Detroit Red Wings 2025-26 Season Deep Dive: Progress Without Payoff – The Hockey Writers – Detroit Red Wings

I was hoping to write this Detroit Red Wings season deep dive later in the spring. But alas, here we are – the Red Wings failed to reach the postseason for the 10th-consecutive year.

No doubt, there will be changes in Detroit. But before any decisions are made, it’s important to review the data and unlock insights to guide those decisions. That’s what we’re doing today.

2025-26 Red Wings vs. 2024-25 Red Wings

First, we’ll compare the team as a whole year-over-year. What facets improved? What regressed? Let’s dive in.

Detroit’s .561 points percentage was a seven percent improvement over last season. Still, it feels like empty progress.

The Red Wings ultimately missed the playoffs by eight points after sitting atop the Atlantic Division as late as Jan. 25. They had several opportunities to bank more points throughout the season and failed to do so, including four instances where they led late, gave up a tying goal with under two minutes to play, and went on to lose in overtime/the shootout. Coupled with two other games—Mar. 10 vs. Florida and Apr. 5 vs. Minnesota—where they coughed up a lead late and lost in regulation, it’s fair to say that the Red Wings left at least six points on the table. Earning them would likely have led to a different ending this season.

Progress, but also disappointment.

Regarding their special teams units, Detroit was buoyed by their power play for most of the season, and ultimately finished 12th in the league, converting at a 22.6 percent clip. 

There was a lot to like about how the Red Wings handled the man advantage. Detroit rated very well in terms of faceoff wins, zone entries, chances, and scoring, of course. They also drew the 10th-most penalties in the NHL, setting themselves up for success.

The penalty kill was a different story. While the Red Wings did a good job staying out of the box—Detroit took the sixth-fewest penalties—the PK was not very effective in 2025-26. They gave up more shot attempts than any other team while down a man and had the 10th-worst save percentage. Ben Chiarot, J.T. Compher, and Andrew Copp, in particular, played heavy PK minutes and struggled to limit opportunities against. Perhaps their penalty kill roles should be reduced in 2026-27.

Red Wings Offense: Year-Over-Year Comparison

Now, we’ll focus on the offense – Detroit’s five-on-five offense to be specific. 

All statistics at five-on-five. Metric definitions are provided below.

Once again, the Red Wings rostered a top-heavy bunch where an incomplete top six led the charge. Detroit’s top two lines accounted for 66 goals, while the other 14 forwards only scored 46. 

Within the top six, the trio of Lucas Raymond, Alex DeBrincat, and Patrick Kane did the heavy lifting. Surprisingly, Dylan Larkin only scored nine five-on-five goals this season, which tied him with Evander Kane and Connor Brown for 220th in the NHL.

In the bottom six, J.T. Compher led the way with 11 five-on-five tallies. No other depth forward reached double-digits.

This lack of five-on-five scoring wasn’t a late-season issue, either. It was constant:

• Pre-Olympics: 2.11 GF/60 & 2.66 xGF/60 
• Post-Olympics: 2.18 GF/60 & 2.51 xGF/60

So why couldn’t the Red Wings muster more offensively? Two reasons, and they’re related.

First, their talent level. The bottom six featured several players who just can’t keep up with the modern NHL. And second, the collective forward group had trouble reaching the tough areas around the net consistently.

Consider this: Detroit ranked 25th in high-danger chances for per 60 at five on five. On top of the low output, their high-danger shooting percentage (15.79 percent) ranked 30th. Simply put, the Red Wings struggled to generate high-danger offense. And, when they did so, they had even more trouble converting on those chances. 

Converting opportunities was a problem all over the ice. Detroit ranked 30th with a paltry 8.07 percent shooting percentage at five on five.

Throughout the season, Detroit’s xGF/60 was greater than their GF/60 and their shooting percentage left much to be desired. The common response was that they would regress to the mean – the Red Wings were unlucky and their GF/60 and shooting percentage would see an uptick eventually.

That wasn’t the case, which brings me back to the first symptom. The talent just wasn’t there. Apart from a few key drivers, there wasn’t enough offensive depth to get the job done. That’s ultimately what did the Red Wings in.

Red Wings Defense: Year-Over-Year Comparison

Next, we’ll cover Detroit’s five-on-five team defense and goaltending to see what improvements were made over the last year.

All statistics at five-on-five. Metric definitions are provided below.

As a whole, Detroit’s team defense left much to be desired. Don’t get me wrong – Moritz Seider should be a Norris Trophy finalist, Simon Edvinsson was outstanding in shutting down opponents, and the team led the league in blocked shots. The collective output, though, was subpar. 

At a high level, the Red Wings gave up too many shot attempts and high-danger chances. They also struggled to take the puck away from opponents (ninth-least in the league), which led to even more chances against than preferred.

Defensive zone microstats varied by defenseman. Seider and Edvinsson thrived in all facets – denials, retrievals, and exits. Albert Johansson was a mixed bag, but was much more confident in his own end compared to his rookie year. And Jacob Bernard-Docker was adequate, too, playing mostly low-event hockey.

But on the other hand, the quartet of Ben Chiarot, Justin Faulk, Axel Sandin-Pellikka, and Travis Hamonic botched far too many retrievals and failed to exit the zone too often. In general, zone exits with possession was an issue for the Red Wings, and something that needs to improve next season. 

The difference this year, though, was Detroit’s goaltending. John Gibson and Cam Talbot bailed the team out plenty of times this season. 

Part of this was due to how well Detroit’s tandem minimized rebounds. Talbot ranked topped all NHL goalies in rebounds allowed per save (0.038) and Gibson ranked eighth (0.054). Last season, no Red Wings goalie ranked in the top 40. 

Looking ahead to 2026-27, defensive improvements will need to come from within. All seven defensemen are expected to return, plus William Wallinder will likely join the Red Wings since he’ll need to pass through waivers to be assigned to the AHL. The team needs to be harder to play against, and it’s up to the players and coaching staff to make that happen.

Assessment of the 2025-26 Red Wings

Are you a glass half-full or half-empty person?

On one hand, the Red Wings finished with more points (92) than any season under Steve Yzerman, would have been a playoff team in the Western Conference, finally bought at the trade deadline, and held their own in the most competitive division in the NHL. 

But on the other hand, Detroit collapsed down the stretch and missed the playoffs, struggled to score at five on five, and lacked a team identity/culture plus internal leadership necessary to right the ship as they were slipping. 

I’m an optimist, but in my opinion, the collapse overshadowed any gains made. 

To avoid a repeat in 2026-27 and finally get over the hump, the Red Wings need to complete their top six, infuse more talent in the bottom six, and remove/replace ineffective players that either can’t keep up with today’s game or provide no leadership value. No more “jerseys” – everyone needs to pull their weight in 2026-27. 

Advanced Metrics Definitions

Below are quick definitions of the metrics used to quantify Detroit’s on-ice efforts:

• CF/60 & CA/60 – Corsi-for/against per 60. Shots on net, missed shots, and blocked shots per 60 minutes of five-on-five play.
• GF/60 & GA/60 – Goals-for/against per 60.
• xGF/60 & xGA/60 – Expected goals-for/against per 60 – according to Natural Stat Trick’s shot location model.
• HDCF/60 & HDCA/60 – High-danger chances for/against per 60 – per Natural Stat Trick’s shot location data.

Data courtesy of All Three Zones, MoneyPuck, Natural Stat Trick, NHL.com, and PuckIQ.