, 16:32 of the third. C. Dach, tip-in from 23 feet, a 5% chance by the model (off the rush), past M. Postava. Assists: R. Shea, R. Nugent-Hopkins. A. Copp was 48 seconds into his shift for the defending side. Win probability moved 39 points.
  • DET 3–3, 18:43 of the third on the power play. D. Larkin, wrist shot from 10 feet, a 20% chance by the model (off the rush), past T. Jarry. Assists: L. Raymond, M. Seider. Win probability moved 43 points.
The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · SO · Oct 26
DET
4
EDM
3

Red Wings edge the Oilers in a shootout

Chances 2.6 – 3.3Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Oilers deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
DET
2.65
EDM
3.29
45% of the chances55%

The board read DET 4, EDM 3. The chances read DET 2.6, EDM 3.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
DET
+1.4
goals above expected
DET2.65 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
EDM3.29 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
+43
win-probability points
5% → 48% for DET
EDM 100%the game, start to finish
DET 100%P1 · P2 · P3
DETP3 18:43 · PP

D. Larkin makes it 3–3.

In-game win model · fitted on 5,248 games
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 06:10EDMV. Podkolzin9%0–1
  2. P2 08:35DETV. ArvidssonPP8%1–1
  3. P3 04:18EDMI. HowardPP20%1–2
  4. P3 04:48DETE. Finnie20%2–2
  5. P3 16:32EDMC. Dach5%2–3
  6. P3 18:43DETD. LarkinPP20%3–3
  7. SO 00:00DETL. RaymondPP3–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
DET
42 shots
3
Final
87 shots
EDM
45 shots
3
DET attackEDM attack
DET EDM Goal

Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

42
shots · 3 in
45
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
DETEDM
2 / 3
0.61 xG
High danger
1 / 2
0.39 xG
1 / 14
1.48 xG
Medium
1 / 21
2.52 xG
0 / 40
0.56 xG
Low
1 / 35
0.38 xG

The Red Wings buried 2 of 3 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B
M. Postava
+0.3
DET · 25/28 · 63:16
Best save · a 20% chance, backhand from 7 ft · P3 05:34
D
T. Jarry
−0.3
EDM · 26/29 · 65:00
Best save · a 22% chance, wrist from 5 ft · P2 04:05
Best skater on the ice
A+
DET
V. Arvidsson
L · impact 2.25
18:11
Ice time
1–1
G – A
0.52
Own xG
68%
xG share
Impact · top 4
V. Arvidsson2.3A+
L. Raymond1.8A+
L. Draisaitl1.9A+
C. McDavid1.7A
Report card
DETEDM
OffenseC+B
DefenseDC-
TransitionDB
Special teamsC+A+
GoaltendingC+C-
DisciplineB-C-
LuckB-C-
Seven dimensions, A+ to F · basis on the breakdown
Why it went the way it went
Why DET won
  1. 01Dangerous off the rush
  2. 02Won against the run of play
  3. 03Power play cashed in
Why EDM lost
  1. 01Rush defense leaked all night
  2. 02Deserved a better fate
Our storyline model · reasoning on the breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Red Wings edge the Oilers in a shootout

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 6–5
  1. 06:10EDMV. Podkolzin(L. Draisaitl, C. McDavid)0–1

    Deflection from 8 feet, a 9% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past M. Postava. Win probability moved 14 points.On the ice: Z. Hyman, R. Nugent-Hopkins, C. Murphy, K. Kapanen, R. Shea · against B. Chiarot, V. Arvidsson, A. DeBrincat, M. Seider, E. Finnie

2ndshots 17–7
  1. 08:35DETV. Arvidssonpower play(L. Raymond, A. DeBrincat)1–1

    Snap shot from 28 feet, an 8% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past T. Jarry. Win probability moved 20 points.On the ice: J. Faulk, A. Copp, J. Compher, M. Rasmussen, W. Wallinder · against C. Murphy, L. Draisaitl, K. Kapanen, R. Shea, V. Podkolzin

3rdshots 5–12
  1. 04:18EDMI. Howardpower play(K. Kapanen, C. Dach)1–2

    Snap shot from 24 feet, a 20% chance (off the rush), past M. Postava. Win probability moved 27 points.On the ice: C. Murphy, M. Joseph, R. Shea, A. Formenton, O. Michaels · against J. Compher, A. Englund, L. Raymond, A. Johansson, N. Danielson

  2. 04:48DETE. Finnie(V. Arvidsson)2–2

    Wrist shot from 8 feet, a 20% chance (off the rush), past T. Jarry. 1s after a DET takeaway by V. Arvidsson. Win probability moved 27 points.On the ice: B. Chiarot, V. Arvidsson, A. DeBrincat, M. Seider, E. Finnie · against L. Draisaitl, C. McDavid, E. Bouchard, V. Podkolzin, S. Mukhamadullin

  3. 16:32EDMC. Dach(R. Shea, R. Nugent-Hopkins)2–3

    Tip-in from 23 feet, a 5% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past M. Postava. A. Copp was 48s into his shift for the defending side. Win probability moved 39 points.On the ice: M. Joseph, A. Formenton, E. Bouchard, S. Mukhamadullin, O. Michaels · against A. Copp, J. Compher, A. Englund, M. Rasmussen, A. Johansson

  4. 18:43DETD. Larkinpower play(L. Raymond, M. Seider)3–3

    Wrist shot from 10 feet, a 20% chance (off the rush), past T. Jarry. Win probability moved 43 points.On the ice: B. Chiarot, A. Copp, J. Compher, M. Rasmussen, M. Seider · against R. Nugent-Hopkins, K. Kapanen, E. Bouchard, S. Mukhamadullin, C. Dach

OTshots 1–4no goals
    SO
    1. 00:00DETL. Raymondpower play3–3

    score reads DET–EDM

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    2.65
    DET chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    +1.4
    Finishing
    Goals above what those chances were worth
    1.001
    DET puck luck
    About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
    49.6%
    Shot attempts
    Under half — they were outshot
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    2.65Expected goals3.29
    EDM 55% of the chance quality
    29Shots on goal28
    3High-danger chances2
    57All attempts (Corsi)58
    Adjusted for score: DET 51% · EDM 49%
    Faceoffs · EDM won50%off45%neu39%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    DET2 / 3 · 0.61 xG
    EDM1 / 2 · 0.39 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    DET1 / 14 · 1.48 xG
    EDM1 / 21 · 2.52 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    DET0 / 40 · 0.56 xG
    EDM1 / 35 · 0.38 xG

    EDM went 1-for-21 from medium danger on 2.52 expected goals — 1.5 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    DET
    4 G · 2.65 xG · +1.4
    EDM
    3 G · 3.29 xG · -0.3
    012345

    DET finished +1.4 against expected, EDM -0.3.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    DET
    WRIST2/26
    BACKHAND0/3
    TIP IN0/3
    SLAP0/5
    SNAP1/2
    WRAP AROUND0/2
    DEFLECTED0/1
    OTHER0/15
    EDM
    WRIST0/29
    BACKHAND0/5
    TIP IN1/5
    SLAP0/2
    SNAP1/3
    WRAP AROUND0/0
    DEFLECTED1/1
    OTHER0/13
    DET
    EDM
    Off the rush
    3 G on 25
    1.98 xG
    3 G on 31
    2.76 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 2
    0.33 xG
    0 G on 3
    0.37 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: DET went 2-for-26, EDM 0-for-29. DET 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
    M. Postava
    DET · 25/28 · .893
    started · 63:16 · win
    +0.3
    saved above expected
    B
    the night
    Attempts faced
    45
    Avg chance faced
    7.3%
    Stopped vs expected
    0.933 vs 0.927
    Rebounds allowed
    3
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/20.4-0.6
    Medium1/212.5+1.5
    Low1/220.4-0.6
    Shorthanded1/131.5+0.5
    Tips & deflections2/60.4-1.6
    The save
    20% chance stopped, a backhand from 7 ft · P3 05:34
    The one to have back
    5% chance went in, a tip-in from 23 ft · P3 16:32

    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

    T. Jarry
    EDM · 26/29 · .897
    started · 65:00 · OT loss
    -0.3
    saved above expected
    D
    the night
    Attempts faced
    42
    Avg chance faced
    6.3%
    Stopped vs expected
    0.929 vs 0.937
    Rebounds allowed
    2
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger2/30.6-1.4
    Medium1/141.5+0.5
    Low0/250.6+0.6
    Shorthanded2/90.8-1.2
    Tips & deflections0/40.3+0.3
    The save
    22% chance stopped, a wrist from 5 ft · P2 04:05
    The one to have back
    8% chance went in, a snap from 28 ft · P2 08:35

    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: V. Arvidsson (DET), 18:11 of ice, 1-1, 68% of the expected goals while he was out.

    DET18 skaters
    SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
    V. ArvidssonL18:111-168A+
    L. RaymondL21:120-254A+
    D. LarkinC23:161-044B
    A. DeBrincatR19:280-163B
    E. FinnieC20:341-047B
    M. SeiderD30:070-136B
    M. RasmussenC19:010-053C
    W. WallinderD17:510-070C
    A. CoppC17:480-075C
    C. MazurL5:100-046C
    J. FaulkD22:180-062C
    M. Brandsegg-NygårdR15:180-062C
    J. CompherL17:130-044D
    B. ChiarotD22:330-038D
    N. DanielsonC8:110-039D
    A. JohanssonD10:530-034D
    K. KolesarR8:190-014F
    A. EnglundD13:260-018F
    EDM18 skaters
    SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
    L. DraisaitlC25:100-178A+
    C. McDavidC26:270-179A
    R. Nugent-HopkinsC22:220-168A
    C. DachC14:381-115A
    E. BouchardD31:410-078A
    V. PodkolzinR21:371-071A
    I. HowardL8:431-021B
    Z. HymanL8:250-078B
    K. KapanenR19:020-130B
    S. MukhamadullinD17:520-058C
    R. SheaD25:020-137C
    T. EmbersonD9:080-03D
    M. JosephR10:320-051D
    A. FormentonL11:350-032D
    O. MichaelsR12:570-032D
    C. MurphyD22:280-024F
    J. WalmanD13:160-02F
    T. FredericC7:140-02F

    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, DET: D. Tarasov, A. Johansson, A. Sandin-Pellikka. Scratched, EDM: M. Ekholm, M. Jones, F. Hallander. Referees Francis Charron and Graham Skilliter; linesmen Brandon Gawryletz and Travis Toomey.

    Graded against a league-average game

    Report card

    Seven dimensions · A+ to F
    DimensionDETEDM
    Offense
    ▸Basis

    DET Created 2.65 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 3 high-danger shots (0.61 xG) and 25 rush shots (1.98 xG).

    EDM Created 3.29 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 2 high-danger shots (0.39 xG) and 31 rush shots (2.76 xG).

    C+
    78
    B
    86
    Defense
    ▸Basis

    DET Allowed 3.29 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 2 high-danger shots (0.39 xG) and 31 rush shots (2.76 xG).

    EDM Allowed 2.65 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 3 high-danger shots (0.61 xG) and 25 rush shots (1.98 xG).

    D
    64
    C-
    72
    Transition
    ▸Basis

    DET Rush shots 25–31, rush xG 1.98–2.76 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

    EDM Rush shots 31–25, rush xG 2.76–1.98 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

    D
    64
    B
    86
    Special teams
    ▸Basis

    DET 1-for-4 on the power play (25%; league ≈21%) with 0.38 PP xG.

    EDM 1-for-3 on the power play (33%; league ≈21%) with 1.52 PP xG.

    C+
    77
    A+
    100
    Goaltending
    ▸Basis

    DET +0.29 goals saved above expected on 28 shots against.

    EDM -0.35 goals saved above expected on 29 shots against.

    C+
    78
    C-
    71
    Discipline
    ▸Basis

    DET Took 3 penalties for 6 PIM vs 4 for 8 on the other side.

    EDM Took 4 penalties for 8 PIM vs 3 for 6 on the other side.

    B-
    80
    C-
    70
    Luck

    Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

    ▸Basis

    DET Finishing +0.35 goals vs xG plus +0.29 GSAx of save luck = +0.64 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

    EDM Finishing -0.29 goals vs xG plus -0.35 GSAx of save luck = -0.64 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

    B-
    80
    C-
    70
    Source · NHL play-by-play · xG engine · luck graded separately
    What the model flagged
    WARNINGDET

    Rush defense leaked all night

    Gave up 31 rush shots worth 2.76 xG (3 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

    STRENGTHEDM

    Dangerous off the rush

    3 goals on 31 rush shots worth 2.76 xG.

    WARNINGEDM

    Rush defense leaked all night

    Gave up 25 rush shots worth 1.98 xG (3 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

    STRENGTHDET

    Dangerous off the rush

    3 goals on 25 rush shots worth 1.98 xG.

    SURPRISEDET

    Won against the run of play

    The Red Wings took it 4-3 in a shootout with only 45% of expected goals (2.65–3.29).

    STRENGTHEDM

    Power play cashed in

    1-for-3 on the power play (33%) on 1.52 PP xG.

    87 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    DET
    42 shots
    3
    Final
    87 shots
    EDM
    45 shots
    3
    DET attackEDM attack
    DET EDM Goal

    Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

    Each club shoots toward its own end — DET left, EDM 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
    L. Raymond
    #23 · L · DET
    0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 21:12 on ice
    V. Arvidsson
    #33 · L · DET
    1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 18:11 on ice · +1
    C. Dach
    #34 · C · EDM
    1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 14:38 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Mon, Oct 26
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelOct 26, 9:01 AMEdited 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

    Detroit and Edmonton are about as close to a pick'em as a matchup gets, and the model treats it that way.

    The model projects a DET 3.1 - 3.3 EDM game and gives the Oilers a 52% chance to win. Detroit is the team controlling play. The Red Wings take 53.4% of shot attempts at five-on-five, so expect territorial tilt. Weighting for shot quality with expected goals shrinks that edge to 51.4%, barely above even.

    Edmonton's case rests on form and fortune. The Oilers went 8-2-0 over their last 10, which makes them the hotter team by points pace. Their PDO, the stat analysts call a shooting-and-save total, sits at 1.025. That is running hot, so expect some regression.

    Neither goalie has been stopping what his shots suggested. J. Gibson has allowed 4.2 more goals than his shots predicted across 8 games, and his save percentage is 86.7%. T. Jarry's number is worse, at 5.2 goals in 4 games, and his save percentage is 86.1%.

    Margins decide this one. Watch whether Detroit's territorial edge survives the goaltending, because the model's read is that the small edges are the story.

    Data: NHL API, Backcheck expected goals model

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    EDM 53%
    53%
    EDM
    Model favorite
    47%
    53%
    DET50EDM

    EDM by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score DET 3.1–3.3 EDM; 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
    DET← edge
    edge →EDM
    51.4%50.2%
    53.4%47.5%
    3.213.06
    3.033.04
    2.554.36
    2.913.55
    0.9961.025

    DET holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.996 vs 1.025) says EDM has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    DET
    4-3-3
    -3 GD · 1d rest
    EDM
    8-2-0
    +11 GD · 1d rest
    0.996
    DET PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    1.025
    EDM PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    TACTICAL

    The Red Wings drive Corsi at 53.4%

    The Red Wings drive Corsi at 53.4% — expect territorial tilt.

    WARNINGEDM

    Regression watch: Oilers

    The Oilers' PDO is 1.025 — running hot, expect some regression.

    Weight the underlying numbers over the recent results.

    TACTICAL

    A true toss-up

    Win probability splits 52%–47% — margins decide this one.

    TACTICALEDM

    T. Jarry was beatable last time out

    T. Jarry stopped just 83.3% in his last start.

    Where the edges live
    • The Red Wings drive Corsi at 53.4% — expect territorial tilt.
    Regression watch
    • The Oilers' PDO is 1.025 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Things to watch
    • The Red Wings drive Corsi at 53.4% — expect territorial tilt.
    • Goalie matchup: J. Gibson (-4.2 GSAx in 8 GP, 86.7% SV) vs T. Jarry (-5.2 GSAx in 4 GP, 86.1% SV).
    • The Oilers are the hotter team by points pace (8-2-0 over their last 10).
    • The Oilers' PDO is 1.025 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    DET
    vs CGY · Sat, Oct 24
    Expected in goal
    J. Gibson
    1 day rest.840 last start60:00 played
    Backup Daniil Tarasov · +4.4 GSAx this season
    Forwards · 11
    • A. Copp14:36
    • L. Raymond20:47
    • M. Rasmussen13:45
    • M. Brandsegg-Nygård16:34
    • N. Danielson11:20
    • V. Arvidsson20:19
    • J. Compher15:32
    • K. Kolesar08:37
    • E. Finnie18:22
    • D. Larkin19:34
    • A. DeBrincat21:56
    Defence · 7
    • B. Chiarot19:35
    • A. Johansson12:14
    • A. Englund14:06
    • A. Johansson11:35
    • M. Seider24:43
    • W. Wallinder13:22
    • J. Faulk20:23
    EDM
    vs TOR · Sat, Oct 24
    Expected in goal
    T. Jarry
    1 day rest.833 last start59:45 played
    Backup Devon Levi · +0.5 GSAx this season
    Forwards · 12
    • Z. Hyman18:28
    • F. Hallander08:30
    • M. Joseph13:52
    • A. Formenton12:49
    • L. Draisaitl20:59
    • C. Dach10:10
    • K. Kapanen15:23
    • O. Michaels13:24
    • M. Jones08:08
    • V. Podkolzin16:39
    • R. Nugent-Hopkins18:56
    • C. McDavid22:27
    Defence · 6
    • E. Bouchard26:11
    • C. Murphy17:53
    • R. Shea25:33
    • T. Emberson14:39
    • S. Mukhamadullin17:28
    • J. Walman14:32

    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