Sample Report

Deep Stat Comparison

See what a premium player comparison looks like — league rankings, NHL trajectory match, scouting grades, and coaching analysis. All powered by real game data.

Compare Your Player

Carson S.

#47 · F · RINK HA Kelowna U18 Prep

Two-Way Forward

OVR (est.)

Nate M.

#22 · D · OHA Edmonton U18 Prep

Shutdown D

OVR (est.)

Why This Matters

Built from 6 categories. Uses G, A, +/-, PIM, SOG + advanced stats when uploaded.

VERDICT

59(est.)

Carson S. has the edge

Wins 4 of 6 stat categories. Stronger offensive production but trails in physicality and defensive positioning.

52(est.)

LEAGUE RANKINGS

Carson S.

Points Per Game#12 Top 3%

Goals Per Game#18 Top 5%

PIM Per Game#372 Bottom 6%

Nate M.

Plus/Minus Per Game#31 Top 8%

PIM Per Game#45 Top 12%

Points Per Game#89 Top 23%

Where They Rank

Ranked among all 393 players. Uses PPG, GPG, +/-, PIM. Source: CSSHL box scores.

The NHL Connection

Matched by PPG, goal rate, PIM pattern + player identity. Real NHL career stats and achievements included.

NHL TRAJECTORY MATCH

Two-Way Forward

Patrice Bergeron

“The gold standard for two-way play.”

Carson's production profile at U18 Prep (1.50 PPG with elevated PIM) mirrors Bergeron's early QMJHL numbers. Both showed strong offensive instincts with the two-way commitment still developing.

Bergeron at 17: 1.10 PPG in QMJHL
Selke Trophy (5x) · Stanley Cup · Olympic Gold (2x)

Key gap: Bergeron's breakout came when he reduced PIM from 2.0/game to under 0.8/game. Carson needs the same discipline shift.

Shutdown D

Jonas Brodin

“The invisible wall.”

Nate M.'s defensive-first profile matches Brodin's junior path. Both are players who change how the other team plays without showing up on the scoresheet.

Brodin at 17: 0.27 PPG in SHL
700+ NHL games · Minnesota Wild all-time blocked shots leader

Key opportunity: Brodin's value was only visible through advanced stats. Uploading game PDFs would reveal Nate M.'s hidden impact.

CATEGORY BREAKDOWN

68SKT

SKT62

67SHT

SHT42

43CHK

CHK55

50DEF

DEF60

Head-to-Head Stats

6 categories with analysis. Uses GPG, S%, hits, +/-. PDFs add Corsi, xG, TOI.

Scout-Level Grades

5 grades from GPG, +/-, hits, PIM, game variance. Weighted by player identity — Shutdown D not penalized for low offense.

SCOUTING GRADES

Carson S.

Offensive ImpactA-

Defensive ResponsibilityB-

Compete LevelA

DisciplineC+

ConsistencyA-

OVERALLB+

Nate M.

Offensive ImpactC

Defensive ResponsibilityA-

Compete LevelB+

DisciplineA

ConsistencyB

OVERALLB

DEVELOPMENT FOCUS

Priority

Penalty Discipline

At 2.53 PIM/game, Carson is costing his team power play opportunities. The aggression is a strength — channeling it into clean hits would close the checking gap. Target: under 1.5 PIM/game.

Growth Area

Defensive Zone Play

For a Two-Way Forward, the defensive rating should be higher. Uploading game stats PDFs would reveal whether this is positioning or backchecking. Target: DEF rating 60+.

Your Action Plan

Targets from PIM/game, DEF rating, S%. PDFs add shift trends, zone entries, battle win %.

The Coach's Verdict

Weighs production, player identity fit, discipline, league rank. The insight parents share with their player's coach.

COACH'S PICK

Carson S. is the higher-ceiling offensive weapon — his 1.50 PPG puts him in the top 3% of the division, and his two-way forward identity means he'll only get more defensively responsible as he matures.

Nate M. is the safer pick for a shutdown role — disciplined, positionally sound, and the kind of player who makes everyone else's job easier.

Bottom line: Carson for offense. Nate M. for structure.

Ready to Compare Your Player?

Get this level of analysis for any two players in the system. Your first game report is free.