Hockey Terminal
Be a GM

Compare players, 2016-17 season

At a glance

Tanner Glass Peter Cehlarik

GoalsAssistsPointsShotsHitsCorsi for %CF% relOn-ice xG %RatingChances createdShot qualityFinishingThe typical playerTanner Glass: Goals, 0.09 a game, 22nd percentileTanner Glass: Assists, 0.09 a game, 16th percentileTanner Glass: Points, 0.18 a game, 16th percentileTanner Glass: Shots, 0.73 a game, 3rd percentileTanner Glass: Hits, 3.36 a game, 99th percentileTanner Glass: Corsi for %, 47.7%, 25th percentileTanner Glass: CF% rel, -1.1, 36th percentileTanner Glass: On-ice xG %, 47.4%, 26th percentileTanner Glass: Rating, -0.2 goals above replacement, 21st percentileTanner Glass: Chances created, 0.85 xG per 60, 72nd percentileTanner Glass: Shot quality, 11.3% a shot, 99th percentileTanner Glass: Finishing, -0.7 goals above expected, 46th percentilePeter Cehlarik: Goals, 0.00 a game, 1st percentilePeter Cehlarik: Assists, 0.18 a game, 40th percentilePeter Cehlarik: Points, 0.18 a game, 16th percentilePeter Cehlarik: Shots, 0.73 a game, 3rd percentilePeter Cehlarik: Hits, 0.64 a game, 27th percentilePeter Cehlarik: Corsi for %, 51.8%, 70th percentilePeter Cehlarik: CF% rel, -0.9, 39th percentilePeter Cehlarik: On-ice xG %, 53.8%, 80th percentilePeter Cehlarik: Rating, +0.1 goals above replacement, 23rd percentilePeter Cehlarik: Chances created, 0.57 xG per 60, 20th percentilePeter Cehlarik: Shot quality, 10.4% a shot, 97th percentilePeter Cehlarik: Finishing, -1.5 goals above expected, 39th percentile
00.511.52Tanner Glass 2Peter Cehlarik 2

On the radar, each spoke runs from the lowest at the centre to the league leader at the rim, among the regulars at his position: forwards against forwards, defencemen against defencemen. The gap between two players on a spoke is the real gap between their numbers. The dashed shape is the typical player. Hover over a dot for the number. The lines are each player's points adding up, game by game.

Where they shot from

Tanner Glass
Peter Cehlarik

There is a dot for each attempt, bigger for a better chance. "Show as heat map" shades the ice by where the attempts came from. Click a line in a key to filter its map.

The numbers

Tanner Glass L, CGY 2016-17 Peter Cehlarik L, BOS
11 Games played 11
1 Goals 0
1 Assists 2
2 Points 2
0.18 Points per game 0.18
0 Plus/minus 0
8 Shots 8
12.5 Shooting % 0.0
37 Hits 7
17 Penalty minutes 0
10:55 Average ice time 13:55
Five-on-five, while he was on the ice
47.7 Corsi for % 51.8
-1.1 CF% relative to team -0.9
47.3 Fenwick for % 54.1
47.4 Expected goals for % 53.8
-1.5 xGF% relative to team -1.5
50.0 Goals for % 50.0
100.6 PDO 98.4
18 Shot attempts taken 15
Expected goals, all situations
1.7 Expected goals 1.5
0.85 Expected goals per 60 0.57
11.3% Chance per attempt 10.4%
-0.7 Goals above expected -1.5
Rating, in goals
-0.2 Goals above replacement +0.1
0.0 Wins above replacement +0.0
-0.2 Even-strength offence 0.0
-0.1 Even-strength defence -0.3
0.0 Power play -0.2
0.0 Penalty kill 0.0
-0.2 Penalties +0.2
Contract
$1.45M Cap hit $743K
$725K Cap dollars per point $371K

The better value in each stat is highlighted. Stats where more is not clearly better, such as games played, are not judged. Bars show each value against the larger of the two. What the advanced numbers mean