Bands show position percentiles; axis labels show current rolling values.
Dashed outline: average defenseman in the fixed reference. Outside = above average; inside = below average. All axes point outward for stronger results.
Player value: 2.30 Peer range: 2.11 – 3.69 xGF/60
MeanTravis Dermott
Lower Higher (better)
Player 2.30 · mean 2.54. Higher raw values rank higher.
Rolling profile against a fixed reference group
Fixed rolling-profile reference · 239 players. Values use the same history and smoothing as the radar.
History, sample sizes & calculation
Higher radar percentiles mean stronger recorded results against the fixed reference, including older seasons. These are separate from this season’s league percentile. Each player has a different amount of covered history. Weighted minutes and attempts give recent games more influence. “Prior” is the share contributed by a frozen league baseline: it is higher when a player has less evidence, and differs by metric because each uses its own smoothing strength. It is not a confidence score.
On-ice offense · xGF/60
546.1 weighted minutes · 42% prior
On-ice defense · xGA/60
546.1 weighted minutes · 42% prior
Chance generation · ixG/60
546.1 weighted minutes · 27% prior
Shot quality · ixG/attempt
38.1 weighted attempts · 57% prior
Finishing · goals above expected/60
38.1 weighted attempts · 51% prior
History through Jan 26, 2025. Recent games count more than older games. History carries across seasons and stays unchanged while inactive. On-ice results are shared; finishing describes results rather than established talent.
Travis Dermott
86 attempts2.65 xG4 G
Goal4Shot on goal61Missed shot21Blocked shot0Larger dot = higher xG
Shooting by zone
Zone
Shots
xG
Goals
S%
Point
58
0.8
1
1.7%
High slot
12
1.1
1
8.3%
Left circle
10
0.3
0
0.0%
Right circle
3
0.1
0
0.0%
Inner slot
2
0.3
1
50.0%
Outer slot
1
0.0
1
100.0%
Hover or focus a row to light up those attempts on the rink.
Finishing evidence. Scoring 4.7% on chances vs 3.1% expected (+1.6 points), led by point volume and wrist finishing.
Shot types86 attempts
Wrist64%
Slap17%
Snap16%
Tip-in2%
High-danger chances
Expected
0.3
Goals
2
Conversion
66.7%
Model 9.9%
3 high-danger attempts · Model is the expected conversion on those attempts.
Recent form
Loading recent games…
Season vs reference
Loading season comparison…
Loading playoff games…
Loading game log…
Loading career ledger…
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.
Slightly below average: 0.15 individual expected goals per 60 (144th of 223)
Slightly below average: 0.15 individual expected goals per 60 (144th of 223)
Very good: 52.8% on-ice expected goal share at five-on-five (56th of 223)
Very good: 52.8% on-ice expected goal share at five-on-five (56th of 223)
Above average: 2.28 on-ice expected goals against per 60 (74th of 223)
Above average: 2.28 on-ice expected goals against per 60 (74th of 223)
Defensive metrics
Five-on-five on-ice suppression; individual events in all situations.
Suppression & events
Player
Percentile
Rank
53.06
96 / 223
—
—
—
0.056
44 / 223
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Player value: 53.06 Peer range: 43.99 – 69.91 / 60
MeanTravis Dermott
Lower (better)Higher
Player 53.06 · mean 53.93. Lower raw values are better.
On-ice attempts against per 60, including blocks.
Discipline & puck management
Recorded season event counts · all situations
Penaltiesnet —
Taken —Drawn —
Puck eventsnet —
Giveaways —Takeaways —
Blocks
—
all situations
Hits
—
all situations
0.00 power-play points per 60
0.00 power-play points per 60
Power play
3:54 recorded ice time · peers need 100 minutes
Share of team PP
—
in games dressed
PP points
0
goals + assists
Unit xGF / 60
1.34
team without: —
Power play rates
Player
Percentile
Rank
0.00
—
—
—
—
—
0.00
—
—
0.60
—
—
1.34
—
—
—
—
—
Player value: 0.00 Peer range: 0.00 – 6.78 / 60
MeanTravis Dermott
Lower Higher (better)
Player 0.00 · mean 4.15. Higher raw values rank higher. Needs 100 minutes in this special-teams scope.
Recorded goals plus assists per 60 in this scope; widened power-play and penalty-kill scopes.
Needs 100 minutes in this special-teams scope.
Penalty kill
63:25 recorded ice time · peers need 100 minutes
Share of team PK
—
in games dressed
SH points
0
goals + assists
Unit xGA / 60
7.71
team without: —
Penalty kill rates
Player
Percentile*
Rank
7.71
—
—
—
—
104.07
—
—
—
—
2.12
—
* Provisional: under 100 PK minutes
Player value: 7.71 Peer range: 4.02 – 8.17 / 60
MeanTravis Dermott
Lower (better)Higher
Player 7.71 · mean 6.29. Lower raw values are better. Provisional PK percentile: under 100 recorded minutes. Smaller samples are less reliable; official ranks need 100 minutes.
Raw on-ice expected goals against per 60; the Season metrics sample.
Provisional PK percentile: under 100 recorded minutes. Smaller samples are less reliable; official ranks need 100 minutes.
17:19 TOI per game (15:38 at five-on-five · 0:04 PP · 1:08 PK)
17:19 TOI per game (15:38 at five-on-five · 0:04 PP · 1:08 PK)
Results vs expected
Five-on-five · what happened beside the chances created and allowed
On-ice results
Player
Percentile
Rank
—
—
—
2.55
53 / 223
—
—
—
2.28
74 / 223
—
—
—
52.8
56 / 223
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Complete recorded inputs are unavailable.
5v5 goals
—
for–against
5v5 expected
37.2–33.2
xG for–against
EPV added
+2.36
55 attributed games · all situations
On ice vs off ice
Toronto's share with Travis Dermott 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 52.8% · Off ice unavailable
—
CF%
On ice 49.8% · 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
2 points over the last 10 games
2 points over the last 10 games
56 games · most recent vs TBL, W 2–1: 0 G, 0 A
56 games · most recent vs TBL, W 2–1: 0 G, 0 A
Official totals; expected-goal columns are five-on-five.
Shading: peer percentile that season. Bold: career high.
Season metrics
2019–20 · five-on-five · against qualified peers
Production
Player
Percentile
Rank
0.69
138 / 223
0.27
44 / 223
—
—
—
Shooting & finishing
Player
Percentile
Rank
0.15
144 / 223
3.98
147 / 223
7.33
196 / 223
0.029
67 / 151
0.12
21 / 151
Above averageNear averageBelow averageBars and shaded cells show peer percentile, so more is always better · tick at the 50th
Player value: 0.69 Peer range: 0.11 – 1.95 / 60
MeanTravis Dermott
Lower Higher (better)
Player 0.69 · mean 0.81. Higher raw values rank higher.
Recorded five-on-five goals plus assists per 60 minutes.
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. Green/red differences show favorable/unfavorable values versus average, not isolated player impact. Brass marks top-ten ranks.
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.
Recent form
Trailing ten appearances. Shaded games have fewer than ten in the window.
Trailing 10 games · Points / gamePoints in each gameSeason points / game
0.20 P / GP
Mar 10, 2020vs TBL
Trailing 10 · Points / game
0.20
Points in this game
0
Season points / game
0.20
10 appearances in window10 with five-on-five model coverage
