Washington Capitals line combinations
Derived from shift charts · 2025-26 regular season · to
These are inferred, not published. These units are inferred from ice-time overlap in the NHL's shift charts. They are not an official depth chart and the NHL does not publish them. A forward line here is three forwards on the ice together; a defence pair is two defencemen.
Even strength only. Only five-on-five play is counted. Strength is established by counting the non-goalie players each club had on the ice at every moment, so power plays, penalty kills, four-on-four, three-on-three overtime and empty-net play are all excluded — a power-play unit cannot appear here as a line.
Ranked by time, not by depth. Units are ranked by measured time together, not by depth. Nothing in shift data says which trio a coach considers his first line.
- Games measured
- 47
- Five-on-five ice time
- 2254:15 (78.9% of all ice time)
- Not credited to a line
- 0.9% of five-on-five time
- Shifts with no usable end
- 0
The strength the filter measured, moment by moment: 5v5 78.9% · 5v4 7.8% · 4v5 7.3% · 4v4 1.9% · 5v6 1.3% · 6v5 0.9%. Read from this club's point of view where it is at home; the man advantage and the penalty kill are separate entries, and the empty-net cases are the six-skater ones. The share not credited to a line is five-on-five time when a club was not lined up three forwards and two defencemen — mid-change, or a shape nobody deploys — and no unit is given credit for it.
Forward lines
Three forwards on the ice together at five-on-five, ranked by time together.
| Forwards | Time together | Games | Shifts | Per game | Share of club |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 187:25 | 44 | 285 | 4:16 | 8.4% | |
| 97:08 | 32 | 158 | 3:02 | 4.3% | |
| 83:44 | 18 | 121 | 4:39 | 3.7% | |
| 81:12 | 34 | 135 | 2:23 | 3.6% | |
| 80:01 | 28 | 131 | 2:51 | 3.6% | |
| 74:19 | 28 | 111 | 2:39 | 3.3% | |
| 72:40 | 31 | 105 | 2:21 | 3.2% | |
| 65:37 | 30 | 102 | 2:11 | 2.9% | |
| 61:49 | 16 | 102 | 3:52 | 2.8% | |
| 55:30 | 24 | 98 | 2:19 | 2.5% | |
| 51:39 | 18 | 88 | 2:52 | 2.3% | |
| 47:23 | 23 | 78 | 2:04 | 2.1% |
Defence pairs
Two defencemen on the ice together at five-on-five, ranked by time together.
| Defencemen | Time together | Games | Shifts | Per game | Share of club |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 273:37 | 42 | 365 | 6:31 | 12.2% | |
| 259:21 | 40 | 340 | 6:29 | 11.6% | |
| 183:04 | 35 | 233 | 5:14 | 8.2% | |
| 172:49 | 23 | 227 | 7:31 | 7.7% | |
| 160:05 | 44 | 243 | 3:38 | 7.2% | |
| 144:22 | 14 | 190 | 10:19 | 6.5% | |
| 140:54 | 36 | 197 | 3:55 | 6.3% | |
| 132:02 | 40 | 191 | 3:18 | 5.9% | |
| 114:54 | 22 | 163 | 5:13 | 5.1% | |
| 95:08 | 39 | 145 | 2:26 | 4.3% | |
| 94:45 | 22 | 128 | 4:18 | 4.2% | |
| 79:44 | 38 | 115 | 2:06 | 3.6% |
How settled is each skater?
The tables above name each club's most-used units. They cannot say whether a most-used unit means anything for a given player, and for many players it does not. These charts show what share of a skater's own five-on-five ice time went to his single most-used combination.
| Skater | Five-on-five ice time | Most-used line | Share of his ice time | Combinations covering three quarters of his ice time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anthony Beauvillier | 646:49 over 47 games | with Alex Ovechkin and Dylan Strome | 29 per cent | 13 of the 91 he appeared in |
| Dylan Strome | 633:21 over 47 games | with Alex Ovechkin and Anthony Beauvillier | 30 per cent | 7 of the 76 he appeared in |
| Aliaksei Protas | 600:28 over 41 games | with Pierre-Luc Dubois and Tom Wilson | 14 per cent | 10 of the 87 he appeared in |
| Justin Sourdif | 583:54 over 44 games | with Connor McMichael and Ryan Leonard | 17 per cent | 12 of the 88 he appeared in |
| Alex Ovechkin | 550:39 over 47 games | with Dylan Strome and Anthony Beauvillier | 34 per cent | 7 of the 78 he appeared in |
| Connor McMichael | 547:31 over 43 games | with Justin Sourdif and Ryan Leonard | 18 per cent | 12 of the 96 he appeared in |
| Ryan Leonard | 546:47 over 46 games | with Connor McMichael and Justin Sourdif | 18 per cent | 11 of the 80 he appeared in |
| Tom Wilson | 492:57 over 37 games | with Aliaksei Protas and Pierre-Luc Dubois | 17 per cent | 7 of the 67 he appeared in |
| Brandon Duhaime | 440:27 over 47 games | with Hendrix Lapierre and Ethen Frank | 18 per cent | 14 of the 94 he appeared in |
| Ethen Frank | 410:40 over 38 games | with Brandon Duhaime and Hendrix Lapierre | 19 per cent | 9 of the 69 he appeared in |
| Nic Dowd | 373:20 over 29 games | with Brandon Duhaime and Ethen Frank | 15 per cent | 13 of the 76 he appeared in |
| Hendrix Lapierre | 344:07 over 42 games | with Brandon Duhaime and Ethen Frank | 23 per cent | 12 of the 88 he appeared in |
| Pierre-Luc Dubois | 306:26 over 23 games | with Aliaksei Protas and Tom Wilson | 27 per cent | 4 of the 61 he appeared in |
| Skater | Five-on-five ice time | Most-used pair | Share of his ice time | Combinations covering three quarters of his ice time |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jakob Chychrun | 829:35 over 45 games | with Matt Roy | 33 per cent | 3 of the 9 he appeared in |
| Matt Roy | 750:31 over 44 games | with Jakob Chychrun | 36 per cent | 3 of the 9 he appeared in |
| Martin Fehervary | 724:48 over 46 games | with Rasmus Sandin | 25 per cent | 4 of the 9 he appeared in |
| Rasmus Sandin | 706:57 over 43 games | with Martin Fehervary | 26 per cent | 4 of the 9 he appeared in |
| Trevor van Riemsdyk | 604:10 over 42 games | with Jakob Chychrun | 43 per cent | 3 of the 9 he appeared in |
| John Carlson | 406:59 over 24 games | with Martin Fehervary | 42 per cent | 3 of the 7 he appeared in |
| Cole Hutson | 203:21 over 14 games | with Matt Roy | 71 per cent | 2 of the 7 he appeared in |
Nobody publishes NHL line combinations, so this page derives them
The NHL publishes a shift chart for every game: for each player, the moment each of his shifts began and the moment it ended. It does not publish lines. No feed says which three forwards a coach considers his second unit, and a site that shows you one has either licensed it from a vendor who watches warmups or typed it in after reading a beat reporter. What the shift chart does support is a measurement — which three forwards were on the ice together, for how long, and in how many games — and that measurement is what this page is.
A measurement and a depth chart are different objects, and the difference shows up exactly when they disagree. A coach who names a line in the morning and splits it up after the first period has one depth chart and two measurements, and this page shows the second thing. It cannot tell you what he intended. It tells you what he did, with the evidence attached.
A power play is five players on the ice together, and it is not a line
The naive version of this measurement — rank every pair of teammates by the ice time they share — produces a table in which a club's top power-play unit outranks its actual fourth line, and nothing in the output admits it. Five skilled players sent out together for two minutes at a time will always beat three checkers rolling a dozen short shifts a night, and a reader looking at the finished table has no way to tell which row is which.
So only five-on-five play is counted here. Shift data carries no strength state of its own, and it does not need one: counting how many non-goalie players each club had on the ice at each instant is the strength state, measured continuously rather than sampled whenever a play happened to occur. Intervals with five a side survive. Power plays, penalty kills, four-on-four, three-on-three overtime and the scramble after a goaltender is pulled do not, because none of them has five a side. The distribution that filter produced is printed on this page, so it can be checked against what a hockey game is known to look like rather than taken on trust.
Filtering that hard costs coverage, and it is the right trade. A meaningful slice of every game is played at some other strength and every second of it is discarded here. What is left is the state in which a line is actually a line, and a unit that only ever appears on the man advantage does not appear at all.
A most-common line is a summary of a distribution, not a fact
Coaches juggle, and they juggle hardest when losing. A winger can finish a single game having taken shifts with three different pairs of forwards, and across half a season the number of distinct combinations he appears in runs well into three figures — most of them seconds long, the residue of a change that went wrong rather than a decision anyone made.
That is why every unit here arrives with its evidence rather than only its total: the time together, the number of games it appeared in, and the number of separate shifts it was sent out for. A trio seen twice and a trio seen forty times must not look alike, and a table sorted by minutes alone would let them. Time per game is shown beside every total for the same reason — a unit with a large total and a small per-game figure is one that has been together often and briefly, which is a different animal from a line.
It is also why the chart on this page exists. It shows, for each skater, how much of his own five-on-five ice time went to his single most-used combination. A defenceman at four fifths has a partner. A centre at a third has a rotation, and naming any one of his trios his line would be a confident answer to a question that has no single answer. The count beside it — how many combinations it takes to cover three quarters of his ice time — is the same fact stated the other way round.
What ice-time overlap cannot see
It cannot see intent, injury or the morning skate. A line that appears for two games and vanishes may have been broken up deliberately or may have lost its centre to a groin strain, and the shift chart records the same thing either way. It does not know about a trade: a unit's games are counted where they were played, so a club's list can hold a combination that no longer exists and will not say so.
Positions come from the league's own listing, which is looser than it looks — plenty of players listed at centre spend the season on a wing — so a trio of three listed centres here is usually an ordinary line rather than a fault. Ordering is by measured time together and by nothing else. Nothing in shift data says which trio is a first line, and presenting a ranking as a depth chart would be inventing one. The rows are not numbered for that reason.
The sample is whatever has been ingested, and the window it covers is printed on this page. It is not always a full season. Two clubs measured over different numbers of games are not comparable on totals at all, which is why time per game sits beside every total, and a club whose shift charts have not been ingested is absent rather than shown as a club with no lines.
Questions about NHL line combinations
How are NHL line combinations derived from shift data?
- By measuring which players were on the ice at the same time. The NHL publishes a shift chart giving the start and end of every player's every shift, and comparing those intervals within a period shows exactly which teammates were out together and for how long. A forward line is recorded when a club has exactly three forwards on the ice, and a defence pair when it has exactly two defencemen. These units are inferred from that overlap rather than taken from a published depth chart, because the NHL does not publish one.
Are these the official NHL line combinations?
- No. The NHL does not publish line combinations, and these are derived from ice-time overlap in its shift charts. They describe what a coach actually did across the games measured, not what he told reporters at the morning skate and not what he intends for tonight. Where the two disagree — a line named in the morning and split up after the first period — this shows the second thing. For confirmed lines before a game, a beat reporter at the skate is the source, and this site does not carry that.
Why are only even-strength line combinations shown?
- Because a power play puts five players on the ice together who are not a line, and counting all ice time equally would rank a club's top power-play unit above its actual fourth line with nothing in the table to reveal it. Only five-on-five play is counted here, established by counting the non-goalie players each club had on the ice at every moment, which excludes power plays, penalty kills, four-on-four, three-on-three overtime and empty-net situations. The cost is that special-teams units are not shown at all; the benefit is that no unit shown here is a special-teams unit in disguise.
Why does one player appear on several different lines?
- Because coaches change lines, often several times within a game and far more when a team is behind. A player genuinely has a distribution of linemates rather than a single set, and over half a season a regular forward can appear in more than a hundred distinct combinations, most of them lasting seconds. That is why each player is shown with the share of his own even-strength ice time that went to his most-used combination: a share around four fifths means he has a settled line, while a share around a third means the answer is a rotation and no single trio describes him.
What does the shifts column mean on a line combination?
- It counts how many separate times a unit was on the ice together, rather than how many intervals the arithmetic produced. A run has to last a minimum number of seconds to be treated as a deployment, so a few seconds of three forwards overlapping in the middle of a line change is counted as ice time but not as a shift. Brief interruptions are bridged for the same reason, because a forward line that stays out while the defence changes behind it has taken one shift and not two. Read alongside games and time together, it separates a unit that plays from a unit that has merely coincided.
Why do line combinations matter in fantasy hockey?
- Because who a player skates with usually moves his production more than anything about the player himself. A winger promoted alongside a first-line centre sees more offensive-zone starts, more time with the puck and more secondary assists, and the same player dropped to a checking line loses all three without changing anything he does. Measured time together is a useful signal for that, but it is a record of games already played rather than a forecast of tonight's lineup, and it says nothing about power-play deployment, which is where a large share of fantasy scoring comes from.