Returning regular · 2025-26

Beckett Sennecke

Anaheim Ducks · RW · R shot · age 20 at the dated snapshot.

Team: ANA
Lane: RW
Age: 20

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

Goals23

Assists37

Points60

Even strength46all even-strength points

Power play13

Short handed1

Empty net1

5v5 points / 602.045

Average TOI17:27

PP TOI2:21

PK TOI0:02

Organizational context

3 RW regulars in ANA

The all-team median is 3.5. 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 0.756). Finishing is goals minus expected goals; it is noisy in one season.

Unblocked shots310

Expected goals28.49.2% per shot

Goals23

Finishing−5.4goals 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 quality53%4.1 expected goals for and 3.58 against per 60 minutes

Drive, three seasons (ranking measure)+1.8 pts5v5 chance share against his club without him, over this season and the two before (weights 1 / 0.7 / 0.4; 1144 / 0 / 0 minutes) · 80% band -1.0 to 4.6 pts. This is the number the rankings order by: it predicts next season better than one season does.

Drive, this season only+2 ptsat 5-on-5, over 19.1 hours: his share minus the club's share when he is off the ice · with its 80% band: 1.8 pts, 80% band -1.4 to 4.6 pts

Setup (chances his passes produced)3.55 xG21 primary assists; 0.169 expected goals per pass on average, 0.149 per 60. A pass to a tap-in counts more than a pass to a point shot.

Drive, offence+0.46expected goals created per 60 with him on, minus the club without him

Drive, defence-0.24expected goals suppressed per 60 with him on, against the club without him; positive means fewer chances allowed

Isolated impact (RAPM), offence / defence+0.20 / -0.12expected goals per 60 at 5v5 with every teammate, opponent, score state, venue and zone start held as columns of one ridge regression; ± 0.10 / 0.10 SE over 1144 minutes

Offensive-zone starts65%of his faceoffs in either end zone; heavy offensive use lifts the numbers above

Chance share, score-and-venue adjusted (5v5)51%raw 52%; each shot weighted by the league's share in that score state and venue, so trailing at home is not mistaken for tilting the ice

Finish, shrunk (goals above expected per 100 shots)-0.9raw -2.3 on 310 shots; the data carries 30% of the weight, the league the rest (about 580 shots to weight the player one half)

Company (linemates / opponents)average / averageteammates -1.0, opponents -0.2 points of relative chance share, weighted by seconds shared

Start +/- (goals begun on his shift)721 of them were scored after he had changed off

On the ice for85 for, 75 againstthe plus/minus view, for comparison

Giveaways that led to a goal2his own turnovers inside the sequence, over 23.8 hours on the ice

Line or pairLine 1his rank by 5-on-5 ice time within the club, most common over 51 games

LinematesMason McTavish, Cutter Gauthiershared 51% and 35% of his 5-on-5 time

Matchup64% vs first lines64% of his time against the other club's first line (hard matchups)

Shutdown (drive, defence, deployment removed)-0.09offence the same way +0.08; zone starts, opponent quality and first-line share removed by a league-wide fit

Two-way (offence + defence, deployment removed)-0.01chances created minus chances allowed per 60, against his club without him; a fast-paced player can allow more and still win here

Penalty kill1%1% of his club's penalty kill (rarely used) · 3 shorthanded minutes

Matchup rating (Elo)1495below the league middle · results by who he faced over 19.1 hours of 5-on-5; 58% chance share against the strongest opponents he saw most (Drew Doughty, Ivan Barbashev, Brandt Clarke, Victor Olofsson, Jack Eichel)

Finish rating (Elo)1461bottom tenth of the league · 23 goals on 310 shots worth 30.1 expected; rated against the goalies and the chances actually faced, so the same goal counts more against a strong goalie from a poor spot

In the play-by-play33.2 per 60how often the league's feed names him on the puck (the moments a caller says a name): 84th percentile of forwards; the feed never records carries or passes that do not end in a goal

Power-play rating (Elo)1405above the league middle · 7.81 expected goals per 60 on the power play over 189 minutes, rated against the penalty-killers faced (league rate 8.27)

Shot-lane rating (Elo)1583above the league middle · 299 of 373 attempts got through (80%), rated against the defenders on the ice

Lane defence rating (Elo, unit)1443above the league middle · 388 of 1326 attempts faced were blocked while he was on (29%); shared with the four others on the ice

Turnover balance-2.85 per 6024 takeaways, 92 giveaways (16 in his own end) over 23.8 hours; recorded by the league's scorers, so counts differ by rink

Blocked shots and hits1.6 · 3.8 per 6038 blocks, 91 hits given, 107 taken, 28 penalties taken

Real points571 empty-net point left out · 22 goals, 21 primary and 15 secondary assists · 13 on the power play

How these measures are defined, and where they stop.

Advanced scoring · 2025-26

Goals, assists and plus/minus, weighted by what they changed

Every goal counts the win probability it added, scaled so the average goal is 1.0: a late tying goal counts several, a goal at 6-1 or into an empty net late counts little. Plus/minus also credits the players on the ice when the goal's sequence began.

Advanced goals (aG)22.8from 22 goals · 1 clutch (worth twice an average goal or more) · +19.0 above the chances they came from

Advanced primary assists (aA1)26.4from 21 primary assists

Advanced secondary assists (aA2)13.0from 15 secondary assists; kept apart, not guessed at

Advanced points62.2against 58 scoresheet points

Advanced plus/minus (a+/-)+11.5on the ice for 86 goals for and 86 against, each weighted by what it changed · 1 of the goals for began on his shift after he had changed off · +0.48 per 60

Shot map · 2025-26

Where he shoots from, and how it goes

Every unblocked shot placed by distance, angle and shot type. His rate from each spot is set against the league's rate for the same shot from the same spot, so the edge is against everyone else taking that shot, not against an average.

His office (most-used spot)—fewer than 15 shots from any one spot

Crease (under 15 ft and inside 45°)26% of shots11 goals on 80 shots (13.8%, expected 16.3%)

Slot (under 30 ft and inside 40°)13% of shots5 goals on 40 shots (12.5%, expected 12.9%)

Circles (under 40 ft, wider)38% of shots6 goals on 118 shots (5.1%, expected 8.0%)

Point (40 ft and beyond inside 30°)14% of shots1 goals on 44 shots (2.3%, expected 3.7%)

Wall (40 ft and beyond, wide)9% of shots0 goals on 28 shots (0.0%, expected 2.8%)

Wrist shots8.8%9 of 102; expected 9.5%

Snap shots9.0%9 of 100; expected 10.1%

Tip-in shots2.4%1 of 42; expected 9.8%

Backhand shots9.4%3 of 32; expected 10.7%

Career arc · era-adjusted points per 82 games

Beckett Sennecke, season by season

Each dot is one season. The amber bar is what his earlier seasons and his age predicted for that season (80% band), so a dot far above its bar is a season the numbers did not see coming. The shaded band is where most players at his position sit at each age.

Seasons on file12025-26 to 2025-26

Best season55.42025-26, age 20, 82 games

Latest season55.4expected 14.1 to 71.5

Measured labels0none that passed its test

his seasonexpected range from his earlier seasons

Position band: quantile regression (10th/50th/90th) of qualifying seasons on an age spline, weighted for players who drop out.

What the numbers found

No shipped label applies. A label is a measured finding about a run of seasons (for example, a spike that came back to the old level), and it is shown only for label types that passed their test on held-out seasons.

Projection at the draft

At the draft the model expected 141 NHL hours through his age-25 season (80% band 98 to 173). He logged 24 hours, below the 10th percentile. The model was applied to his draft class without being fitted or tested on it.

Every season

Season	Age	GP	Level	Expected (80%)
2025-26	20	82	55.4	14.1 to 71.5

Source: CapOrCup careers desk (method and league curves) · as of 2026-09-29

Comparables at the same age

Who looked like this at 17 to 20

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)0.76median across the comparables; this player's own line is below

This player so far: age 16 GTHL U16 1.78 → age 17 OHL 0.90 → age 18 OHL 1.08 → age 19 OHL 1.54 → age 20 NHL 0.73

All 3 columns shown

Player	Distance (lower is closer)	What he did afterwards
Anton LundellC · matched at ages 17, 18, 19, 20	0.03	age 21 NHL 0.45 → age 22 NHL 0.45 → age 23 NHL 0.57 → age 24 NHL 0.69
Sean MonahanC · matched at ages 17, 18, 19, 20	0.07	age 21 NHL 0.78 → age 22 NHL 0.71 → age 23 NHL 0.86 → age 24 NHL 1.05 → age 25 NHL 0.69
Brendan GallagherR · matched at ages 17, 18, 19, 20	0.07	age 21 NHL 0.51 → age 22 NHL 0.57 → age 23 NHL 0.76 → age 24 NHL 0.45 → age 25 NHL 0.66
Cutter GauthierL · matched at ages 17, 18, 19, 20	0.08	age 21 NHL 0.54 → age 22 NHL 0.91
Mavrik BourqueC · matched at ages 17, 18, 19, 20	0.09	age 21 AHL 0.30 → age 22 AHL 0.49 → age 23 NHL 0.34 → age 24 NHL 0.50
Miroslav SatanC · matched at ages 17, 18, 19, 20	0.09	age 21 NHL 0.56 → age 22 NHL 0.44 → age 23 NHL 0.58 → age 24 NHL 0.81 → age 25 NHL 0.83
Anthony CirelliC · matched at ages 17, 18, 19, 20	0.09	age 21 NHL 0.48 → age 22 NHL 0.65 → age 23 NHL 0.44 → age 24 NHL 0.57 → age 25 NHL 0.50
Jackson BlakeR · matched at ages 17, 18, 19, 20	0.09	age 21 NHL 0.42 → age 22 NHL 0.65

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