Motion-blurred skater in a Vegas Golden Knights sweater

Breakdown · CAR at VGK

Golden Knights run the Hurricanes off the ice on the underlying numbers

FinalMon, Oct 20

CARCarolina Hurricanes1 VGKVegas Golden Knights4

The verdict · earned

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

CAR 1 · VGK 4

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 12:29 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

Vegas buried Carolina 4–1, but the scoreline understates the Knights' dominance. They controlled 62% of expected goals at 5-on-5 (3.52–2.15) despite outshooting the Hurricanes by just one attempt (26–27 on goal). The gap wasn't volume—it was precision. Vegas generated 0.064 expected goals per shot; Carolina managed 0.035. Nearly twice the efficiency.

High-danger chances spelled out the gap more bluntly: Vegas 7, Carolina 1. That's not randomness. That's creation meeting finish.

The Hurricanes underperformed their expected goals by 1.15. F. Andersen (0.880 SV%, +0.52 above expected) held firm in net, but Carolina's offense couldn't convert. Vegas's A. Schmid was the evening's showstopper: 0.957 save percentage with +0.83 goals saved above expected, a performance that locked in the Knights' efficiency advantage.

William Karlsson's wrist shot from the wing (third period, 18:23) marked the decisive moment.

Three Stars

#93 M. Marner (VGK) — 2A in 20:37
#49 I. Barbashev (VGK) — 1G, 1A in 14:31
#27 S. Theodore (VGK) — 1A in 23:58

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Oct 20

CAR

VGK

Golden Knights run the Hurricanes off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 2.1 – 3.5Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Golden Knights earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

CAR

2.15

VGK

3.52

38% of the chances62%

The board read CAR 1, VGK 4. The chances read CAR 2.1, VGK 3.5.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations

Luck check

VGK

+0.5

goals above expected

VGK3.52 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

CAR2.15 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

P1 08:42VGKJ. Eichel0–1
P1 10:28VGKP. Dorofeyev0–2
P2 04:18CARS. Aho1–2
P3 11:06VGKI. Barbashev1–3
P3 18:23VGKW. KarlssonEN1–4

NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model

Where the shots came from

CAR

37 shots

Final

74 shots

VGK

37 shots

CAR VGK GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 1 in

shots · 4 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

CARVGK

0 / 1

0.21 xG

High danger

2 / 7

1.95 xG

1 / 13

1.32 xG

Medium

1 / 9

0.98 xG

0 / 48

0.62 xG

Low

1 / 39

0.58 xG

The Golden Knights buried 2 of 7 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance

In the net

A. Hill

+2.1

VGK · 4/4

B+

A. Schmid

+1.1

VGK · 22/23

+1 more on the full breakdown

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Golden Knights run the Hurricanes off the ice on the underlying numbers

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 8–8

08:42VGKJ. Eichel(B. Saad, I. Barbashev)0–1
10:28VGKP. Dorofeyev(M. Marner, T. Hertl)0–2

2ndshots 9–7

04:18CARS. Aho(S. Jarvis, N. Ehlers)1–2

3rdshots 10–11

11:06VGKI. Barbashev1–3
18:23VGKW. Karlssonempty net(M. Marner, S. Theodore)1–4

score reads CAR–VGK

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.52

VGK chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.5

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.057

VGK puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

47.0%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.15Expected goals3.52

VGK 62% of the chance quality

27Shots on goal26

1High-danger chances7

62All attempts (Corsi)55

Adjusted for score: CAR 58% · VGK 42%

Faceoffs · VGK won40%off56%neu65%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

CAR0 / 1 · 0.21 xG

VGK2 / 7 · 1.95 xG

Medium dangermid-range

CAR1 / 13 · 1.32 xG

VGK1 / 9 · 0.98 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

CAR0 / 48 · 0.62 xG

VGK1 / 39 · 0.58 xG

CAR went 0-for-48 from low danger on 0.62 expected goals — 0.6 left on the table.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

CAR

1 G · 2.15 xG · -1.1

VGK

4 G · 3.52 xG · +0.5

012345

CAR finished -1.1 against expected, VGK +0.5.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

CAR

WRIST1/28

SNAP0/1

BACKHAND0/2

SLAP0/5

BAT0/1

TIP IN0/0

OTHER0/25

VGK

WRIST3/22

SNAP0/9

BACKHAND1/4

SLAP0/1

BAT0/0

TIP IN0/1

OTHER0/18

CAR

VGK

Off the rush

1 G on 24

1.81 xG

3 G on 24

2.33 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 0

0.00 xG

0 G on 3

0.25 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: CAR went 1-for-28, VGK 3-for-22. VGK scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

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

F. Andersen

CAR · 22/25 · .880

+0.5

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/71.9-0.1

Medium1/91.0-0.0

Low1/390.6-0.4

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

A. Hill

VGK · 4/4 · 1.000

+2.1

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/10.2+0.2

Medium1/131.3+0.3

Low0/480.6+0.6

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

A. Schmid

VGK · 22/23 · .957

+1.1

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/10.2+0.2

Medium1/131.3+0.3

Low0/480.6+0.6

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

74 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

CAR

37 shots

Final

74 shots

VGK

37 shots

CAR VGK GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — CAR left, VGK 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. Marner

#93 · R · VGK

0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 20:37 on ice · +2

I. Barbashev

#49 · L · VGK

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 14:31 on ice · +2

S. Theodore

#27 · D · VGK

0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 23:58 on ice · +2

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Oct 20

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJun 16, 3:13 PMEdited 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 calls this a dead heat: CAR 2.5, VGK 2.5, 50% win probability each. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

On the underlying numbers, Carolina owns legitimate territorial dominance. Their 60.0% Corsi means they'll control play; Vegas counters with a 54.0% xG%, indicating sharper danger quality but fewer opportunities. The territorial edge is genuine; the gap isn't insurmountable.

Both teams are running cold on luck. Carolina's 0.984 PDO and Vegas's 0.983 PDO tell the same story — puck luck has turned against each team equally. Whichever team capitalizes on positive regression first could steal this.

Goaltending injects real uncertainty. Both A. Hill and B. Bussi are on back-to-backs, forcing a roster decision: fresh backup or fatigued starter? That choice, more than matchup advantage, could tip the scale.

The skill matchup favors Carolina but not decisively. Jackson Blake (1.06 xG/60, 14G 19A, 10.9% shooting) and Seth Jarvis (0.98 xG/60, 17G 12A, 11.9% shooting) are the higher-ceiling threats — Blake in particular generating elite volume. Vegas counters with Brandon Saad (0.91 xG/60, 3G 6A, 4.1% shooting) and Tomas Hertl (0.88 xG/60, 5G 17A, 4.3% shooting), who offer depth and playmaking instead of individual firepower. On a neutral night, Carolina's top two are more dangerous; on a night when Vegas's supporting cast finds form, the gap narrows.

The defining factor: can Carolina's shot volume translate to finish? Vegas's xG% indicates they're getting their looks; they're just not converting at Blake's rate. If Vegas gets goaltending luck, they stay competitive. If Carolina's Corsi dominance becomes sustained offensive pressure, this becomes one-sided.

There's no hidden edge — just two evenly matched teams where outcome hinges on execution and variance rather than talent gap.

Three Things to Watch

Will Carolina's 60.0% Corsi dominance translate to goals, or will Vegas's xG% and fresher goaltending hold the line?
How does the back-to-back goaltending situation resolve for both teams?
Whether Blake and Jarvis can assert their will early or if Vegas's depth can steal possession time.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

CAR 50%

50%

CAR

Model favorite

50%

CAR50VGK

CAR by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score CAR 2.5–2.5 VGK; 18% 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

CAR← edge

edge →VGK

56.0%54.0%

60.0%52.0%

2.982.52

2.312.11

2.262.12

1.952.10

0.9840.983

CAR holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.984 vs 0.983) says CAR has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

CAR

6-2-2

+9 GD · 1d rest

VGK

6-2-2

+4 GD · 1d rest

0.984

CAR PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.983

VGK PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

CAR drives Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.

Regression watch

VGK PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.
CAR PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Things to watch

CAR drives Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
A. Hill is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
B. Bussi is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
VGK PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

CAR

Expected in goal

B. Bussi

back-to-back.893 last start

Backup Brandon Bussi · +2.8 GSAx this season

Back-to-back: the backup often gets this one. Treat the starter as unconfirmed.

No completed game on file for this club yet.

VGK

Expected in goal

A. Hill

back-to-back.963 last start

Backup Akira Schmid · -1.0 GSAx this season

Back-to-back: the backup often gets this one. Treat the starter as unconfirmed.

No completed game on file for this club yet.

Lineups are the players who dressed in each club's last game, with their minutes; clubs confirm tonight's at warm-up. Every player this preview names was in that lineup.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG

CAR

Jackson Blake14G 19A

1.06 xG/60 · 2 HD · 10.9% sh

Seth Jarvis17G 12A

0.98 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.9% sh

VGK

Brandon Saad3G 6A

0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.1% sh

Tomas Hertl5G 17A

0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.3% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page