Returning regular · 2025-26

Cutter Gauthier

Anaheim Ducks · LW · L shot · age 22 at the dated snapshot.

Team: ANA
Lane: LW
Age: 22

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.

Games76

Goals41

Assists28

Points69

Even strength50all even-strength points

Power play19

Short handed0

Empty net4

5v5 points / 602.468

Average TOI17:15

PP TOI2:48

PK TOI0:19

Organizational context

4 LW regulars in ANA

The all-team median is 4. ANA’s farm system ranks #13 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 shots421

Expected goals27.76.6% per shot

Goals41

Finishing+13.3goals 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 quality54%4.44 expected goals for and 3.71 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)1.76 xG14 primary assists; 0.126 expected goals per pass on average, 0.082 per 60. A pass to a tap-in counts more than a pass to a point shot.

Drive, offence+1.43expected goals created per 60 with him on, minus the club without him

Drive, defence-0.28expected goals suppressed per 60 with him on, against the club without him; positive means fewer chances allowed

Offensive-zone starts45%of his faceoffs in either end zone; heavy offensive use lifts the numbers above

Company (linemates / opponents)strong / averageteammates +2.5, opponents -0.1 points of relative chance share, weighted by seconds shared

Start +/- (goals begun on his shift)813 of them were scored after he had changed off

On the ice for138 for, 134 againstthe plus/minus view, for comparison

Giveaways that led to a goal1his own turnovers inside the sequence, over 21.6 hours on the ice

Line or pairLine 1his rank by 5-on-5 ice time within the club, most common over 29 games

LinematesMason McTavish, Beckett Senneckeshared 47% and 40% of his 5-on-5 time

Matchup60% vs first lines60% of his time against the other club's first line (hard matchups)

Shutdown (drive, defence, deployment removed)-0.33offence the same way +1.41; zone starts and opponent quality removed by a league-wide fit

Real points654 empty-net points left out · 41 goals, 14 primary and 14 secondary assists · 19 on the power play

How these measures are defined, and where they stop.

Comparables at the same age

Who looked like this at 19 to 22

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)1.01median across the comparables; this player's own line is below

This player so far: age 14 HPHL 13U 1.00 → age 15 HPHL 16U 0.84 → age 16 HPHL 16U 1.00 → age 17 USHL 0.66 → age 18 USHL 1.27 → age 19 NCAA 1.16 → age 20 NCAA 1.58 → age 21 NHL 0.54 → age 22 NHL 0.91

All 3 columns shown

Player	Distance (lower is closer)	What he did afterwards
Brayden PointC · matched at ages 19, 20, 21, 22	0.08	age 23 NHL 1.17 → age 24 NHL 0.97 → age 25 NHL 0.86 → age 26 NHL 0.88 → age 27 NHL 1.16
Josh NorrisC · matched at ages 19, 20, 21, 22	0.08	age 24 NHL 0.60 → age 25 NHL 0.62 → age 26 NHL 0.77
Seth JarvisR · matched at ages 19, 20, 21, 22	0.08	age 23 NHL 0.92 → age 24 NHL 0.93
Lucas RaymondL · matched at ages 19, 20, 21, 22	0.09	age 23 NHL 0.98 → age 24 NHL 0.95
Cole CaufieldR · matched at ages 19, 20, 21, 22	0.10	age 23 NHL 0.79 → age 24 NHL 0.85 → age 25 NHL 1.09
Brady TkachukL · matched at ages 19, 20, 21, 22	0.11	age 23 NHL 1.01 → age 24 NHL 0.91 → age 25 NHL 0.76 → age 26 NHL 0.98
Jordan StaalC · matched at ages 19, 20, 21, 22	0.11	age 23 NHL 0.81 → age 24 NHL 0.65 → age 25 NHL 0.49 → age 26 NHL 0.52 → age 27 NHL 0.58
Robert ThomasC · matched at ages 19, 20, 21, 22	0.12	age 23 NHL 0.89 → age 24 NHL 1.05 → age 25 NHL 1.16 → age 26 NHL 1.00

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