SHL 2026/27
SHL stats – xG table, leaderboards and top scorers
The points table tells you what has happened. This page tells you why – and what is likely to happen next. Here is the model’s table for the SHL 2026/27: expected goals for and against, shots, special teams and playing style alongside the usual points. Below it are the leaderboards – goals, points, xG and the goaltenders ranked on what can actually be measured.
Everything is calculated from the event data, match by match, and updated after every round played. These are the same numbers behind the predictions for the next round. Hover over the question mark by each column if anything is unclear. It usually is the first time.
Best xG difference per match right now: Skellefteå (+1.85). Olivier Nadeau (Lakers) leads the goalscoring chart with 8 goals – Oscar Lindberg tops the points chart with 17 points.
The model's table SHL 2026/27
The official standings with the underlying numbers alongside. Points tell you who is where. xGD tells you who should be.
84 matches played · updated 27 Oct
| Team | W–OTW–OTL–L | Playing style | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Färjestad | 33 | 12 | 10–1–1–0 | 48–12 | 43.1 | 23.8 | +19.3 | 325 | 272 | 28.9% | 91.4% | 54.3% | 95.6% | |
| 2 | Frölunda | 28 | 13 | 8–2–0–3 | 45–30 | 37.9 | 33.9 | +4.0 | 316 | 297 | 26.5% | 85.0% | 47.1% | 89.9% | |
| 3 | Skellefteå | 25 | 12 | 7–1–2–2 | 44–27 | 47.1 | 24.9 | +22.2 | 377 | 244 | 26.2% | 87.9% | 52.2% | 88.9% | |
| 4 | Rögle | 19 | 12 | 5–2–0–5 | 32–26 | 35.5 | 29.3 | +6.1 | 325 | 266 | 15.6% | 76.5% | 50.0% | 90.2% | |
| 5 | Malmö Redhawks | 17 | 11 | 4–1–3–3 | 31–29 | 27.7 | 25.1 | +2.6 | 293 | 273 | 25.0% | 58.1% | 51.8% | 89.4% | |
| 6 | Örebro | 17 | 12 | 5–0–2–5 | 27–37 | 26.4 | 40.0 | -13.6 | 273 | 337 | 20.0% | 60.0% | 49.8% | 89.0% | |
| 7 | Björklöven | 17 | 12 | 5–1–0–6 | 26–37 | 23.5 | 44.0 | -20.5 | 231 | 352 | 17.2% | 77.1% | 46.3% | 89.5% | |
| 8 | Brynäs | 15 | 12 | 4–1–1–6 | 34–31 | 35.0 | 29.6 | +5.4 | 317 | 278 | 19.4% | 69.6% | 49.9% | 88.8% | |
| 9 | Luleå | 15 | 12 | 4–0–3–5 | 29–35 | 31.7 | 33.2 | -1.5 | 255 | 269 | 26.1% | 91.7% | 45.8% | 87.0% | |
| 10 | Timrå | 15 | 12 | 3–3–0–6 | 22–28 | 32.0 | 28.4 | +3.6 | 344 | 277 | 21.6% | 75.0% | 51.5% | 89.9% | |
| 11 | Växjö Lakers | 15 | 12 | 4–1–1–6 | 32–39 | 31.5 | 31.2 | +0.3 | 256 | 277 | 32.1% | 76.0% | 45.5% | 85.9% | |
| 12 | Djurgården | 14 | 13 | 2–3–2–6 | 27–39 | 33.2 | 45.3 | -12.1 | 299 | 386 | 16.7% | 77.5% | 51.4% | 89.9% | |
| 13 | Linköping | 12 | 11 | 3–1–1–6 | 23–36 | 22.5 | 31.5 | -9.1 | 251 | 310 | 13.6% | 70.8% | 50.7% | 88.4% | |
| 14 | HV71 | 10 | 12 | 1–2–3–6 | 31–45 | 32.1 | 38.9 | -6.7 | 283 | 307 | 27.6% | 75.9% | 50.7% | 85.3% |
Shots against and faceoff percentage are shown on wider screens. Position and points are the official ones. xG, xGA, shots, special teams and save percentage are calculated from the event data match by match. Click a column heading to sort, the question mark for an explanation.
Leaderboards SHL 2026/27 – top scorers, points, xG and goaltenders
Goals and points as usual – and next to them what the players should have produced. Goaltenders are ranked on goals saved above expected.
Points leaders
Season totals. The per game unit (GU) column normalises for ice time: 1 game unit (GU) = 15 min of ice time — the league average for a skater per match. Goaltenders are counted per 60 minutes. That way players with different ice time are compared fairly.
| # | Player | GP | G | A | P | xG | P/GU | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Oscar Lindberg C AIK | 12 | 4 | 13 | 17 | 3.97 | 6.19 | 6.96 | 1.13 |
| 2 | Lucas Elvenes LW Lakers | 12 | 2 | 15 | 17 | 1.35 | 7.28 | 7.80 | 1.08 |
| 3 | Viktor Lodin RW FBK | 12 | 8 | 7 | 15 | 4.02 | 5.69 | 7.02 | 1.02 |
| 4 | Pär Lindholm C AIK | 12 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 3.61 | 1.56 | 5.31 | 0.96 |
| 5 | Rickard Hugg LW AIK | 12 | 4 | 8 | 12 | 5.11 | 5.89 | 4.49 | 0.82 |
| 6 | Olivier Nadeau RW Lakers | 12 | 8 | 3 | 11 | 5.99 | 1.00 | 6.73 | 0.75 |
| 7 | Joel Persson | 12 | 5 | 6 | 11 | 1.53 | 3.79 | 6.76 | 0.64 |
| 8 | Radim Zohorna C FBK | 12 | 4 | 7 | 11 | 3.49 | 4.63 | 6.04 | 0.79 |
| 9 | Jakob Silfverberg | 12 | 3 | 8 | 11 | 3.29 | 3.05 | 5.95 | 0.71 |
| 10 | Charles Hudon | 13 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 2.79 | 3.81 | 6.23 | 0.74 |
Top goalscorers
Season totals. The per game unit (GU) column normalises for ice time: 1 game unit (GU) = 15 min of ice time — the league average for a skater per match. Goaltenders are counted per 60 minutes. That way players with different ice time are compared fairly.
| # | Player | GP | G | A | P | xG | G/GU | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Olivier Nadeau RW Lakers | 12 | 8 | 3 | 11 | 5.99 | 1.00 | 6.73 | 0.55 |
| 2 | Viktor Lodin RW FBK | 12 | 8 | 7 | 15 | 4.02 | 5.69 | 7.02 | 0.55 |
| 3 | Jan Mysak C HV71 | 12 | 8 | 1 | 9 | 3.65 | 1.62 | 5.49 | 0.52 |
| 4 | Mikkel Aagaard RW AIK | 12 | 7 | 2 | 9 | 7.15 | 1.77 | 3.98 | 0.52 |
| 5 | Kieffer Bellows | 12 | 7 | 2 | 9 | 4.53 | 3.47 | 6.89 | 0.44 |
| 6 | Luboš Horký RW RBK | 12 | 7 | 2 | 9 | 2.83 | 2.07 | 7.36 | 0.53 |
| 7 | Max Veronneau RW OHK | 12 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 4.47 | 1.69 | 5.30 | 0.37 |
| 8 | Joona Koppanen C LHF | 12 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 3.21 | 1.41 | 5.41 | 0.37 |
| 9 | Johan Larsson | 12 | 5 | 5 | 10 | 3.17 | 3.25 | 6.72 | 0.32 |
| 10 | Robin Kovacs | 12 | 5 | 1 | 6 | 2.95 | 2.67 | 4.93 | 0.34 |
Assist leaders
Season totals. The per game unit (GU) column normalises for ice time: 1 game unit (GU) = 15 min of ice time — the league average for a skater per match. Goaltenders are counted per 60 minutes. That way players with different ice time are compared fairly.
| # | Player | GP | G | A | P | xG | A/GU | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lucas Elvenes LW Lakers | 12 | 2 | 15 | 17 | 1.35 | 7.28 | 7.80 | 0.95 |
| 2 | Oscar Lindberg C AIK | 12 | 4 | 13 | 17 | 3.97 | 6.19 | 6.96 | 0.87 |
| 3 | Pär Lindholm C AIK | 12 | 4 | 9 | 13 | 3.61 | 1.56 | 5.31 | 0.67 |
| 4 | Kalle Kossila C OHK | 12 | 1 | 9 | 10 | 1.48 | 2.48 | 4.85 | 0.60 |
| 5 | Hugo Fransson D HV71 | 12 | 0 | 9 | 9 | 1.63 | 3.44 | 4.60 | 0.56 |
| 6 | Rickard Hugg LW AIK | 12 | 4 | 8 | 12 | 5.11 | 5.89 | 4.49 | 0.55 |
| 7 | Jakob Silfverberg | 12 | 3 | 8 | 11 | 3.29 | 3.05 | 5.95 | 0.52 |
| 8 | Dennis Rasmussen | 12 | 2 | 8 | 10 | 4.23 | 1.56 | 4.16 | 0.50 |
| 9 | Viktor Lodin RW FBK | 12 | 8 | 7 | 15 | 4.02 | 5.69 | 7.02 | 0.48 |
| 10 | Radim Zohorna C FBK | 12 | 4 | 7 | 11 | 3.49 | 4.63 | 6.04 | 0.50 |
xG leaders – expected goals
Season totals. The per game unit (GU) column normalises for ice time: 1 game unit (GU) = 15 min of ice time — the league average for a skater per match. Goaltenders are counted per 60 minutes. That way players with different ice time are compared fairly.
| # | Player | GP | G | A | P | xG | xG/GU | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mikkel Aagaard RW AIK | 12 | 7 | 2 | 9 | 7.15 | 1.77 | 3.98 | 0.53 |
| 2 | Olivier Nadeau RW Lakers | 12 | 8 | 3 | 11 | 5.99 | 1.00 | 6.73 | 0.41 |
| 3 | Rickard Hugg LW AIK | 12 | 4 | 8 | 12 | 5.11 | 5.89 | 4.49 | 0.35 |
| 4 | Joakim Nygard RW FBK | 12 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 4.94 | 3.81 | 4.34 | 0.43 |
| 5 | Joel Kellman C RBK | 12 | 3 | 4 | 7 | 4.65 | 3.67 | 6.02 | 0.34 |
| 6 | Kieffer Bellows | 12 | 7 | 2 | 9 | 4.53 | 3.47 | 6.89 | 0.29 |
| 7 | Dennis Everberg LW RBK | 12 | 4 | 5 | 9 | 4.51 | 2.16 | 5.34 | 0.33 |
| 8 | Max Veronneau RW OHK | 12 | 5 | 3 | 8 | 4.47 | 1.69 | 5.30 | 0.33 |
| 9 | Graeme Clarke RW FHC | 13 | 4 | 6 | 10 | 4.46 | 3.40 | 4.41 | 0.32 |
| 10 | Oscar Tellström | 12 | 3 | 3 | 6 | 4.34 | 2.61 | 3.77 | 0.32 |
xT leaders – expected threat
Season totals. The per game unit (GU) column normalises for ice time: 1 game unit (GU) = 15 min of ice time — the league average for a skater per match. Goaltenders are counted per 60 minutes. That way players with different ice time are compared fairly.
| # | Player | GP | G | A | P | xG | xT/GU | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lucas Elvenes LW Lakers | 12 | 2 | 15 | 17 | 1.35 | 7.28 | 7.80 | 0.46 |
| 2 | Dylan McLaughlin C TIK | 12 | 2 | 7 | 9 | 4.31 | 6.23 | 4.19 | 0.40 |
| 3 | Oscar Lindberg C AIK | 12 | 4 | 13 | 17 | 3.97 | 6.19 | 6.96 | 0.41 |
| 4 | Rickard Hugg LW AIK | 12 | 4 | 8 | 12 | 5.11 | 5.89 | 4.49 | 0.40 |
| 5 | Otto Kivenmäki LW TIK | 12 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 1.55 | 5.79 | 6.59 | 0.44 |
| 6 | Viktor Lodin RW FBK | 12 | 8 | 7 | 15 | 4.02 | 5.69 | 7.02 | 0.39 |
| 7 | Radim Zohorna C FBK | 12 | 4 | 7 | 11 | 3.49 | 4.63 | 6.04 | 0.33 |
| 8 | Jonathan Pudas D AIK | 12 | 2 | 7 | 9 | 2.43 | 4.43 | 7.68 | 0.24 |
| 9 | Anton Levtchi LW LHF | 12 | 2 | 6 | 8 | 1.79 | 4.29 | 5.56 | 0.33 |
| 10 | Jacob Peterson C FHC | 13 | 3 | 5 | 8 | 4.28 | 4.00 | 3.52 | 0.27 |
Highest match rating
Season totals. The per game unit (GU) column normalises for ice time: 1 game unit (GU) = 15 min of ice time — the league average for a skater per match. Goaltenders are counted per 60 minutes. That way players with different ice time are compared fairly.
| # | Player | GP | G | A | P | xG | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Fredrik Händemark | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0.37 | 0.05 | 7.94 |
| 2 | Lucas Elvenes LW Lakers | 12 | 2 | 15 | 17 | 1.35 | 7.28 | 7.80 |
| 3 | Jonathan Pudas D AIK | 12 | 2 | 7 | 9 | 2.43 | 4.43 | 7.68 |
| 4 | Marcus Johansson LW FBK | 3 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1.18 | 1.01 | 7.43 |
| 5 | Luboš Horký RW RBK | 12 | 7 | 2 | 9 | 2.83 | 2.07 | 7.36 |
| 6 | Jack Berglund C FBK | 12 | 3 | 7 | 10 | 3.53 | 3.04 | 7.24 |
| 7 | Emil Sylvegård LW Redhawks | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1.01 | 0.77 | 7.13 |
| 8 | Viktor Lodin RW FBK | 12 | 8 | 7 | 15 | 4.02 | 5.69 | 7.02 |
| 9 | Oscar Lindberg C AIK | 12 | 4 | 13 | 17 | 3.97 | 6.19 | 6.96 |
| 10 | Kieffer Bellows | 12 | 7 | 2 | 9 | 4.53 | 3.47 | 6.89 |
Goaltender leaders – goals saved above expected
At least 20 shots faced.
| # | Goaltender | Starts | Shots | GA | SV% | GSAx | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Melker Thelin | 6/6 | 157 | 3 | 98.1% | +7.30 | +1.21 |
| 2 | Magnus Hellberg | 10/10 | 307 | 25 | 91.9% | +3.76 | +0.37 |
| 3 | Frans Tuohimaa | 6/6 | 167 | 14 | 91.6% | +2.10 | +0.36 |
| 4 | Calle Clang | 3/3 | 68 | 4 | 94.1% | +1.48 | +0.50 |
| 5 | Emil Larmi | 5/5 | 115 | 7 | 93.9% | +0.33 | +0.06 |
| 6 | Waltteri Ignatjew | 2/2 | 50 | 4 | 92.0% | -0.36 | -0.18 |
| 7 | Jacob Johansson | 10/10 | 256 | 18 | 93.0% | -0.51 | -0.05 |
| 8 | Lassi Lehtinen | 5/6 | 182 | 18 | 90.1% | -0.58 | -0.12 |
| 9 | Tobias Normann | 5/5 | 119 | 11 | 90.8% | -1.28 | -0.25 |
| 10 | Filip Larsson | 3/4 | 115 | 12 | 89.6% | -1.40 | -0.40 |
Goaltender leaders – save percentage
At least 20 shots faced.
| # | Goaltender | Starts | Shots | GA | SV% | GSAx | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Melker Thelin | 6/6 | 157 | 3 | 98.1% | +7.30 | +1.21 |
| 2 | Calle Clang | 3/3 | 68 | 4 | 94.1% | +1.48 | +0.50 |
| 3 | Emil Larmi | 5/5 | 115 | 7 | 93.9% | +0.33 | +0.06 |
| 4 | Jacob Johansson | 10/10 | 256 | 18 | 93.0% | -0.51 | -0.05 |
| 5 | Marek Langhamer | 7/7 | 185 | 14 | 92.4% | -2.52 | -0.36 |
| 6 | Waltteri Ignatjew | 2/2 | 50 | 4 | 92.0% | -0.36 | -0.18 |
| 7 | Magnus Hellberg | 10/10 | 307 | 25 | 91.9% | +3.76 | +0.37 |
| 8 | Frans Tuohimaa | 6/6 | 167 | 14 | 91.6% | +2.10 | +0.36 |
| 9 | Jonas Arntzen | 8/8 | 220 | 19 | 91.4% | -1.44 | -0.19 |
| 10 | Lars Johansson | 7/7 | 177 | 16 | 91.0% | -2.53 | -0.35 |
321 skaters and 28 goaltenders with ice time in SHL 2026/27. Top 10 per list.
Team metrics – the best in the league per category
The same 14 teams, seventeen metrics, the top five per category. Click a team for its full profile with the league rank for every number.
Goals per game/match
- 1
Färjestad BK4.00 - 2
Skellefteå AIK3.67 - 3
Frölunda HC3.46 - 4
Brynäs IF2.83 - 5
IF Malmö Redhawks2.82
Goals against per game/matchlower = better
- 1
Färjestad BK1.00 - 2
Rögle BK2.17 - 3
Skellefteå AIK2.25 - 4
Frölunda HC2.31 - 5
Timrå IK2.33
xG per game/match
- 1
Skellefteå AIK3.93 - 2
Färjestad BK3.59 - 3
Rögle BK2.96 - 4
Frölunda HC2.92 - 5
Brynäs IF2.91
xGA per game/matchlower = better
- 1
Färjestad BK1.98 - 2
Skellefteå AIK2.07 - 3
IF Malmö Redhawks2.28 - 4
Timrå IK2.37 - 5
Rögle BK2.45
xT per game/match
- 1
Skellefteå AIK3.88 - 2
Färjestad BK3.85 - 3
Luleå HF3.10 - 4
HV 713.04 - 4
HV713.04
xTA per game/matchlower = better
- 1
Skellefteå AIK2.24 - 2
Växjö Lakers HC2.59 - 3
Brynäs IF2.61 - 4
Färjestad BK2.61 - 5
IF Malmö Redhawks2.65
Counter-attack xT per game/match
- 1
Färjestad BK1.19 - 2
Skellefteå AIK1.08 - 3
HV 710.99 - 3
HV710.99 - 4
Timrå IK0.98
Shots on goal per game/match
- 1
Skellefteå AIK31.4 - 2
Timrå IK28.7 - 3
Färjestad BK27.1 - 4
Rögle BK27.1 - 5
IF Malmö Redhawks26.6
Shots against per game/matchlower = better
- 1
Skellefteå AIK20.3 - 2
Rögle BK22.2 - 3
Luleå HF22.4 - 4
Färjestad BK22.7 - 5
Frölunda HC22.8
Shot attempts per game/match
- 1
Skellefteå AIK59.5 - 2
Färjestad BK51.6 - 3
Brynäs IF51.4 - 4
Timrå IK50.6 - 5
Rögle BK50.6
Time in OZ with the puck/match
- 1
Skellefteå AIK7.8 min - 2
Färjestad BK7.4 min - 3
Rögle BK6.7 min - 4
Brynäs IF6.6 min - 5
IF Malmö Redhawks6.4 min
Field tiltseason
- 1
Skellefteå AIK64.5% - 2
Växjö Lakers HC57.0% - 3
Färjestad BK56.8% - 4
Rögle BK56.0% - 5
Brynäs IF55.5%
Passes per game/match
- 1
Skellefteå AIK430 - 2
Växjö Lakers HC391 - 3
Brynäs IF347 - 4
Färjestad BK322 - 5
IF Malmö Redhawks318
Pass %season
- 1
Skellefteå AIK79.9% - 2
Växjö Lakers HC78.5% - 3
Frölunda HC76.6% - 4
Brynäs IF76.3% - 5
Djurgårdens IF76.1%
Faceoff ratingseason
- 1
Örebro HK1538 - 2
Skellefteå AIK1529 - 3
Färjestad BK1529 - 4
Linköping HC1526 - 5
Djurgårdens IF1526
Penalties per game/matchlower = better
- 1
Brynäs IF1.9 - 2
Luleå HF2.0 - 3
Växjö Lakers HC2.1 - 4
Linköping HC2.2 - 5
Timrå IK2.3
PK goals per 2 min/2 minlower = better
- 1
Luleå HF0.08 - 2
Färjestad BK0.09 - 3
Skellefteå AIK0.12 - 4
Frölunda HC0.15 - 5
Djurgårdens IF0.20
PP goals per 2 min/2 min
- 1
Växjö Lakers HC0.32 - 2
Skellefteå AIK0.32 - 3
Frölunda HC0.31 - 4
HV 710.30 - 4
HV710.30
PP xG per 2 min/2 min
- 1
Skellefteå AIK0.38 - 2
Frölunda HC0.34 - 3
HV 710.32 - 3
HV710.32 - 4
Luleå HF0.31
xGA per 2 min of PK/2 minlower = better
- 1
Luleå HF0.17 - 2
Frölunda HC0.20 - 3
IF Malmö Redhawks0.21 - 4
Färjestad BK0.22 - 5
Timrå IK0.23
Save %season
- 1
Färjestad BK95.6% - 2
Rögle BK90.2% - 3
Frölunda HC89.9% - 4
Timrå IK89.9% - 5
Djurgårdens IF89.9%
How to read the model’s table
Start with xGD. A team with a positive xG difference creates more than it allows, and sooner or later that usually shows in the points column. A team high in the table but low in xGD is living on the margins: a hot goaltender, shots in off the crossbar, a power play converting 30 per cent. That kind of thing regresses. Not always next week, but over a season.
That is where the value is. The odds market still prices a lot on league position and form in results, not on the underlying numbers. A SHL team that has lost three in a row with a positive xGD is cheaper than it should be. That is the simple idea behind everything we do here.
Shots on goal and save percentage go together. A team that allows 32 shots per match but has a 93 per cent save rate looks good in goals conceded. Until the day the goaltender is human again. Check both columns, not just the one that looks good.
Playing style is not a grade. Shot volume does not win more often than puck possession. But it tells you something about how the team wins – and which markets become interesting. A shot-volume team drives shot totals, a transition team scores more in the third period when the opponents are chasing.
Leaderboards that measure more than points
The goals and points leaderboards are here as they always have been. Next to them are the xG and xT leaderboards, which are more interesting. A player with six goals on 2.1 xG has finished brilliantly or been lucky – usually a bit of both, and it rarely lasts. A player with high xT and no points creates the danger but does not get the reward. Yet. That kind of player is often mispriced in the goalscorer markets.
The per-game-unit column normalises for ice time. A fourth-line centre playing twelve minutes a match cannot be compared with a first-line forward on twenty – not in totals. Per game unit he can. That is how scouts read statistics, and that is how we read them.
The goaltenders are ranked on GSAx – goals saved above expected. Save percentage punishes the goaltender behind a poor defence. GSAx looks at the shots the goaltender actually faced and asks how many an average goaltender would have let in. The difference is the goaltender’s credit. Or blame.
From stats to predictions
The numbers here are the same ones the model uses before every match. The difference is that the match page combines them with home advantage, form and opposition into a probability – and compares it with the odds. Go to this round's predictions, pick a match in the SHL fixtures or see how the predictions have performed so far.
SHL teams
Frequently asked questions about the SHL stats
What is an xG table for the SHL?
A table where the teams are listed by expected goals for and against instead of just goals scored and conceded. xG (expected goals) gives every shot a value between 0 and 1 for how often such a shot goes in – distance, angle, shot type and game situation are all weighed in. The sum over the season tells you how many goals a team should have scored. Here the xG table for the SHL 2026/27 is shown next to the official table, so you can see who is over- and underperforming their numbers.
Why does the model’s table differ from the official SHL table?
It does not in position and points – those are the official ones, with three points for a win after 60 minutes and two and one when a match is settled in overtime or a shootout. What differs are the columns alongside: xG, xGA, xGD, shots on goal, power play and penalty kill percentages, faceoffs, save percentage and playing style. They show how the teams earned their points, not just how many.
What does xGD mean and why does it matter?
xGD is xG minus xGA, the difference between the chances a team creates and the chances it allows. It is the number that best predicts future results – better than points, better than goal difference. A team with a clear plus in xGD and a minus in the table has been unlucky and usually climbs. The reverse falls.
What is GSAx for goaltenders?
Goals Saved Above Expected: how many fewer goals the goaltender has conceded than the combined xG of the shots says. A goaltender who has faced shots worth 40 expected goals and let in 34 has +6 GSAx. The measure takes shot quality into account, which save percentage does not – that is why we rank goaltenders on GSAx.
What does per game unit (GU) mean?
A game unit is the league’s average ice time per match for a skater, roughly 15–16 minutes. Goals, assists, xG and xT per game unit show what a player produces per unit of ice time instead of per match, so a player with little ice time can be compared with one who plays half the match. Goaltenders are counted per 60 minutes.
How often are the stats updated?
After every round played in the SHL, as soon as the match event data is in – normally within a day of the final buzzer. The table and leaderboards are built on the same data as the match pages’ predictions and match reports.
Where does the data come from?
From PlaymakerAI’s event data for Swedish ice hockey: every shot, pass, puck carry, faceoff and penalty with position and time, from every match in the SHL and HockeyAllsvenskan. All 14 teams in the SHL 2026/27 are included. The same data that powers Otto.Hockey.
Björklöven