PIT @ CAR
S. Jarvis

S. Jarvis

CAR β€’ C

4.1
+0.9Projected SOG
3.24.1
2
9
2
2
1

πŸ”₯ 5.5 SOG/G at home vs 1.7 away (L5) β€’ Massive split suggests elite home zone dominance

πŸ“Š Home vs road disparity (3.8 gap) β€’ Defensive structure breakdown on the road

J. Blake

J. Blake

CAR β€’ RW

3.4
+0.4Projected SOG
33.4
2
6
0
4
3

πŸ“Š Neutral offensive momentum β€’ No clear directional trend emerging

πŸ“ˆ Home ice typically boosts shot volume β€’ At home, expect baseline lift

S. Aho

S. Aho

CAR β€’ C

3.6
+0.4Projected SOG
3.23.6
1
5
7
2
1

πŸ”₯ 6.0 SOG/G at home vs 1.3 away (L5) β€’ Massive split exploits soft road D

πŸ“Š Home ice advantage β€’ Transition speed and slot access surge

N.J @ NYR
T. Meier

T. Meier

N.J β€’ RW

3.4
0.2Projected SOG
3.63.4
6
2
4
2
4

πŸ“ˆ NYR 3rd-worst D (L10, 30.8 SOG/G) β€’ Porous gap control invites slot access

πŸ“ˆ N.J. 6th in SOG/G this season β€’ Road team primed for volume

J. Hughes

J. Hughes

N.J β€’ C

3.5
0.5Projected SOG
43.5
5
4
5
2
4

πŸ“ˆ NYR 3rd-worst D (L10), allows 30.8 SOG/G β€’ Gap control breakdown on the road

πŸ“ˆ 10th in NHL for SOG/G this season β€’ Consistent volume threat away from home

OTT @ WSH
B. Tkachuk

B. Tkachuk

OTT β€’ LW

3.6
Projected SOG
3.63.6
3
5
5
3
2

πŸ“ˆ 2nd in NHL SOG/G this season β€’ Elite shot volume translates on road

πŸƒ Away splits historically favor volume shooters β€’ WSH allows 34.2 SOG/G at home

DAL @ COL
J. Robertson

J. Robertson

DAL β€’ LW

3.5
+0.8Projected SOG
2.83.5
2
1
3
5
3

πŸ“ˆ 12th SOG/G + road disadvantage β€’ Away teams generate fewer high-danger chances

πŸ“Š COL allows 29.1 SOG/G (L10) β€’ Defensive structure contains perimeter volume

N. MacKinnon

N. MacKinnon

COL β€’ C

3.3
0.7Projected SOG
43.3
9
1
4
2
4

πŸ”₯ 4.7 SOG/G at home (L5) β€’ Elite volume in familiar territory

πŸ“ˆ DAL allows 21.5 SOG/G (4th-worst D) β€’ Porous gap control creates slot access

STL @ CGY
J. Kyrou

J. Kyrou

STL β€’ RW

3.0
+0.4Projected SOG
2.63.0
5
2
0
5
1

πŸ”₯ 2.0 SOG/G away vs 3.5 at home (L5) β€’ Road underperformance compounds travel fatigue

πŸ“ˆ CGY allows 31.4 SOG/G (2nd-worst D, L10) β€’ Porous gap control creates slot access

D. Holloway

D. Holloway

STL β€’ LW

3.3
+0.3Projected SOG
33.3
3
2
2
2
6

πŸ”₯ 3.7 SOG/G away vs 2.0 at home (L5) β€’ Road aggression compounds home passivity

πŸ“ˆ CGY allows 31.4 SOG/G (2nd-worst D, L10) β€’ Porous gap control invites high-volume looks

J. Snuggerud

J. Snuggerud

STL β€’ RW

3.6
0.2Projected SOG
3.83.6
3
8
3
1
4

πŸ”₯ 3.3 SOG/G away vs 4.5 at home (L5) β€’ Road underperformance compounds offensive struggles

πŸ“ˆ CGY allows 31.4 SOG/G, 2nd-worst D (L10) β€’ Porous gap control creates high-volume opportunities

PHI @ ANA
O. Tippett

O. Tippett

PHI β€’ RW

3.7
+0.1Projected SOG
3.63.7
1
3
6
6
2

πŸ“Š Away teams vs ANA (27.8 SOG/G, 16th) β€’ Neutral matchup, standard road volume

πŸ“ˆ PHI neutral zone play (L5 avg) β€’ Transition speed determines slot access