The Line Lab
Which trios actually work when they're on the ice together. We compare what a line shouldproduce given who's on it against what it actually produces — the difference is chemistry. Every unit below really played together at 5-on-5; nothing is hypothetical.
How to read this
Nothing here is invented: every line and pair below actually played together at 5-on-5, with real minutes attached. For each unit we show its observed — the slice of scoring chances it controlled while on the ice, where 50% means break-even.
The interesting part is the split. We first compute an : what those players should produce together if a line were just the sum of its parts. Whatever the real unit does beyond that is the — the closest a spreadsheet gets to measuring whether three players actually fit. Small-minute units are noisy, so read a big bonus on 30 minutes as a hypothesis, not a verdict — and remember this is a model estimate, not the coach's lineup card.
- BASE
- what the unit “should” produce — its members' individual profiles, added up
- CHEM
- observed share minus base: the whole vs. the sum of the parts
- PROJ
- base + chem — the model's expectation if the unit stays together
- TICK
- the hairline on each bar marks 50% — the break-even line
- Lines recovered from MoneyPuck lines.csv (5on5, observed deployment); chemistry = observed xG% minus additive archetype base. Model-estimated.
- 01Tanner Jeannot – Mark Kastelic – Fraser MintenTogether this unit controls play outright — 55% of expected goals, 7 points better than these players' profiles predict. Real chemistry.199 min together 48 +7 → proj 5555.0%· obs.
- 02David Pastrnak – Morgan Geekie – Marat KhusnutdinovTogether this unit tilts the ice — 53% of expected goals, 9 points better than these players' profiles predict. Real chemistry.117 min together 44 +9 → proj 5353.0%· obs.
- 03Viktor Arvidsson – Pavel Zacha – Casey MittelstadtTogether this unit plays about even — 49% of expected goals, about what the talent on it predicts.585 min together 47 +2 → proj 4949.0%· obs.
- 01Hampus Lindholm – Henri JokiharjuTogether this unit tilts the ice — 52% of expected goals, 26 points better than these players' profiles predict. Real chemistry.135 min together 26 +26 → proj 5252.0%· obs.
- 02Charlie McAvoy – Jonathan AspirotTogether this unit plays about even — 51% of expected goals, 22 points better than these players' profiles predict. Real chemistry.493 min together 29 +22 → proj 5151.0%· obs.
- 03Nikita Zadorov – Andrew PeekeTogether this unit gets buried territorially — 44% of expected goals, 21 points better than these players' profiles predict. Real chemistry.501 min together 23 +21 → proj 4444.0%· obs.