A way too early review of the Edmonton Oilers even-strength capacity and play

Without overreacting, it is safe to assume that Game 1 did not go as the Edmonton Oilers intended. Between defensive misplays in the offensive end, and an overall lack of effort for the season’s first game, it can be reasonably suggested that Edmonton wishes a do-over against Vancouver.

Although it is a relatively small sample size, this article dives into the early results of the best and worst underlying metrics for individual and line combinations (Corsi %, Expected Goal %, Scoring Chance %, High Danger Chance %).

Individual performance at 5v5

Reviewing each category, the analytics highlight vastly different effectiveness in Edmonton’s bottom six.

Game 1

On the positive side, as was confirmed by the eye test of anyone watching Wednesday’s game, Dylan Holloway was Edmonton’s best player that night. Not only was he buzzing right from puck drop, but the underlying metrics indicate he was the engine behind the third line’s play. Holloway was the best player across the board, dominating both puck possession (C%) and shot quality generation (XG%) at well-above-average rates. Furthermore, he showed his ability to play a full 200-foot game regarding chance creation. He was limiting opponents to zero high and low-danger opportunities while generating six high-danger and eight total chances.

The same story does not carry to Mattias Janmark. Although Janmark played over six minutes at even strength, he posted zeroes across the board, not generating any chances in the opposition’s end. Additionally, he did not create a chance for a shot on the net when on the ice while being on for three against, showcasing minimal puck possession skills and shot quality generation.

Game 2

It is safe to assume that Edmonton was “goalied” in the second Vancouver game. The results were much more positive, with the team completely dominating at even strength, a stat confirmed by most team-wide underlying metrics being above league average.

The top six were more ready to play, headlined by Evander Kane, Leon Draisaitl, and Zach Hyman leading in advanced score categories. Kane controlled both puck possession (23-2 CF vs. CA) and harnessed his ability to play at both ends of the ice, recording 11 chances for versus one against. Regarding chance quality, Draisatil continued to build on another solid start to the season, outpacing the opposition by recording a 1.56 expected goals net differential. Lastly, Hyman continued the strong top-six play, limiting opponents to one high-danger opportunity against while generating a team-high nine high-danger chances for.

Similar to the previous game, Janmark’s difficult start was a continuing trend in Game 2. Janmark played slightly under six minutes at even strength and was the worst Oiler in three categories, including losing the shot quality generation, and both total and high-danger chance battles. Although most of Edmonton’s players were generally above the 50% benchmark, an indication of net positive play, Janmark was one of the few posting subpar scores in those metrics. Outside of Janmark, Warren Foegele had the lowest puck possession results but still retained an 8% above-average control score.

Line combinations 5v5 with minimum of four minutes played together

Game 1

Although the sample size is minimal (roughly four minutes), the Nugent-Hopkins-Draisaitl-Brown line was dominant at even strength. Regarding puck possession, the line generated eight chances while holding the opposition to none. Although this line combination was 100% in other categories, the best Edmonton line of the night was the third line of Holloway-Mcleod-Foegele. These three players held the highest actual Expected Goals For (XGF) and created the most High Danger Chances (HDC), indicating the line carried the play in the likelihood of shots resulting in goals.

For opening night, other than the combination of Nugent-Hopkins-Draisaitl-Brown, Edmonton’s top six were not good. In terms of puck control, Hyman-Draisaitl-Nugent-Hopkins were out-chanced at a rate of 6–1. Regarding shot quality, Kane-Nugent-Hopkins-Brown were vastly outplayed by Vancouver, allowing the third-highest XGA in only three minutes played together. However, Kane-McDavid-Brown gave up the most high-danger chances against at 5v5, being out chanced 2–1 by Vancouver.

Game 2

Keeping the lineup mostly the same highlights the game-by-game variance in the NHL.

Retaining the sample size at roughly four minutes, the Hyman-Draisaitl-Nugent-Hopkins line completely outplayed the competition at even strength, finishing first in team shot quality generation and high danger chance creation. Combined, this line accumulated the greatest goal likelihood creation (XG%) and team HDC (8 For vs 1 Against), providing a solid indication of the dominance of this line, including strong team defensive play. Continuing to highlight that the best strategy to defend against the opposition is to keep the play in the opposing team’s end. Regarding team puck control, the top line of Kane-McDavid-Brown created lots of chemistry, generating 18 chances while holding the opposition to two.

Unlike opening night, the combination of Holloway-Mcleod-Foegele was the worst in several categories but still possessed positive scores overall. Regarding puck control (C%), the line out-chanced the opposition at a rate of 12-8. Per the shot quality metric (XG%), this trio did score the second-highest XGF (0.83) but did allow the opposition to create high-quality chances, totaling Edmonton’s worst XGA (0.60). However, the Kane-McDavid-Brown line gave up the worst HDC%, still out-chancing Vancouver at a favorable rate at 3–1.

Due to the limited sample size, the fourth line did not reach the qualifying time player together benchmark.

Summary

There are a few takeaways from Edmonton’s forward corps from the very limited sample size.

The top nine is very effective on a game-by-game basis at even strength, with the play of Holloway-Mcleod-Foegele being a pleasant surprise at driving play in terms of puck control. Additionally, the Hyman-Draisaitl-Nugent-Hopkins line has shown signs of chemistry being built, utterly dominating the underlying metrics. As a hot take, the Holloway breakout season is happening, not only driving play but playing a strong 200-foot game that indicates the talent of the former first-round pick, who may soon see an opportunity if an injury occurs.

Conversely, the slow start to Janmark’s season may prove a slight cause for concern. Not only is he losing battles for puck possession and shot-to-goal likelihood, but he is being caved in on in terms of total and high-danger chances. Overall, it is a small sample size but may soon draw the ire of Edmonton fans due to the need for a scapegoat and an argumentative point for the need to call up Raphael Lavoie.

In the future, due to the very high rate of variability of team defence and goaltending play, another article will delve into the effectiveness of the current defence pairings and goaltending.

References: https://www.naturalstattrick.com/game.php?season=20232024&game=20009

Photo by Curtis Comeau/Icon Sportswire