Jonathan Huberdeau

Calgary Flames#10Left wing Shoots left

Age 33 · 6′1″ · 200 lb · Saint-Jerome, QC, CAN

No checked season results are available for this selection.

Games69T-83rd in NHL

Goals230.33/GP▼0.03T-48th in NHL

Assists550.80/GP▲0.047th in NHL

Points781.13/GPT-10th in NHL…

5v5 xG share51.4%54th of 125…

Avg TOI18:46T-184th in NHL…

Career awards

No checked season results are available for this selection.

No complete checked component breakdown is available for this selection.

Loading season standing and profile…

Season metrics

2019–20 · five-on-five · vs 125 positional peers

Player	Percentile	Rank
2.51		7 / 12595th
0.92		31 / 12576th
—	—	—

Shooting & finishing	Player	Percentile	Rank
	0.70		70 / 12544th
	6.91		60 / 12552nd
	11.56		68 / 12546th
	0.076		41 / 9658th
	0.22		17 / 9683rd

Elite90+Strong70–89Average30–69Weak10–29Poor<10Bar length is the peer percentile, so longer is always better · tick at the 50th

How to read these comparisons

Player values are recorded season results. Peer averages are arithmetic means of qualified players in the selected group; each row uses the same peers for its average and rank. Ranks use unrounded values, with tied players sharing a rank and the next rank skipped. Lower xG against ranks better. Bar colours are the five performance tiers; context rows are blue and not graded. Differences from the average describe the season, not isolated player impact.

Goals above expected is the raw goals-minus-xG rate, without the shrinkage used in the older finishing comparison. On-ice measures include teammates, opponents and deployment. These recorded metrics describe different quantities from the adjusted Season score components beside them.

Skaters need 20 appearances and 300 five-on-five minutes; quality and finishing also need 75 unblocked attempts. Early in a season these minimums scale down with games played so far. At least 30 peers must qualify. Playoff ranks are withheld. A reviewed axis whose own evidence fails is withheld and shown with its reason rather than ranked. These workload rules do not express statistical confidence.

Position uses the NHL listed primary position available now; it does not establish historical position or actual deployment. Broad groups are forwards, defence and goalies. This version uses the current model’s covered games only.

Season vs reference

Reference

Per game · all situations

Metric2019–20ReferenceDiff

0.330.37-0.03

0.800.76+0.04

1.131.12+0.01

2.202.76-0.55

Reference: 2018–19 · 82 games.

Season comparisons

Loading peer comparisons and model evidence…

Optional recent-history profile

Rolling Radar

Recent NHL history, carried across seasons. The radar compares this broader profile with a fixed position-group reference.

Rolling profile is currently unavailable.

Rolling Radar

Loading recent-history profile…

Results vs expected

Five-on-five · what happened beside the chances created and allowed

Chances	Player	Percentile	Rank
	2.52		42 / 12567th
	2.39		63 / 12550th
	51.4		54 / 12557th

Player	Percentile	Rank
—	—	—
—	—	—
—	—	—

Player	Percentile	Rank
—	—	—
—	—	—
—	—	—

Context · not graded

5v5 goals: —
5v5 expected: 41.2–39.0
EPV added: +5.09

On ice vs off ice

Florida's share with Jonathan Huberdeau on the ice against the same team without him.

Share	On ice and off ice	On-minus-off gap in percentage points
xGF%	On ice 51.4% · Off ice unavailable	—
CF%	On ice 50.3% · Off ice unavailable	—
GF%	On ice unavailable · Off ice unavailable	—

On iceOff ice

Scale 40–65% · marker at 50% · right column is the on-minus-off gap in points

Loading model evidence…

Defensive metrics

Five-on-five on-ice suppression; individual events in all situations.

Player	Percentile	Rank
52.12		60 / 12552nd
—	—	—
0.058		52 / 12559th

Player	Percentile	Rank
—	—	—
—	—	—
—	—	—

Physical style	Player	Percentile	Rank
	—	—	—
	—	—	—

Context · not graded

Evidence coverage: high danger 22 of 69 games.

Discipline & puck management

Recorded season event counts · all situations

Penaltiesnet —

Taken —Drawn —

Puck eventsnet —

Giveaways —Takeaways —

Blocks: —
Hits: —

Both penalty counts cover 28 of 69 games with every drawn role recorded.

Loading defensive evidence…

SituationChancesViewShot type

Shot map

All 216 attempts

Goal23Shot on goal129Missed shot64Blocked shot0Larger dot = higher xG

Shooting by zone

Hover a row to light it up · click to pin

Zone	Att	G	xG	Goal rate	Exp.	G−xG
Outer slot	19	5	1.2	26.3%	6.4%	+3.8
Inner slot	38	6	4.7	15.8%	12.4%	+1.3
Point	37	2	0.8	5.4%	2.2%	+1.2
Below goal line	2	1	0.2	50.0%	9.8%	+0.8
Left circle	11	1	0.4	9.1%	3.5%	+0.6
Right circle	11	0	0.3	0.0%	2.6%	−0.3
High slot	98	8	9.3	8.2%	9.5%	−1.3
All zones	216	23	17.0	10.6%	7.9%	+6.0

Finishing evidence. Scoring 10.6% on chances vs 7.9% expected (+2.8 points), led by outer slot volume and wrist finishing.

Sorted by goals minus expected goals. Goal rate is goals per unblocked attempt against the expected rate.

Shot profile

Context · not graded

On-net rate: 70.4%
Slot share: 63.0%
Average distance: 30.0 ft
Rebound attempts / 60: 0.60

Shot types

216 attempts

Type	Share	Sh%	G−xG
Wrist	50.5%	14.5%	+3.6
Snap	23.1%	14.7%	−0.3
Tip-in	11.6%	21.1%	+2.2
Backhand	6.0%	20.0%	+1.1
Slap	5.6%	11.1%	0.0
Wrap-around	2.3%	0.0%	−0.4
Other	0.9%	—	−0.2

Share is context, not a grade. Sh% counts shots on goal only.

High-danger chances

Model goal probability ≥ 0.20

Conversion16.7%−7.9 pts vs expected

Actual16.7%

Expected24.6%

Attempts: 12
Goals: 2
Expected goals: 3.0
G−xG: −1.0

Shot locations

Loading canonical shot events…

Usage by situation

Ice time, share of team ice time, scoring and scoring rate, with where shifts start.

Scope	TOI/GP	Team share	G	A	P	P/60
Five-on-five	14:13	—	15	26	41	2.51
Power play	3:34	—	5	23	28	6.83
Penalty kill	0:03	—	0	0	0	0.00
Other	0:56	—	3	6	9	8.33
All situations	18:46	—	23	55	78	3.61

Where the 78 points come from · All situations

Goals23 · 1.07/60
Primary assists— · —/60
Secondary assists— · —/60

Zone starts — offensive of OZ + DZ

Offensive —Neutral —Defensive —

Shifts

— a game · — average

Zone starts: five-on-five · Shifts: all situations

Usage by situation

Loading usage…

Power play

246:00 recorded ice time · peers need 100 minutes

Share of team PP: —
PP points: 28
Unit xGF / 60: 6.64

Player	Percentile	Rank
6.83		2 / 4898th
—	—	—
7.56		44 / 489th
1.09		39 / 4819th
6.64		20 / 4860th
—	—	—

Evidence coverage: goals 12 of 69 games · team time 23 of 69 games.

Penalty kill

3:35 recorded ice time · peers need 100 minutes

Share of team PK: —
SH points: 0
Unit xGA / 60: 2.79

Player	Percentile	Rank
2.79		—
—	—	—
50.23		—
—	—	—
2.36		—

No rank yet

Evidence coverage: goals 1 of 12 games · high danger 2 of 12 games · team time 23 of 69 games.

Loading special teams…

Split	GP	G	A	P	P/GP	5v5 xG share	Team record
Venue
Home	35	14	32	46	1.31	55.6%	17–14–4
Away	34	9	23	32	0.94	46.1%	18–12–4
Rest
Back-to-back	14	4	12	16	1.14	51.5%	8–4–2
1 day of rest	35	10	27	37	1.06	48.0%	16–17–2
2+ days of rest	19	9	16	25	1.32	56.5%	11–4–4
Opponent
vs Eastern	42	14	33	47	1.12	52.2%	20–17–5
vs Western	27	9	22	31	1.15	50.2%	15–9–3
vs playoff teams	38	14	24	38	1.00	50.2%	15–18–5
vs non-playoff teams	31	9	31	40	1.29	52.9%	20–8–3
Recent
Last 10	10	2	5	7	0.70	42.6%	4–4–2

Split	G	A	P	5v5 xG share	5v5 CF%	5v5 GF–GA
Period
1st period	5	16	21	—	—	—
2nd period	8	18	26	—	—	—
3rd period	9	20	29	—	—	—
Overtime	1	1	2	—	—	—
Score state · 5v5 on ice
Leading	—	—	—	51.0%	46.4%	18–13
Tied	—	—	—	51.5%	52.1%	12–14
Trailing	—	—	—	57.4%	57.8%	10–12

Teammate	Pos	TOI together	xG share together	GF–GA	CF%	Him without	Teammate without
Aleksander Barkov	C	775:53	55.6%	35–33	54.4%	42.6%	44.2%
Evgenii Dadonov	L	663:51	57.2%	30–28	55.0%	45.2%	51.6%
Aaron Ekblad	D	397:00	57.8%	12–18	55.2%	50.4%	50.8%
Keith Yandle	D	337:15	54.4%	8–15	50.8%	53.0%	46.6%
Anton Stralman	D	327:11	47.6%	21–7	49.0%	56.3%	48.8%
MacKenzie Weegar	D	245:03	57.8%	9–12	55.8%	52.0%	52.1%
Mike Matheson	D	242:18	54.5%	12–7	53.1%	53.1%	46.3%
Joshua Brown	D	169:42	50.6%	4–10	46.6%	54.0%	45.8%
Noel Acciari	C	155:06	49.7%	5–5	43.8%	54.1%	44.3%
Mike Hoffman	C	146:03	52.7%	4–4	59.5%	53.6%	49.8%
Riley Stillman	D	144:30	44.0%	10–4	45.7%	55.3%	50.1%
Vincent Trocheck	C	118:28	42.6%	4–5	48.5%	54.7%	51.5%

	Opponent	Result		G	A		PPP	+/−	SOG		5v5 on-ice xG share	Game
Aug 7	vs NYI	L 1–5	20:22	0	1	1	1	-1	5	0.38	69.0%	View →
Aug 5	vs NYI	W 3–2	20:27	0	0	0	0	-1	2	0.11	34.3%	View →
Aug 4	@ NYI	L 2–4	17:39	0	1	1	—	1	3	0.33	74.6%	View →
Aug 1	@ NYI	L 1–2	18:32	1	0	1	—	1	2	0.13	43.0%	View →
Filtered 4	—	1–3	19:15 avg	1	2	3	—	0	12	0.95	58.8%	—

Season	GP	G	A	P	SOG	P/GP	5v5 ixG/60	5v5 GP
2021–22	10	1	4	5	25	0.50	0.90	10
2020–21	6	2	8	10	18	1.67	0.59	6
2019–20	4	1	2	3	12	0.75	0.97	4
2015–16	6	1	2	3	34	0.50	1.33	6

	Opponent	Result		G	A		PPP	+/−	SOG		5v5 on-ice xG share	Game
Mar 9	@ STL	W 2–1	15:06	0	0	0	—	-1	3	0.07	27.4%	View →
Mar 7	vs MTL	W 4–1	19:02	1	0	1	0	1	2	0.11	29.5%	View →
Mar 5	vs BOS	OTL 1–2 OT	20:55	0	0	0	—	0	1	0.03	82.6%	View →
Mar 1	vs CGY	L 0–3	23:07	0	0	0	—	-1	7	0.67	46.8%	View →
Feb 29	vs CHI	OTL 2–3 SO	22:29	0	0	0	—	1	2	0.00	45.1%	View →
Feb 27	vs TOR	L 3–5	18:51	0	0	0	0	-2	1	0.03	17.8%	View →
Feb 25	@ ARI	W 2–1	16:28	0	1	1	1	-1	2	0.11	40.0%	View →
Feb 22	@ VGK	L 3–5	19:26	0	0	0	0	-2	3	0.05	53.0%	View →
Feb 20	@ LAK	L 4–5	19:20	1	3	4	—	0	2	0.13	61.2%	View →
Feb 19	@ ANA	W 4–1	18:16	0	1	1	0	1	0	0.08	38.0%	View →
Filtered 10	—	4–4–2	19:18 avg	2	5	7	—	-4	23	1.28	42.6%	—

Season	Box score · all situations	5v5 individual	5v5 on ice	Season performance
2025–26	32	CGY	50	10	15	25	-9	41	83	12.0	3	18:08	—	—	1.46	0.61	5.10	0.079	2.53	2.54	49.9	52.8	—	—	—	—
2024–25	31	CGY	81	28	34	62	-13	34	153	18.3	10	19:33	—	—	—	—	—	0.092	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
2023–24	30	CGY	81	12	40	52	-29	49	143	8.4	4	17:25	—	—	1.46	0.69	5.62	0.082	2.67	2.76	49.2	52.7	—	—	—	—
2022–23	29	CGY	79	15	40	55	2	36	126	11.9	4	16:52	—	—	2.04	0.72	5.01	0.103	3.13	2.39	56.7	56.4	—	—	—	—
2021–22	28	FLA	80	30	85	115	35	54	222	13.5	5	19:25	—	—	2.97	0.98	8.07	0.096	3.37	2.73	55.3	55.3	—	—	—	—
2020–21	27	FLA	55	20	41	61	12	36	122	16.4	5	18:25	—	—	2.54	0.60	5.76	0.086	2.61	2.06	56.0	53.3	—	—	—	—
2019–20	26	FLA	69	23	55	78	5	30	152	15.1	5	18:46	—	—	2.51	0.70	6.91	0.076	2.52	2.39	51.4	50.3	—	—	—	—
2018–19	25	FLA	82	30	62	92	-14	40	226	13.3	11	18:51	—	—	2.44	0.90	7.95	0.085	2.77	2.61	51.5	51.2	—	—	—	—
2017–18	24	FLA	82	27	42	69	-2	32	204	13.2	7	19:12	—	—	2.01	0.68	6.63	0.075	2.73	2.58	51.4	51.0	—	—	—	—
2016–17	23	FLA	31	10	16	26	-2	13	86	11.6	3	17:55	—	—	2.04	0.76	7.74	0.079	3.00	2.58	53.7	54.2	—	—	—	—
2015–16	22	FLA	76	20	39	59	17	43	174	11.5	4	18:09	—	—	2.25	0.76	7.43	0.081	2.74	2.28	54.5	47.6	—	—	—	—
Career	—	11 seasons	766	225	469	694	2	408	1691	13.3	61	18:28	—	—	—	—	—	0.085	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—

1 award records

Calder Memorial Trophy · 2012–13

Every metric name opens its definition; the full list lives in Metrics.

Traditional statistics cover all situations. Supporting five-on-five analyses use completed games, raw adjustment and exposure from xG model v4. The two samples can differ.

An em dash means unavailable, not zero. A partial season remains partial. Where a panel reports evidence coverage, its rates use only the covered games. History never substitutes a different model, and a missing appearance interrupts a rolling model window.

Shot maps use the same shot model as Game Center and show which model version scored recent shots beside the rink. Older seasons can use earlier model versions. High danger means a model scoring probability of at least 0.20 on an unblocked attempt; for goalies, medium danger is 0.08 to 0.20 and low is below 0.08.

Special-team buckets include the wider recorded man-advantage and man-down states, read from the player’s own team; for a goalie, penalty kill means facing a power play. Their ranks need 100 recorded minutes and at least 30 qualified peers; below 100 minutes, penalty-kill percentiles are provisional. Playoff values have no ranks or percentiles. Team share is player ice time divided by team ice time in that situation, over the games the player dressed. Zone starts describe faceoff-started five-on-five shifts and exclude on-the-fly starts.

Penalties count events, including one for a double minor; bench and served-by roles are excluded, and victimless infractions have no drawn role. EPV added sums changes in the probability that the possessing team scores next; it is not standings points or an isolated player grade. Rolling windows never cross seasons or season types, and a missed game is not a zero-performance appearance. Career rates use summed counts and exposure, never an average of season rates; a missing contributing season withholds its career metric, and Performance begins in 2023–24.

Explore the full methodology →

Season			Box score · all situations												5v5 individual				5v5 on ice					Season performance
Season	Age	Team	GP	G	A	P	+/−	PIM	SOG	Sh%	PPG	TOI/GP	Hits	Blk	P/60	ixG/60	SOG/60	xG/UA	xGF/60	xGA/60	xGF%	CF%	GF%	Perf/60	Grade	Rank
2025–26	32	CGY	50	10	15	25	-9	41	83	12.0	3	18:08	—	—	1.46	0.61	5.10	0.079	2.53	2.54	49.9	52.8	—	—	—	—
2024–25	31	CGY	81	28	34	62	-13	34	153	18.3	10	19:33	—	—	—	—	—	0.092	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
2023–24	30	CGY	81	12	40	52	-29	49	143	8.4	4	17:25	—	—	1.46	0.69	5.62	0.082	2.67	2.76	49.2	52.7	—	—	—	—
2022–23	29	CGY	79	15	40	55	2	36	126	11.9	4	16:52	—	—	2.04	0.72	5.01	0.103	3.13	2.39	56.7	56.4	—	—	—	—
2021–22	28	FLA	80	30	85	115	35	54	222	13.5	5	19:25	—	—	2.97	0.98	8.07	0.096	3.37	2.73	55.3	55.3	—	—	—	—
2020–21	27	FLA	55	20	41	61	12	36	122	16.4	5	18:25	—	—	2.54	0.60	5.76	0.086	2.61	2.06	56.0	53.3	—	—	—	—
2019–20	26	FLA	69	23	55	78	5	30	152	15.1	5	18:46	—	—	2.51	0.70	6.91	0.076	2.52	2.39	51.4	50.3	—	—	—	—
2018–19	25	FLA	82	30	62	92	-14	40	226	13.3	11	18:51	—	—	2.44	0.90	7.95	0.085	2.77	2.61	51.5	51.2	—	—	—	—
2017–18	24	FLA	82	27	42	69	-2	32	204	13.2	7	19:12	—	—	2.01	0.68	6.63	0.075	2.73	2.58	51.4	51.0	—	—	—	—
2016–17	23	FLA	31	10	16	26	-2	13	86	11.6	3	17:55	—	—	2.04	0.76	7.74	0.079	3.00	2.58	53.7	54.2	—	—	—	—
2015–16	22	FLA	76	20	39	59	17	43	174	11.5	4	18:09	—	—	2.25	0.76	7.43	0.081	2.74	2.28	54.5	47.6	—	—	—	—
Career	—	11 seasons	766	225	469	694	2	408	1691	13.3	61	18:28	—	—	—	—	—	0.085	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—

Jonathan Huberdeau

Season performanceSelected-season standing and the components behind the scoreCollapse

Season metrics

Season vs reference

Season comparisons

Rolling Radar

Rolling Radar

On-ice impact5v5Average 51.4% on-ice expected goal share at five-on-five (54th of 125)What the team creates and allows during the player’s five-on-five minutesExplore

Results vs expected

On ice vs off ice

Defense5v5 · AllAverage 2.39 on-ice expected goals against per 60 (63rd of 125)On-ice suppression and individual disciplineExplore

Defensive metrics

Discipline & puck management

Penaltiesnet —

Puck eventsnet —

Shooting & finishingAverage 0.70 individual expected goals per 60 (70th of 125)Where the player shoots, the quality of those chances, and actual versus expected goalsExplore

Shot map

Shooting by zone

Shot profile

Shot types

High-danger chances

Shot locations

Usage & deployment18:46 TOI per game (14:13 at five-on-five · 3:34 PP · 0:03 PK)Scoring by situation, zone starts and workloadExplore

Usage by situation

Where the 78 points come from · All situations

Zone starts — offensive of OZ + DZ

Shifts

Usage by situation

Special teamsPP · PKElite 6.83 power-play points per 60 (2nd of 48)Power play and penalty killExplore

Power play

Penalty kill

FormExplore

Rolling Radar

Splits1.31 points per game at home · 0.94 awayVenue, rest and opponentExplore

By period and score state

Linemates5v5Most often with Aleksander Barkov: 776 five-on-five minutes, 55.6% xG share togetherWho he plays with at five-on-fiveExplore

Playoffs4 playoff games: 1 goal, 3 points · 26 career playoff gamesExplore

2019–20 playoffs

Playoff games

Every playoff run

Game log69 games · most recent at STL, W 2–1: 0 G, 0 AOfficial totals and five-on-five evidenceExplore

Career11 NHL seasons: 766 games, 694 pointsEvery season and a recomputed career lineExplore

Data notesScopes, missing values and model evidenceExplore

2019–20 playoffs

Playoff games

Every playoff run

Defensive metrics

Discipline & puck management

Penaltiesnet —

Puck eventsnet —

Power play

Penalty kill

Results vs expected

On ice vs off ice

Shot map

Shooting by zone

Shot profile

Shot types

High-danger chances

Usage by situation

Where the 78 points come from · All situations

Zone starts — offensive of OZ + DZ

Shifts

By period and score state

Season metrics

Season vs reference