Mikhail Sergachev — 2019–20 stats and season rank | IceSheet
Mikhail Sergachev
Utah Mammoth·#98·Defenseman · Shoots left
Age 28 · 6′3″ · 212 lb · Nizhnekamsk, RUS
No checked season results are available for this selection.
Games70T-34th in NHL
Goals100.14/GP▲0.06T-229th in NHL
Assists240.34/GP0.00T-137th in NHL
Points340.49/GP…
5v5 xG share…
Avg TOI20:22…
Career awards
×2
/
Loading season standing and profile…
Season comparisons
Loading peer comparisons and model evidence…
Optional recent-history profile
Rolling Radar
Loading recent-history profile…
Loading model evidence…
Loading defensive evidence…
Shot locations
Loading canonical shot events…
Usage by situation
Loading usage…
Loading special teams…
T-180th in NHL
108th in NHL
No checked season results are available for this selection.
No complete checked component breakdown is available for this selection.
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.
Recent scoring against his own season
Recent scoring against his own season
Loading recent games…
Loading splits…
Loading linemates…
Loading playoff games…
Loading game log…
Loading career ledger…
2 award records
Stanley Cup · 2020–21
Stanley Cup · 2019–20
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.
Most often with Kevin Shattenkirk: 596 five-on-five minutes, 56.5% xG share together
Most often with Kevin Shattenkirk: 596 five-on-five minutes, 56.5% xG share together
Five-on-five · time together from shift charts (1,113:42 of his 5v5 ice time) · xG share together and apart
Teammate
Pos
TOI together
xG share together
GF–GA
CF%
Him without
Teammate without
Kevin Shattenkirk
D
596:23
56.5%
36–19
54.3%
55.1%
52.7%
Nikita Kucherov
R
345:55
60.2%
13–8
58.5%
53.8%
57.3%
Brayden Point
C
339:57
60.4%
14–8
57.4%
53.7%
56.9%
Ondrej Palat
L
316:55
60.1%
19–13
56.5%
53.7%
52.6%
Anthony Cirelli
C
281:01
55.6%
13–11
53.0%
56.0%
50.5%
Yanni Gourde
C
269:52
54.4%
18–8
54.7%
56.3%
53.6%
Alex Killorn
L
265:14
48.1%
11–8
49.5%
57.9%
48.5%
Tyler Johnson
C
261:42
58.2%
12–10
53.3%
55.0%
49.3%
Steven Stamkos
C
256:41
55.3%
8–8
55.1%
56.1%
50.7%
Patrick Maroon
L
241:10
50.0%
11–10
48.6%
57.3%
53.8%
Cedric Paquette
C
222:26
48.9%
8–8
48.5%
57.1%
48.2%
Carter Verhaeghe
C
150:17
66.8%
13–3
60.3%
53.8%
52.3%
Without columns are five-on-five xG share apart: him on the ice without that teammate, and the teammate without him (with this club). Bars are centred on an even 50%.
2019–20 playoffs
Official playoff totals · no peer ranks, since playoff samples are too small for a fair comparison
Games
25
22:37 per game
Goals
3
1 on the power play
Assists
7
official
Points
10
4 power-play points
Plus-minus
+4
even strength and shorthanded
Shots
52
5.8% shooting
Playoff games
Official totals; expected-goal columns are five-on-five.
Strong 0.23 individual expected goals per 60 (50th of 223)
Strong 0.23 individual expected goals per 60 (50th of 223)
54.8%24th of 223
Elite 54.8% on-ice expected goal share at five-on-five (24th of 223)
Elite 54.8% on-ice expected goal share at five-on-five (24th of 223)
Strong 2.10 on-ice expected goals against per 60 (29th of 223)
Strong 2.10 on-ice expected goals against per 60 (29th of 223)
Defensive metrics
Five-on-five on-ice suppression; individual events in all situations.
Suppression
Player
Percentile
Rank
48.55
24 / 22390th
—
—
—
0.057
57 / 22375th
Puck management
Player
Percentile
Rank
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Physical style
Player
Percentile
Rank
—
—
—
—
—
—
Context · not graded
Player value: 48.55 Peer range: 43.99 – 69.91 / 60
MeanMikhail Sergachev
Lower (better)Higher
Player 48.55 · mean 53.93. Lower raw values are better.
On-ice attempts against per 60, including blocks.
Evidence coverage: high danger 14 of 70 games.
Discipline & puck management
Recorded season event counts · all situations
Penaltiesnet —
Taken —Drawn —
Puck eventsnet —
Giveaways —Takeaways —
Blocks
—
all situations
Hits
—
all situations
Both penalty counts cover 27 of 70 games with every drawn role recorded.
Average 4.46 power-play points per 60 (26th of 61)
Average 4.46 power-play points per 60 (26th of 61)
Power play
134:39 recorded ice time · peers need 100 minutes
Share of team PP
—
in games dressed
PP points
10
goals + assists
Unit xGF / 60
5.52
team without: —
Power play rates
Player
Percentile
Rank
4.46
26 / 6158th
—
—
—
11.14
18 / 6172nd
0.76
24 / 6162nd
5.52
44 / 6128th
—
—
—
Player value: 4.46 Peer range: 1.35 – 6.78 / 60
MeanMikhail Sergachev
Lower Higher (better)
Player 4.46 · mean 4.15. Higher raw values rank higher.
Recorded goals plus assists per 60 in this scope; widened power-play and penalty-kill scopes.
Evidence coverage: goals 11 of 62 games · team time 21 of 70 games.
Penalty kill
82:57 recorded ice time · peers need 100 minutes
Share of team PK
—
in games dressed
SH points
2
goals + assists
Unit xGA / 60
4.51
team without: —
Penalty kill rates
Player
Percentile
Rank
4.51
—
—
—
—
69.44
—
—
—
—
1.99
—
No rank yet
Player value: 4.51 Peer range: 4.02 – 8.17 / 60
MeanMikhail Sergachev
Lower (better)Higher
Player 4.51 · mean 6.28. 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.
Evidence coverage: goals 13 of 52 games · high danger 13 of 52 games · team time 21 of 70 games.
20:22 TOI per game (16:10 at five-on-five · 1:55 PP · 1:11 PK)
20:22 TOI per game (16:10 at five-on-five · 1:55 PP · 1:11 PK)
Results vs expected
Five-on-five · what happened beside the chances created and allowed
Chances
Player
Percentile
Rank
2.54
56 / 22375th
2.10
29 / 22387th
54.8
24 / 22390th
Goals
Player
Percentile
Rank
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Luck & variance
Player
Percentile
Rank
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
—
Context · not graded
Player value: 2.54 Peer range: 1.74 – 3.23 / 60
MeanMikhail Sergachev
Lower Higher (better)
Player 2.54 · mean 2.38. Higher raw values rank higher.
Raw on-ice expected goals for per 60; the Season metrics sample.
5v5 goals
—
14 of 70 games
5v5 expected
48.0–39.6
xG for–against
EPV added
+1.97
70 attributed games · all situations
On ice vs off ice
Tampa Bay's share with Mikhail Sergachev 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 54.8% · Off ice unavailable
—
CF%
On ice 52.9% · 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
Cooling 4 points in the last 10 games (0.40 per game vs 0.49 this season)
Cooling 4 points in the last 10 games (0.40 per game vs 0.49 this season)
0.53 points per game at home · 0.44 away
0.53 points per game at home · 0.44 away
70 games · most recent at TOR, L 1–2: 0 G, 0 A
70 games · most recent at TOR, L 1–2: 0 G, 0 A
Shot map
All 171 attempts
Mikhail Sergachev
171 attempts6.80 xG10 G
Goal10Shot on goal108Missed shot53Blocked shot0Larger dot = higher xG
Shooting by zone
Hover a row to light it up · click to pin
Zone
Att
G
xG
Goal rate
Exp.
Goals vs expected
G−xG
Point
125
5
3.1
4.0%
2.5%
+1.9
Inner slot
3
2
0.6
66.7%
19.4%
+1.4
High slot
34
3
2.7
8.8%
8.0%
+0.3
Below goal line
1
0
0.0
0.0%
3.9%
0.0
Right circle
3
0
0.1
0.0%
1.8%
−0.1
Left circle
3
0
0.1
0.0%
4.1%
−0.1
Outer slot
2
0
0.2
0.0%
7.8%
−0.2
All zones
171
10
6.8
5.8%
4.0%
+3.2
Finishing evidence. Scoring 5.8% on chances vs 4.0% expected (+1.9 points), led by point volume and snap 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
69.0%
118 of 171 attempts on goal
Slot share
21.6%
37 from the inner or high slot
Average distance
47.8 ft
from the centre of the net
Rebound attempts / 60
0.25
6 this season · all situations
Shot types
171 attempts
Type
Share
Sh%
G−xG
Wrist
56.1%
5.8%
+0.2
Slap
33.3%
5.9%
+0.2
Snap
7.6%
18.2%
+1.5
Backhand
1.8%
0.0%
−0.2
Deflected
0.6%
100.0%
+0.9
Tip-in
0.6%
100.0%
+0.6
Share is context, not a grade. Sh% counts shots on goal only.
High-danger chances
Model goal probability ≥ 0.20
Conversion100.0%+62.1 pts vs expected
Actual100.0%
Expected37.9%
Attempts
1
0.6% of these attempts
Goals
1
10% of all goals
Expected goals
0.4
0.38 xG per attempt
G−xG
+0.6
above model
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
Rank (D)
Five-on-five
16:10
—
5
14
19
1.01
55 / 223
Power play
1:55
—
4
6
10
4.46
26 / 61
Penalty kill
1:11
—
1
1
2
1.45
—
Other
1:05
—
1
3
4
3.15
82 / 223
All situations
20:22
—
11
24
35
1.47
26 / 223
Where the 35 points come from · All situations
Goals11 · 0.46/60
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
Every game · rest counts days off before the game; the playoff field is the standings' top three per division plus two wild cards
Split
GP
G
A
P
P/GP
5v5 xG share
Team record
Venue
Home
34
6
12
18
0.53
58.1%
22–10–2
Away
36
4
12
16
0.44
51.7%
21–11–4
Rest
Back-to-back
12
1
5
6
0.50
55.8%
8–2–2
1 day of rest
41
9
12
21
0.51
57.1%
25–14–2
2+ days of rest
16
0
4
4
0.25
48.5%
9–5–2
Opponent
vs Eastern
43
6
15
21
0.49
54.0%
28–12–3
vs Western
27
4
9
13
0.48
55.9%
15–9–3
vs playoff teams
34
5
11
16
0.47
54.2%
17–12–5
vs non-playoff teams
36
5
13
18
0.50
55.3%
26–9–1
Recent
Last 10
10
1
3
4
0.40
46.1%
3–6–1
By period and score state
Split
G
A
P
5v5 xG share
5v5 CF%
5v5 GF–GA
Period
1st period
7
6
13
—
—
—
2nd period
3
8
11
—
—
—
3rd period
0
9
9
—
—
—
Overtime
0
1
1
—
—
—
Score state · 5v5 on ice
Leading
—
—
—
56.5%
50.5%
21–16
Tied
—
—
—
56.0%
52.9%
21–13
Trailing
—
—
—
54.5%
60.0%
13–6
From play-by-play; shootouts excluded. Score state is his team's, before each event.
Official totals; expected-goal columns are five-on-five.
Elite90+Strong70–89Average30–69Weak10–29Poor<10Bar length is the peer percentile, so longer is always better · tick at the 50th
Player value: 1.01 Peer range: 0.11 – 1.95 / 60
MeanMikhail Sergachev
Lower Higher (better)
Player 1.01 · 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. 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
Per game · all situations
Metric2019–20ReferenceDiff
0.140.08+0.06
0.340.35-0.00
0.490.43+0.06
1.691.71-0.02
Reference: 2018–19 · 75 games.
Each game against his own season
Points in each game, coloured by how good the game wasTrailing 10 games, per gameSeason 0.49
Points
4
1 G · 3 A
Team record
3–6–1
in his games
5v5 xG share
46.1%
on ice
5v5 ixG
0.3
individual expected goals
Avg TOI
23:33
all situations
Tiles cover the last 10 games.
11 NHL seasons: 638 games, 378 points
11 NHL seasons: 638 games, 378 points
Totals cover all situations; rates are five-on-five.
