Statistical Review: Red Wings 4, Kraken 5

On Tuesday night in Detroit, amidst the NHL's Frozen Frenzy festivities, the Red Wings snapped their five-game win streak in a 5-4 OT loss to the Seattle Kraken.

It was a game in which Detroit's less than stellar five-on-five results in recent games caught up to the Red Wings at last, though in the third period it appeared the power play might get them out of a jam once more.

Without further ado, let's dive into some numbers from last night's game.

-Tuesday's tilt was a game of big momentum swings and abundant penalties, as illustrated by the chart below from MoneyPuck.  By the end of the second, Seattle had more than a 90% chance of victory.  Over the course of a six-penalty third period, the Red Wings peaked at about a 95% chance of claiming the two points.  Instead, the Kraken equalized late and took the extra point in overtime.

I'm not normally a fan of these rolling percentage chance of victory figures.  To me, they imply a degree of certainty that is fundamentally at odds with competitive sports, particularly a sport as chaotic and high-paced as hockey.  However, in this case, it feels worthwhile at least worth glancing at the way this game was defined by penalties and lead changes.

-Simply put, the Red Wings got the result they deserved based on the run of five-on-five play.  While Detroit fans might (justifiably) be frustrated by the evening's officiating, the reality is that the Red Wings did not create nearly enough at five-on-five to win this game.

By all situations expected goals, Seattle bested Detroit 4.15-3.06.  At five-on-five, the Kraken had a 2.6-1.9 edge.  (Both stats from MoneyPuck).  

The below heat map from Natural Stat Trick helps to reinforce this point.  Seattle might have trafficked a bit more in shot volume than shot quality, but it also bested the Red Wings in terms of chance creation in the inner slot.

To reinforce this point, the Kraken out-performed Detroit at five-on-five however you slice it.  The Red Wings had a 40% share of shots, a 38.89% share of high danger chances, and a 39.88% share of expected goals (all figures five-on-five and from NST).

-It was the second period where the Red Wings suffered the most.  Joe Veleno gave the Red Wings a 1-0 lead 1:07 into the frame by deflecting a point shot from Olli Maatta home.  For the remaining 18:53 of the period, Detroit created just 0.186 xG, while the Kraken scored three goals on 0.883 xG.

-Leading the charge for Seattle was their top line of Matty Beniers, Tye Kartye, and Jordan Eberle.

In yesterday's game day notebook, I reviewed the team-building parallels between Seattle and Detroit.  Because the Kraken were built via expansion draft, they needed to rely on depth over star power and inevitably wound up a team reliant on mid-career players.  Because of their poor lottery luck, the Red Wings also needed to prize depth over generational top-of-the-line-up talent, and last summer, Detroit reinforced its line-up with veterans.

The one glaring exception to this rule on the Kraken side of the equation is Beniers, whom Seattle picked with its first ever draft choice, second overall in 2020.

Beniers' line spent the bulk of its five-on-five minutes against the Red Wings' top line and defense pair, and it was dominant.  In 10:54 at five-on-five, the trio boasted a remarkable 85.7% xG share, outshooting their opposition 16-4.

-For the Red Wings, the third line of David Perron, Joe Veleno, and Daniel Sprong was, by a great distance, the top performing forward unit.  That trio played 8:40 together at five-on-five, racking up a team high .955 xG for and yielding just 0.292 xG against (the best mark of any of the team's four regular lines) (all numbers from MP).  

The line accumulated a 76.6% xG share all told.  The next best Red Wing line at five-on-five was Christian Fischer, Austin Czarnik, and Jonatan Berggren at just 35.0%.

-Speaking of Czarnik and Berggren, those two played extremely limited minutes last night.  Czarnik registered 5:38 of ice time, and Berggren just 5:10.  There is a simple explanation for this lack of playing time: neither plays special teams.

In his post-game remarks, Derek Lalonde lamented the fact that he wasn't able to get the fourth line more minutes.  He praised their chance creation but said that the game's lack of rhythm and infrequent extended stretches of five-on-five play precluded rolling four lines as often as he might have wanted.

-Finally, we'll wrap for today with Ville Husso.  The Finnish netminder conceded five goals on 4.15 xG.  I would argue that his performance was probably a bit worse than a -0.85 Goals Saved Above Expected might imply.

Yesterday morning, Lalonde spoke about the impact of soft goals on a team—taking the group out of the fight for a four-to-six minute stretch in the aftermath of a bad goal against.

Against the Kraken, Husso probably had two or three goals he'd like back, and if you wanted to be harsh, that number might even be four.  There certainly wasn't anything for him to do about Eberle's OT winner.

"It was tough," said Lalonde after the game of Husso's performance.  "It was a lot of volume.  There's a couple goals he definitely wants back.  It was probably similar to his first couple starts, where it's not awful [and] he makes some big saves for us.  The previous four games that we just played, there was no soft goals in there [sic].  I think there was a couple he would want back [tonight].  But...down 3-1, two goals going into the third, getting a point was pretty big, and he was part of us getting that point."