Returning regular · 2025-26

Mathieu Joseph

Edmonton Oilers · RW · L shot · age 29 at the dated snapshot.

Team: EDM
Lane: RW
Age: 29

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.

Games51

Goals2

Assists9

Points11

Even strength10all even-strength points

Power play0

Short handed1

Empty net1

5v5 points / 600.956

Average TOI11:59

PP TOI0:02

PK TOI0:46

Organizational context

3 RW regulars in EDM

The all-team median is 3.5. EDM’s farm system ranks #27 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 shots63

Expected goals5.18.1% per shot

Goals2

Finishing−3.1goals 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 quality45%2.47 expected goals for and 3.02 against per 60 minutes

Drive (vs own club without him)-8 ptshis share minus the club's share when he is off the ice

Setup (chances his passes produced)0.85 xG3 primary assists; 0.282 expected goals per pass on average, 0.088 per 60. A pass to a tap-in counts more than a pass to a point shot.

Drive, offence-0.65expected goals created per 60 with him on, minus the club without him

Drive, defence-0.26expected goals suppressed per 60 with him on, against the club without him; positive means fewer chances allowed

Offensive-zone starts50%of his faceoffs in either end zone; heavy offensive use lifts the numbers above

Company (linemates / opponents)average / averageteammates -0.7, opponents +0.7 points of relative chance share, weighted by seconds shared

Start +/- (goals begun on his shift)165 of them were scored after he had changed off

On the ice for43 for, 67 againstthe plus/minus view, for comparison

Giveaways that led to a goal1his own turnovers inside the sequence, over 9.7 hours on the ice

Line or pairLine 3his rank by 5-on-5 ice time within the club, most common over 21 games

LinematesOskar Sundqvist, Brayden Schennshared 19% and 18% of his 5-on-5 time

Matchup49% vs first lines49% against the other club's first line (sheltered)

Shutdown (drive, defence, deployment removed)+0.05offence the same way -0.37; zone starts and opponent quality removed by a league-wide fit

Real points101 empty-net point left out · 2 goals, 3 primary and 6 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 seasons6 of 8

Their later peak (adjusted pts/game)0.38median across the comparables; this player's own line is below

This player so far: age 14 RICBAA 0.76 → age 15 RICBAA 1.17 → age 16 Minor-QC 1.44 → age 17 QMJHL 0.37 → age 18 QMJHL 0.71 → age 19 QMJHL 1.26 → age 20 QMJHL 1.48 → age 21 AHL 0.76 → age 22 NHL 0.37 → age 23 NHL 0.19 → age 24 NHL 0.34 → age 25 NHL 0.31 → age 26 NHL 0.32 → age 27 NHL 0.49 → age 28 NHL 0.23 → age 29 NHL 0.28

All 3 columns shown

Player	Distance (lower is closer)	What he did afterwards
Dominic ToninatoC · matched at ages 26, 28, 29	0.06	age 30 NHL 0.33 → age 31 AHL 0.27 → age 32 AHL 0.38
Zemgus GirgensonsC · matched at ages 26, 28, 29	0.07	age 30 NHL 0.22 → age 31 NHL 0.07 → age 32 NHL 0.27
Vladislav NamestnikovC · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.09	age 30 NHL 0.26 → age 31 NHL 0.47 → age 32 NHL 0.49 → age 33 NHL 0.23
Cameron LundC · matched at ages 26, 27, 28	0.09	age 30 ACH 0.32 → age 31 ACH 0.14
Nick CousinsC · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.09	age 30 NHL 0.22 → age 31 NHL 0.30 → age 32 NHL 0.28
Sean KuralyC · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.10	age 30 NHL 0.28 → age 31 NHL 0.29 → age 32 NHL 0.21 → age 33 NHL 0.27
Alex BelzileR · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.10	age 30 NHL 0.00 → age 31 NHL 0.45 → age 32 AHL 0.37 → age 33 AHL 0.39 → age 34 AHL 0.43
Jordan MartinookL · matched at ages 26, 27, 28, 29	0.10	age 30 NHL 0.41 → age 31 NHL 0.39 → age 32 NHL 0.46 → age 33 NHL 0.38

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