Brandon Hagel

Tampa Bay Lightning#38Left wing Shoots left

Age 28 · 6′2″ · 185 lb · Saskatoon, SK, CAN

Elite offense and chance creation with strong playmaking, though he gives up too much defensively and isn't converting his looks.

Season grade: A+; #27 of 403 qualified F93rd percentile; Performance / 600.2532/71 GP

Loading season standing…

Games71T-329th in NHL

Goals360.51/GP▲0.08T-21st in NHL

Assists380.54/GP▼0.14T-72nd in NHL

Points741.04/GP▼0.06T-37th in NHL…

5v5 xG share61.3%1st of 112…

Avg TOI19:46137th in NHL…

Qualified · 2025–26 forwards

PlayerPeer average

What each component is built from

Offense: Expected goals for while the player is on the ice
Defense: Expected goals against while the player is on the ice (fewer is better)
Chance creation: Expected goals from the player’s own shots
Finishing: Goals minus expected goals on the player’s own shots
Assisting: Primary assists plus half of secondary assists

Each is measured against expectation, per 60 rated minutes: plus is above, minus below.

How this is calculated

Score breakdown

Component	Weight	Scaled	Contribution
Offense	25%	0.705	+0.176
Defense	25%	−0.259	−0.065
Chance creation	20%	0.605	+0.121
Finishing	10%	−0.157	−0.016
Assisting	20%	0.189	+0.038
Performance rate			0.255

Per 60 rated minutes, over the scored appearances. Each component is scaled separately, then weighted; the contributions add to the performance rate at full precision, so rounded figures may differ.

Scoring

Season grade is the qualified peer percentile on the same letter bands as Game Grade — A+ ≥88, A ≥78, A− ≥68, B+ ≥58, B ≥50, B− ≥42, C+ ≥35, C ≥28, C− ≥22, D ≥15, F below 15 — and needs qualification plus at least 30 eligible peers. The letter describes this season’s performance, not permanent ability.

Comparisons

Rank and component percentiles compare this season’s qualified forwards on unrounded rates over every checked appearance; Game Grade compares one appearance with frozen historical games.

Component percentiles are never averaged into the score. Recent history is optional, from up to three completed prior seasons; small samples are provisional.

Coverage

Qualification: 14 covered appearances, 226.5 rated minutes, and 90% appearance and workload coverage. Minimums advance with league progress; valid low-sample results stay visible.

Rated minutes exclude play with a goalie pulled: 14.2 min excluded; official TOI 653.7 min.

Coverage: partial. Updated Oct 17, 2026.

Method

Five weighted components add to the performance rate. Five-on-five offense and defense account for recorded teammates, opponents and game state, so shared on-ice results are not isolated individual ability. Finishing is scored against the shot model’s historical-shooter expectation and assisting counts primary assists plus half of secondary assists; both use the strength baseline, chance creation its positional baseline.

Loading season standing and profile…

Season metrics

2025–26 · five-on-five · vs 112 positional peers

Player	Percentile	Rank
2.98		2 / 11299th
1.40		3 / 11298th
—	—	—

Shooting & finishing	Player	Percentile	Rank
	1.34		1 / 11299th
	8.89		7 / 11295th
	20.83		3 / 11298th
	0.093		11 / 9489th
	0.06		36 / 9462nd

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

Metric2025–26ReferenceDiff

0.510.43+0.08

0.540.67-0.14

1.041.10-0.06

3.012.78+0.23

Reference: 2024–25 · 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
	3.92		1 / 11299th
	2.48		53 / 11253rd
	61.3		1 / 11299th

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

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

Context · not graded

5v5 goals: —
5v5 expected: 64.4–40.8
EPV added: +4.44

On ice vs off ice

Tampa Bay's share with Brandon Hagel 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 61.3% · Off ice unavailable	—
CF%	On ice 58.4% · 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
52.44		20 / 11283rd
—	—	—
0.064		89 / 11221st

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

Physical style	Player	Percentile	Rank
	—	—	—
	—	—	—

Context · not graded

Evidence coverage: high danger 39 of 71 games.

Discipline & puck management

Recorded season event counts · all situations

Penaltiesnet —

Taken —Drawn —

Puck eventsnet —

Giveaways —Takeaways —

Blocks: —
Hits: —

Both penalty counts cover 39 of 71 games with every drawn role recorded.

Loading defensive evidence…

SituationChancesViewShot type

Shot map

All 328 attempts

Goal36Shot on goal178Missed shot114Blocked 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
Inner slot	80	15	13.9	18.8%	17.4%	+1.1
Left circle	24	1	0.9	4.2%	3.8%	+0.1
High slot	127	16	16.1	12.6%	12.6%	−0.1
Right circle	9	0	0.3	0.0%	3.5%	−0.3
Outer slot	31	3	3.3	9.7%	10.8%	−0.3
Below goal line	8	0	0.5	0.0%	6.3%	−0.5
Point	49	1	4.1	2.0%	8.3%	−3.1
All zones	328	36	39.1	11.0%	11.9%	−3.1

Finishing evidence. Scoring 11.0% on chances vs 11.9% expected (−1.0 points), with the largest shortfall in the point.

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: 65.2%
Slot share: 63.1%
Average distance: 27.0 ft
Rebound attempts / 60: 1.15

Shot types

328 attempts

Type	Share	Sh%	G−xG
Wrist	37.5%	23.2%	+0.8
Snap	34.8%	15.8%	−0.9
Tip-in	8.8%	10.5%	−0.8
Slap	8.5%	12.5%	−0.2
Backhand	7.6%	0.0%	−2.2
Other	1.5%	—	+0.5
Wrap-around	1.2%	0.0%	−0.4

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

High-danger chances

Model goal probability ≥ 0.20

Conversion32.5%−8.3 pts vs expected

Actual32.5%

Expected40.8%

Attempts: 40
Goals: 13
Expected goals: 16.3
G−xG: −3.3

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	13:52	—	23	26	49	2.98
Power play	2:11	—	4	7	11	4.26
Penalty kill	2:15	—	1	0	1	0.37
Other	1:27	—	8	5	13	7.59
All situations	19:46	—	36	38	74	3.16

Where the 74 points come from · All situations

Goals36 · 1.54/60
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

154:46 recorded ice time · peers need 100 minutes

Share of team PP: —
PP points: 11
Unit xGF / 60: 9.76

Player	Percentile	Rank
4.26		29 / 5447th
—	—	—
12.79		18 / 5468th
1.90		26 / 5453rd
9.76		8 / 5487th
—	—	—

Evidence coverage: goals 30 of 64 games · team time 39 of 71 games.

Penalty kill

160:16 recorded ice time · peers need 100 minutes

Share of team PK: —
SH points: 1
Unit xGA / 60: 8.70

Player	Percentile	Rank
8.70		—
—	—	—
105.57		—
—	—	—
1.53		—

No rank yet

Evidence coverage: goals 35 of 67 games · high danger 35 of 67 games · team time 39 of 71 games.

Loading special teams…

Split	GP	G	A	P	P/GP	5v5 xG share	Team record
Venue
Home	35	16	16	32	0.91	57.9%	21–13–1
Away	36	20	22	42	1.17	64.5%	22–9–5
Rest
Back-to-back	12	6	5	11	0.92	64.1%	6–4–2
1 day of rest	39	24	21	45	1.15	58.3%	26–11–2
2+ days of rest	19	6	12	18	0.95	66.6%	11–6–2
Opponent
vs Eastern	41	20	15	35	0.85	59.1%	21–17–3
vs Western	30	16	23	39	1.30	64.1%	22–5–3
vs playoff teams	33	19	19	38	1.15	60.7%	24–9–0
vs non-playoff teams	38	17	19	36	0.95	61.8%	19–13–6
Recent
Last 10	10	5	6	11	1.10	66.4%	6–2–2

Teammate	Pos	TOI together	xG share together	GF–GA	CF%	Him without	Teammate without
Anthony Cirelli	C	660:21	61.7%	44–18	59.7%	60.5%	48.3%
Nikita Kucherov	R	532:45	63.5%	42–16	60.3%	58.8%	55.4%
J.J. Moser	D	428:46	60.0%	24–15	59.4%	62.1%	55.4%
Darren Raddysh	D	399:11	64.3%	23–16	62.7%	59.4%	55.7%
Charle-Edouard D'Astous	D	268:12	62.2%	22–11	58.1%	61.0%	53.8%
Jake Guentzel	C	262:50	63.8%	16–12	57.9%	60.5%	53.7%
Erik Cernak	D	218:15	61.3%	16–8	54.5%	61.3%	47.5%
Ryan McDonagh	D	185:27	60.4%	11–6	53.9%	61.5%	51.2%
Emil Lilleberg	D	160:51	61.7%	11–6	57.9%	61.3%	51.7%
Brayden Point	C	141:19	60.3%	5–6	53.4%	61.5%	56.0%
Victor Hedman	D	136:28	57.1%	10–6	55.9%	62.0%	45.0%
Declan Carlile	D	119:09	56.0%	8–3	54.4%	62.1%	47.4%

	Opponent	Result		G	A		PPP	+/−	SOG		5v5 on-ice xG share	Game
May 3	vs MTL	L 1–2	21:53	0	0	0	0	-1	3	0.18	64.0%	View →
May 1	@ MTL	W 1–0 OT	29:05	0	1	1	0	1	3	0.24	69.3%	View →
Apr 29	vs MTL	L 2–3	23:12	0	0	0	0	0	5	0.22	88.7%	View →
Apr 26	@ MTL	W 3–2	25:34	2	0	2	—	1	3	0.30	88.0%	View →
Apr 24	@ MTL	L 2–3 OT	24:58	1	0	1	—	1	2	0.03	65.0%	View →
Apr 21	vs MTL	W 3–2 OT	23:52	1	1	2	0	3	1	0.03	51.6%	View →
Apr 19	vs MTL	L 3–4 OT	25:27	2	0	2	—	1	3	0.24	84.4%	View →
Filtered 7	—	3–4	24:52 avg	6	2	8	—	6	20	1.23	71.7%	—

	Opponent	Result		G	A		PPP	+/−	SOG		5v5 on-ice xG share	Game
Apr 15	vs NYR	L 2–4	20:16	0	0	0	0	0	5	0.46	78.0%	View →
Apr 11	@ BOS	W 2–1	18:46	1	0	1	0	1	4	0.78	67.3%	View →
Mar 31	vs MTL	L 1–4	22:21	0	0	0	0	-3	5	0.00	51.9%	View →
Mar 29	vs NSH	W 3–2	22:20	1	0	1	—	1	5	0.83	53.4%	View →
Mar 28	vs OTT	W 4–2	22:17	1	1	2	0	2	3	0.66	69.9%	View →
Mar 26	vs SEA	OTL 3–4 OT	22:09	0	1	1	0	-1	5	0.41	73.7%	View →
Mar 24	vs MIN	W 6–3	18:49	1	1	2	1	1	2	0.07	55.4%	View →
Mar 22	@ CGY	OTL 3–4 OT	19:13	0	0	0	—	-2	2	0.18	69.2%	View →
Mar 21	@ EDM	W 5–2	20:47	0	2	2	0	3	2	0.12	72.4%	View →
Mar 19	@ VAN	W 6–2	20:01	1	1	2	0	4	4	0.49	68.6%	View →
Filtered 10	—	6–2–2	20:42 avg	5	6	11	—	6	37	4.00	66.4%	—

Teammate	Pos	TOI together	xG share together	GF–GA	CF%	Him without	Teammate without
Anthony Cirelli	C	660:21	61.7%	44–18	59.7%	60.5%	48.3%
Nikita Kucherov	R	532:45	63.5%	42–16	60.3%	58.8%	55.4%
J.J. Moser	D	428:46	60.0%	24–15	59.4%	62.1%	55.4%
Darren Raddysh	D	399:11	64.3%	23–16	62.7%	59.4%	55.7%
Charle-Edouard D'Astous	D	268:12	62.2%	22–11	58.1%	61.0%	53.8%
Jake Guentzel	C	262:50	63.8%	16–12	57.9%	60.5%	53.7%
Erik Cernak	D	218:15	61.3%	16–8	54.5%	61.3%	47.5%
Ryan McDonagh	D	185:27	60.4%	11–6	53.9%	61.5%	51.2%
Emil Lilleberg	D	160:51	61.7%	11–6	57.9%	61.3%	51.7%
Brayden Point	C	141:19	60.3%	5–6	53.4%	61.5%	56.0%
Victor Hedman	D	136:28	57.1%	10–6	55.9%	62.0%	45.0%
Declan Carlile	D	119:09	56.0%	8–3	54.4%	62.1%	47.4%

Split	G	A	P	5v5 xG share	5v5 CF%	5v5 GF–GA
Period
1st period	11	8	19	—	—	—
2nd period	7	15	22	—	—	—
3rd period	18	13	31	—	—	—
Overtime	0	2	2	—	—	—
Score state · 5v5 on ice
Leading	—	—	—	58.4%	51.7%	29–10
Tied	—	—	—	64.0%	61.2%	19–18
Trailing	—	—	—	62.0%	62.9%	18–9

Season	GP	G	A	P	SOG	P/GP	5v5 ixG/60	5v5 GP
2025–26	7	6	2	8	20	1.14	0.70	7
2024–25	3	0	0	0	3	0.00	0.14	3
2023–24	5	3	2	5	8	1.00	0.54	5
2022–23	6	1	4	5	15	0.83	0.73	6
2021–22	23	2	4	6	41	0.26	1.00	23

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
2026–27	28	TBL	9	7	5	12	2	2	41	17.1	1	21:32	6	8	3.42	1.66	13.68	0.090	3.83	2.35	62.0	61.3	—	—	—	—
2025–26	27	TBL	71	36	38	74	34	58	214	16.8	5	19:46	—	—	2.98	1.34	8.89	0.093	3.92	2.48	61.3	58.4	—	0.255	A+	27 / 403
2024–25	26	TBL	82	35	55	90	33	58	228	15.4	0	20:45	—	—	—	—	—	0.087	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
2023–24	25	TBL	82	26	49	75	1	79	184	14.1	2	19:15	—	—	2.36	0.92	7.18	0.091	3.24	2.53	56.1	53.4	—	—	—	—
2022–23	24	TBL	81	30	34	64	23	54	178	16.9	7	18:39	—	—	2.05	1.03	7.06	0.106	3.85	2.98	56.3	53.6	—	—	—	—
2021–22	23	CHI, TBL	77	25	19	44	-18	31	125	20.0	4	16:21	—	—	1.70	0.63	5.63	0.081	2.80	2.89	49.2	50.9	—	—	—	—
2020–21	22	CHI	52	9	15	24	-7	11	91	9.9	0	13:59	—	—	1.50	0.66	7.22	0.075	2.28	2.81	44.8	45.8	—	—	—	—
2019–20	21	CHI	1	0	0	0	0	0	4	0.0	0	11:48	—	—	0.00	1.27	20.34	0.063	3.67	2.20	62.5	50.0	—	—	—	—
Career	—	8 seasons	455	168	215	383	68	293	1065	15.8	19	18:26	—	—	—	—	—	0.090	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—

Brandon Hagel

Season performanceSelected-season standing and the components behind the scoreCollapse

Score breakdown

Scoring

Comparisons

Coverage

Method

Season metrics

Season vs reference

Season comparisons

Rolling Radar

Rolling Radar

On-ice impact5v5Elite 61.3% on-ice expected goal share at five-on-five (1st of 112)What the team creates and allows during the player’s five-on-five minutesExplore

Results vs expected

On ice vs off ice

Defense5v5 · AllAverage 2.48 on-ice expected goals against per 60 (53rd of 112)On-ice suppression and individual disciplineExplore

Defensive metrics

Discipline & puck management

Penaltiesnet —

Puck eventsnet —

Shooting & finishingElite 1.34 individual expected goals per 60 (1st of 112)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 & deployment19:46 TOI per game (13:52 at five-on-five · 2:11 PP · 2:15 PK)Scoring by situation, zone starts and workloadExplore

Usage by situation

Where the 74 points come from · All situations

Zone starts — offensive of OZ + DZ

Shifts

Usage by situation

Special teamsPP · PKAverage 4.26 power-play points per 60 (29th of 54)Power play and penalty killExplore

Power play

Penalty kill

FormExplore

Rolling Radar

Splits0.91 points per game at home · 1.17 awayVenue, rest and opponentExplore

By period and score state

Linemates5v5Most often with Anthony Cirelli: 660 five-on-five minutes, 61.7% xG share togetherWho he plays with at five-on-fiveExplore

Playoffs7 playoff games: 6 goals, 8 points · 44 career playoff gamesExplore

2025–26 playoffs

Playoff games

Every playoff run

Game log71 games · most recent vs NYR, L 2–4: 0 G, 0 AOfficial totals and five-on-five evidenceExplore

Career8 NHL seasons: 455 games, 383 pointsEvery season and a recomputed career lineExplore

Data notesScopes, missing values and model evidenceExplore

Score breakdown

Scoring

Comparisons

Coverage

Method

2025–26 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 74 points come from · All situations

Zone starts — offensive of OZ + DZ

Shifts

By period and score state

Season metrics

Season vs reference