All 776 players Tampa Bay Lightning desk

Returning regular · 2025-26

Ilya Mikheyev

Tampa Bay Lightning · RW · L shot · age 31 at the dated snapshot.

Team: TBL
Lane: RW
Age: 31

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.

Games77

Goals18

Assists18

Points36

Even strength33all even-strength points

Power play0

Short handed3

Empty net3

5v5 points / 601.586

Average TOI17:26

PP TOI0:03

PK TOI2:38

Organizational context

4 RW regulars in TBL

The all-team median is 3.5. TBL’s farm system ranks #29 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 shots172

Expected goals16.29.4% per shot

Goals18

Finishing+1.8goals 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 quality40%2.64 expected goals for and 4.05 against per 60 minutes

Drive (vs own club without him)-6 ptshis share minus the club's share when he is off the ice

Setup (chances his passes produced)1.92 xG11 primary assists; 0.174 expected goals per pass on average, 0.092 per 60. A pass to a tap-in counts more than a pass to a point shot.

Drive, offence-0.06expected goals created per 60 with him on, minus the club without him

Drive, defence-0.86expected goals suppressed per 60 with him on, against the club without him; positive means fewer chances allowed

Offensive-zone starts44%of his faceoffs in either end zone; heavy offensive use lifts the numbers above

Company (linemates / opponents)weak / toughteammates -3.1, opponents +2.4 points of relative chance share, weighted by seconds shared

Start +/- (goals begun on his shift)354 of them were scored after he had changed off

On the ice for89 for, 96 againstthe plus/minus view, for comparison

Giveaways that led to a goal1his own turnovers inside the sequence, over 20.7 hours on the ice

Line or pairLine 1his rank by 5-on-5 ice time within the club, most common over 33 games

LinematesJason Dickinson, Ryan Donatoshared 44% and 43% of his 5-on-5 time

Matchup63% vs first lines63% of his time against the other club's first line (hard matchups)

Shutdown (drive, defence, deployment removed)+0.25offence the same way +0.98; zone starts and opponent quality removed by a league-wide fit

Real points313 empty-net points left out · 18 goals, 11 primary and 5 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 28 to 31

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)0.53median across the comparables; this player's own line is below

This player so far: age 18 MHL 0.60 → age 19 MHL 1.27 → age 20 VHL 0.33 → age 21 KHL 0.35 → age 22 KHL 0.38 → age 23 KHL 0.70 → age 24 KHL 0.73 → age 25 NHL 0.59 → age 26 NHL 0.32 → age 27 NHL 0.60 → age 28 NHL 0.61 → age 29 NHL 0.40 → age 30 NHL 0.42 → age 31 NHL 0.47

All 3 columns shown

Player	Distance (lower is closer)	What he did afterwards
Brendan GallagherR · matched at ages 28, 29, 30, 31	0.05	age 32 NHL 0.46 → age 33 NHL 0.30
Jason ZuckerL · matched at ages 28, 29, 30, 31	0.09	age 32 NHL 0.49 → age 33 NHL 0.73 → age 34 NHL 0.73
Charlie CoyleC · matched at ages 28, 29, 30, 31	0.09	age 32 NHL 0.73 → age 33 NHL 0.34 → age 34 NHL 0.71
Blake ColemanL · matched at ages 28, 29, 30, 31	0.09	age 32 NHL 0.69 → age 33 NHL 0.48 → age 34 NHL 0.51
Adam LowryC · matched at ages 28, 29, 30, 31	0.10	age 32 NHL 0.47 → age 33 NHL 0.30
Nino NiederreiterR · matched at ages 28, 29, 30, 31	0.10	age 32 NHL 0.45 → age 33 NHL 0.31
Lars EllerC · matched at ages 28, 29, 30, 31	0.10	age 32 NHL 0.43 → age 33 NHL 0.27 → age 34 NHL 0.38 → age 35 NHL 0.41 → age 36 NHL 0.22
Jean-Gabriel PageauC · matched at ages 28, 29, 30, 31	0.11	age 32 NHL 0.53 → age 33 NHL 0.47

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