Overview
@HockeyBangers
Value over replacement, based on 82 games played.
Ideal for H2H 12-team banger category leagues, 16 roster spots.
| Per 82 GP | 2026-27projection | 2025-2670 GP | H229 GP | H141 GP | Prev 3228 GP · 3y |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| TOI | 10.43 | 10.54 | 10.57 | 10.30 | 11.47 |
| PP TOI | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.09 | 0.05 |
| G | 4 | 2 | 6 | -0 | 6 |
| A | 5 | 8 | 10 | 7 | 2 |
| PTS | 9 | 11 | 15 | 7 | 9 |
| PPP | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| SOG | 57 | 59 | 78 | 45 | 62 |
| PIM | 13 | 9 | 17 | 4 | 36 |
| Hits | 111 | 114 | 117 | 112 | 122 |
| Blocks | 58 | 62 | 54 | 68 | 59 |
Sample: 70 GP · 608 5v5 min (2025-26) — how much ice time backs these rates
Counts = projected deployment × projected /60 rate, per 82 GP. Rates regress off the process metric (ixG, shot-driving), not last year's finishing %. PP points = projected PP rate (anchored on the 2nd-half PP1 role, finishing regressed) × projected PP TOI.
Metrics worth highlighting
ixG/60 finished the year 150% above where it started (0.36 in the first half, 0.97 in the second). The projection leans on how the season ended, so the second half counts for more.
iHDCF/60 finished the year 150% above where it started (1.89 in the first half, 5.06 in the second). The projection leans on how the season ended, so the second half counts for more.
PIMs/60 ran 72% below his 3-year rate last season (0.79 against 2.80).
5v5 TOI sits in the 3th percentile league-wide (8.70).
Similar & complementary players
Deployment
| Metric | 26-27 proj | 2025-26 | Prev 3 | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| TOI | 10.43 | 10.54 | 11.47 | -8% |
| 5v5 TOI | 8.81 | 8.70 | 9.14 | -5% |
| PP TOI | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.05 | -14% |
Shooting — volume & conversion
How much and how well he shoots — volume (SOG), finishing (% vs chance quality), and the individual shot-quality funnel (iCF ⊇ iSCF ⊇ iHDCF).
| Metric (5v5) | 26-27 proj | 2025-26 | Prev 3 | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SOG/60 | 4.86 | 4.83 | 4.12 | +17% |
| G/60 | 0.27 | 0.20 | 0.34 | -42% |
| iSH% | 5.74 | 4.14 | 8.36 | -50% |
| ixG/60 | – | 0.64 | 0.53 | +21% |
| iCF/60 | – | 7.88 | 8.82 | -11% |
| iSCF/60 | – | 5.22 | 5.53 | -6% |
| iHDCF/60 | – | 3.55 | 2.91 | +22% |
Assists — playmaking & on-ice offense
Primary vs secondary helpers, plus the on-ice offense and luck signals underneath them.
| Metric (5v5) | 26-27 proj | 2025-26 | Prev 3 | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| on-ice SH% | 6.30 | 6.57 | 5.18 | +27% |
| IPP | 54.76 | 57.25 | 44.67 | +28% |
| 1A/60 | 0.34 | 0.49 | 0.09 | +460% |
| 2A/60 | 0.05 | 0.10 | 0.06 | +75% |
Power play
PP opportunity and finishing — modelled separately from 5v5.
| Metric | 26-27 proj | 2025-26 | Prev 3 | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PP TOI | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.05 | -14% |
| PP iSH% | – | n/a | 0.00 | |
| PP SOG/60 | 1.45 | 0.00 | 5.81 | -100% |
| PP ixG/60 | – | 3.05 | 1.47 | +107% |
Physical — PIM · hits · blocks
Peripheral counting categories. Noisier and scorer-biased — read as role over the years, not pure talent.
| Metric (5v5) | 26-27 proj | 2025-26 | Prev 3 | Diff |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PIMs/60 | 1.07 | 0.79 | 2.80 | -72% |
| Hits/60 | 8.87 | 9.26 | 9.45 | -2% |
| Blks/60 | 3.45 | 3.74 | 3.37 | +11% |