Returning regular · 2025-26

Marcus Pettersson

New York Rangers · LD · L shot · age 30 at the dated snapshot.

Team: NYR
Lane: LD
Age: 30

Production and deployment

How the points were built

Official NHL 2025–26 regular-season reports. A missing split stays “—”; it is never converted to zero.

Games82

Goals3

Assists15

Points18

Even strength18all even-strength points

Power play0

Short handed0

Empty net2

5v5 points / 600.611

Average TOI21:27

PP TOI0:06

PK TOI2:43

Organizational context

4 LD regulars in NYR

The all-team median is 4. NYR’s farm system ranks #15 in the maintained two-board consensus.

Thin lane

Questions a GM still has to answer

How much of the scoring comes at five-on-five, on special teams, or into an empty net?
Is the player creating the play, finishing it, or receiving a secondary point?
Does deployment reveal trust, scarcity, underuse, or a role the roster cannot offer?
What contract, acquisition cost, development alternative and Cup-window effect complete the argument?

Shot quality · 2025-26

Expected goals

CapOrCup's shot model (distance, angle, shot type, strength, rebounds, rushes), trained on 2023-24 and 2024-25 and tested on unseen games (AUC 0.757). Finishing is goals minus expected goals; it is noisy in one season.

Unblocked shots122

Expected goals4.33.5% per shot

Goals2

Finishing−2.3goals above expected

CapOrCup measures · 2025-26

What happens while he plays

Measured from the league's play-by-play and shift charts, not from the scoresheet. Expected goals are counted for every player on the ice, and a goal is credited to whoever was on the ice when the sequence began, including players who had changed off before it was scored.

Share of chance quality37%2.47 expected goals for and 4.15 against per 60 minutes

Drive (vs own club without him)-10 ptshis share minus the club's share when he is off the ice

Setup (chances his passes produced)0.3 xG3 primary assists; 0.1 expected goals per pass on average, 0.011 per 60. A pass to a tap-in counts more than a pass to a point shot.

Drive, offence-0.57expected goals created per 60 with him on, minus the club without him

Drive, defence-0.79expected goals suppressed per 60 with him on, against the club without him; positive means fewer chances allowed

Offensive-zone starts43%of his faceoffs in either end zone; heavy offensive use lifts the numbers above

Company (linemates / opponents)weak / toughteammates -2.4, opponents +1.8 points of relative chance share, weighted by seconds shared

Start +/- (goals begun on his shift)403 of them were scored after he had changed off

On the ice for122 for, 189 againstthe plus/minus view, for comparison

Giveaways that led to a goal1his own turnovers inside the sequence, over 28.6 hours on the ice

Line or pairPair 1his rank by 5-on-5 ice time within the club, most common over 35 games

PartnerTom Willandershared 41% of his 5-on-5 time

Matchup61% vs first lines61% of his time against the other club's first line (hard matchups)

Shutdown (drive, defence, deployment removed)-0.12offence the same way -0.21; zone starts and opponent quality removed by a league-wide fit

Real points141 empty-net point left out · 2 goals, 3 primary and 10 secondary assists · 0 on the power play

How these measures are defined, and where they stop.

Comparables at the same age

Who looked like this at 26 to 29

Careers are compared as league-adjusted points per game by age, over the same ages. The comparables below are the closest lines, and what matters is the spread of what they did next, not any single name.

Comparables found8

Went on to two or more NHL seasons8 of 8

Their later peak (adjusted pts/game)0.35median across the comparables; this player's own line is below

This player so far: age 15 Swe-U18 0.36 → age 16 J20 Nationell 0.32 → age 17 SHL 0.00 → age 18 SHL 0.00 → age 19 SHL 0.15 → age 20 SHL 0.22 → age 21 NHL 0.18 → age 22 NHL 0.22 → age 23 NHL 0.32 → age 24 NHL 0.19 → age 25 NHL 0.26 → age 26 NHL 0.35 → age 27 NHL 0.37 → age 28 NHL 0.38 → age 29 NHL 0.22

All 3 columns shown

Player	Distance (lower is closer)	What he did afterwards
Jonas BrodinD · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.05	age 30 NHL 0.43 → age 31 NHL 0.40 → age 32 NHL 0.29
Brett PesceD · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.06	age 30 NHL 0.24 → age 31 NHL 0.19
Adam PelechD · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.06	age 30 NHL 0.35 → age 31 NHL 0.20
Ryan PulockD · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.07	age 30 NHL 0.31 → age 31 NHL 0.35
Connor MurphyD · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.07	age 30 NHL 0.16 → age 31 NHL 0.17 → age 32 NHL 0.28 → age 33 NHL 0.22
Esa LindellD · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.08	age 30 NHL 0.33 → age 31 NHL 0.39
Colton ParaykoD · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.08	age 30 NHL 0.32 → age 31 NHL 0.56 → age 32 NHL 0.23
Matt RoyD · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.09	age 30 NHL 0.35 → age 31 NHL 0.24

Reading it

If most comparables became NHL regulars and their later peak sits well above this player's current line, the numbers say there is room to grow. If most did not, the numbers say the odds are against it. Either way it is what the data shows, not a name chosen to flatter.

Atlantic

Metropolitan

Central

Pacific