Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a St. Louis Blues sweater
← Sat, Oct 18 · the slate
Breakdown · DAL at STL

Blues hold off the Stars

FinalSat, Oct 18
DALDallas Stars1STLSt. Louis Blues3
The verdict · earned

The Blues earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.

DAL 1 · STL 3
◆ By the ModelJun 16, 3:03 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

STL won 3-1. DAL underperformed their expected goals by 1.06 — the variance that mattered.

The Blues controlled the underlying metrics. They held 59% of 5v5 expected goals (2.92–2.06) and led 22–19 in shot attempts. The structure favored STL.

But DAL stayed competitive in the dangerous areas. Both teams produced 5 high-danger chances. STL converted at 40% (2-for-5); DAL couldn't finish.

J. Binnington made the difference. The STL goaltender posted a 0.947 save percentage on 18-for-19, outperforming his expected total by 1.06 goals. J. Oettinger kept DAL afloat with a 0.92 overperformance (19-for-21), but the gap widened.

The turning point: Pius Suter's backhander from the wing in the third period at 18:59.

Three Stars

  • #96 M. Rantanen (STL) — 1G in 24:09
  • #53 W. Johnston (DAL) — 1A in 20:23
  • #25 J. Kyrou (STL) — 1G in 17:42
The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Oct 18
DAL
1
STL
3

Blues hold off the Stars

Chances 2.1 – 2.9Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Blues earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
DAL
2.06
STL
2.92
41% of the chances59%

The board read DAL 1, STL 3. The chances read DAL 2.1, STL 2.9.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
STL
+0.1
goals above expected
STL2.92 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
DAL2.06 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

Both sides finished close to what their chances were worth. This one was earned on the ice.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P2 02:27STLJ. Kyrou0–1
  2. P2 13:52STLJ. Snuggerud0–2
  3. P3 17:42DALM. Rantanen1–2
  4. P3 18:59STLP. SuterEN1–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
DAL
27 shots
1
Final
60 shots
STL
33 shots
3
DAL attackSTL attack
DAL STL Goal
27
shots · 1 in
33
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
DALSTL
1 / 5
1.02 xG
High danger
2 / 5
1.05 xG
0 / 6
0.68 xG
Medium
1 / 12
1.45 xG
0 / 27
0.36 xG
Low
0 / 31
0.43 xG

The Blues buried 2 of 5 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
J. Binnington
+1.1
STL · 18/19
B+
J. Oettinger
+0.9
DAL · 19/21
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Blues hold off the Stars

A model, not a newsroom. Every number on these frames comes from the NHL's play-by-play and our own models. Nothing was watched, guessed or heard from anyone.

Read the full breakdown
backcheckreport.com
01 / 08 · Final
Every goal, in order

How it happened

NHL play-by-play
1stshots 6–6no goals
    2ndshots 5–12
    1. 02:27STLJ. Kyrou(B. Schenn)0–1
    2. 13:52STLJ. Snuggerud(P. Buchnevich, T. Tucker)0–2
    3rdshots 8–4
    1. 17:42DALM. Rantanen(W. Johnston, L. Bichsel)1–2
    2. 18:59STLP. Suterempty net1–3

    score reads DAL–STL

    Source · NHL play-by-play (api-web.nhle.com)
    Process vs result

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    2.92
    STL chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    +0.1
    Finishing
    Goals above what those chances were worth
    1.036
    STL puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    55.8%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    2.06Expected goals2.92
    STL 59% of the chance quality
    19Shots on goal22
    5High-danger chances5
    38All attempts (Corsi)48
    Adjusted for score: DAL 48% · STL 52%
    Faceoffs · STL won62%off36%neu47%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    DAL1 / 5 · 1.02 xG
    STL2 / 5 · 1.05 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    DAL0 / 6 · 0.68 xG
    STL1 / 12 · 1.45 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    DAL0 / 27 · 0.36 xG
    STL0 / 31 · 0.43 xG

    STL went 2-for-5 from high danger on 1.05 expected goals — 0.9 above expected.

    Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play
    The luck layer

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    DAL
    1 G · 2.06 xG · -1.1
    STL
    3 G · 2.92 xG · +0.1
    01234

    DAL finished -1.1 against expected, STL +0.1.

    Source · Backcheck xG model
    Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +
    What they shot — and what went in

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    DAL
    WRIST0/12
    SNAP0/6
    SLAP0/3
    TIP IN0/2
    BACKHAND0/2
    DEFLECTED1/2
    BAT0/0
    POKE0/0
    OTHER0/11
    STL
    WRIST1/20
    SNAP0/6
    SLAP0/2
    TIP IN0/2
    BACKHAND1/1
    DEFLECTED0/0
    BAT0/1
    POKE1/1
    OTHER0/15
    DAL
    STL
    Off the rush
    1 G on 20
    1.63 xG
    1 G on 22
    2.01 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 1
    0.03 xG
    1 G on 2
    0.28 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: DAL went 0-for-12, STL 1-for-20.

    Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
    New to these numbers?

    Two things happened in this game: who created the better chances, and who put the puck in the net. They are not the same thing, and this page separates them on purpose.

    The one to watch is expected goals— the best single read on who deserved to win. When it disagrees with the scoreboard, that disagreement is usually the story. Nothing here is a projection; every figure is computed from this game's play-by-play. Full glossary →

    xG
    Expected goals. Every shot scored by how often that exact look goes in. 2.5 xG means the chances were worth about two and a half goals.
    HD
    High-danger chances — shots from the slot and the crease, where shots actually become goals.
    Corsi
    Every shot attempt, including the ones that missed or got blocked. A rough read on who had the puck.
    Adj.
    Score-adjusted. Teams that trail shoot more and teams that lead sit back, so this corrects the attempt count for the scoreboard.
    GSAx
    Goals saved above expected. A positive number means the goalie stopped more than an average goalie would have on those shots.
    PDO
    Shooting % plus save % — a luck gauge. It sits near 1.000 over a season, so a game far from it usually means the bounces decided it.
    Shot by shot

    In the net

    Graded on goals saved above expected
    J. Oettinger
    DAL · 19/21 · .905
    +0.9
    saved above expected
    B+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger2/51.1-0.9
    Medium1/121.4+0.5
    Low0/310.4+0.4

    A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

    J. Binnington
    STL · 18/19 · .947
    +1.1
    saved above expected
    B+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/51.0+0.0
    Medium0/60.7+0.7
    Low0/270.4+0.4

    A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

    60 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    DAL
    27 shots
    1
    Final
    60 shots
    STL
    33 shots
    3
    DAL attackSTL attack
    DAL STL Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — DAL left, STL right — the way you would watch it. A dot's size is how dangerous the look was, from distance and angle; it is a proxy for shot quality, not the xG model the article is written from. Hover a dot for the shooter and the clock.

    Ranked from the box score

    Three stars

    Points first
    Three stars · computed, not voted
    M. Rantanen
    #96 · R · DAL
    1 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 24:09 on ice
    W. Johnston
    #53 · C · DAL
    0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 20:23 on ice
    J. Kyrou
    #25 · R · STL
    1 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 17:42 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Sat, Oct 18
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelSep 22, 2:59 AMEdited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

    The model sees a 3.0–3.0 game with Dallas at 51% to win—this is a genuine coin flip.

    Dallas owns the underlying play. The Stars hold a 52.1% expected-goals share at 5v5 to St. Louis's 48.7%, indicating they drive play and generate the cleaner looks. But Dallas is running hot: a 1.024 PDO this season means their results are outpacing their chances. Regression is coming.

    St. Louis sits at 1.000 PDO and generates tighter play on possession. Their Corsi (48.3%) nearly matches Dallas's (47.1%), showing the teams are closer in pure puck movement than the underlying shot quality suggests.

    The shutdown assignments

    Dallas must neutralize Jimmy Snuggerud. The Blues' wing carries 0.86 expected goals per 60, 15 goals and 22 assists, and a 2 HD-goal tally—he's efficient and dangerous at both ends of the ice. Michael Bunting, with 0.83 xG/60, 8 goals and 14 assists, and 7.6% shooting, demands defensive focus.

    St. Louis faces Jason Robertson, Dallas's primary threat. Robertson sits at 0.96 xG/60, 25 goals and 21 assists, and 2 HD goals through a 12.4% shooting rate—elite production. Dylan Holloway (0.82 xG/60, 13 goals and 24 assists, 10.8% shooting) presents similar danger.

    Defensive soft spots

    Tyler Myers is the exploitable weak link for Dallas. He carries 2.79 expected goals against per 60 and has been on ice for 53 high-danger shots against this season—a structural liability. St. Louis's defensive vulnerabilities are less apparent this early.

    The edge

    Dallas has the cleaner shot generation, but luck could evaporate. St. Louis has tighter underlying percentages and doesn't need to run at a 1.024 pace to stay in this—they might actually improve. In a pick'em this close, that's the angle.

    Season rates in this preview are from 2025-26 — this season's sample isn't live yet.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    DAL 51%
    51%
    DAL
    Model favorite
    51%
    49%
    DAL50STL

    DAL by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score DAL 3.0–3.0 STL; 17% chance it's tied after 60.

    Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
    Season rates · 5v5

    Tale of the tape

    NHL stats API · our xG
    DAL← edge
    edge →STL
    52.1%48.7%
    47.1%48.3%
    3.102.80
    2.862.95
    3.402.82
    2.763.15
    1.0241.000

    DAL holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.024 vs 1.000) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · No games yet
    DAL
    0-0-0
    +0 GD · 0d rest
    STL
    0-0-0
    +0 GD · 0d rest
    1.024
    DAL PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    1.000
    STL PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    TACTICALSTL

    Shutdown Assignment: Blues

    Key matchup: Neutralize Jason Robertson (25G, 0.96 xG/60, 2 HD goals)

    Key matchup: Neutralize Jason Robertson (25G, 0.96 xG/60, 2 HD goals)

    TACTICALDAL

    Shutdown Assignment: Stars

    Key matchup: Neutralize Jimmy Snuggerud (15G, 0.86 xG/60, 2 HD goals)

    Key matchup: Neutralize Jimmy Snuggerud (15G, 0.86 xG/60, 2 HD goals)

    WARNINGDAL

    Exploitable minutes: Tyler Myers

    Tyler Myers is on ice for 2.79 xGA/60 and 53 high-danger shots against this season.

    Hunt matchups against Tyler Myers's shifts with the top line.

    WARNINGSTL

    Exploitable minutes: Jimmy Snuggerud

    Jimmy Snuggerud is on ice for 2.75 xGA/60 and 44 high-danger shots against this season.

    Hunt matchups against Jimmy Snuggerud's shifts with the top line.

    Where the edges live
    • The Stars own the underlying play — 52.1% 5v5 xG vs 48.7%.
    Regression watch
    • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Things to watch
    • The Stars own the underlying play — 52.1% 5v5 xG vs 48.7%.
    • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Computed danger · scouting

    Players to watch

    NHL stats API · our xG
    DAL
    Jason Robertson25G 21A
    0.96 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.4% sh
    Michael Bunting8G 14A
    0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 7.6% sh
    STL
    Jimmy Snuggerud15G 22A
    0.86 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.9% sh
    Dylan Holloway13G 24A
    0.82 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.8% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next

    Back to the front page