Motion-blurred skater in a Nashville Predators sweater
Breakdown · VAN at NSH

Predators hold off the Canucks

The verdict · coin flip

The Predators won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

VAN 1 · NSH 2
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 12:53 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

Nashville beat Vancouver 2–1, though expected goals (2.95–2.80) suggested it was anyone's game. Despite holding 61% of shot attempts (35–22), they generated only a 51–49 xG edge—the gap that says NSH's volume came without teeth.

J. Saros stopped 1.8 goals above expected, decisive in a statistical tie. T. Demko posted +0.95 (saves above expected), but Vancouver's 1.80-goal skater underperformance outweighed his contribution.

Cole Smith's tip-in from the slot (P3, 05:09) closed it. NSH was lethal on the rush—2 goals on 26 chances—where volume becomes irrelevant. High-danger chances (4–3, NSH) barely registered. Neither team converted their rebounds (NSH 0-for-4, VAN 0-for-3), leaving Saros's performance as the only story that mattered.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Oct 23
VAN
1
NSH
2

Predators hold off the Canucks

Chances 2.8 – 3.0Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Predators took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value
VAN
2.80
NSH
2.95
49% of the chances51%

The board read VAN 1, NSH 2. The chances read VAN 2.8, NSH 3.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NSH
−0.9
goals above expected
NSH2.95 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored
VAN2.80 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Canucks left 1.8 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P2 09:01NSHR. O'ReillySH0–1
  2. P2 11:49VANM. Sasson1–1
  3. P3 05:09NSHC. Smith1–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
VAN
32 shots
1
Final
70 shots
NSH
38 shots
2
VAN attackNSH attack
VAN NSH Goal
32
shots · 1 in
38
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
VANNSH
0 / 3
0.77 xG
High danger
0 / 4
1.00 xG
0 / 15
1.67 xG
Medium
2 / 12
1.38 xG
1 / 33
0.36 xG
Low
0 / 47
0.57 xG

The Canucks went 0 for 3 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
J. Saros
+1.8
NSH · 21/22
B+
T. Demko
+0.9
VAN · 33/35
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Predators hold off the Canucks

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 5–12no goals
    2ndshots 10–12
    1. 09:01NSHR. O'Reillyshorthanded(S. Stastney)0–1
    2. 11:49VANM. Sasson(L. Karlsson)1–1
    3rdshots 7–11
    1. 05:09NSHC. Smith(M. McCarron, J. Barron)1–2

    score reads VAN–NSH

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    2.95
    NSH chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    −0.9
    Finishing
    Goals below what those chances were worth
    1.012
    NSH puck luck
    About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
    55.3%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    2.80Expected goals2.95
    NSH 51% of the chance quality
    22Shots on goal35
    3High-danger chances4
    51All attempts (Corsi)63
    Adjusted for score: VAN 46% · NSH 54%
    Faceoffs · NSH won53%off82%neu53%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    VAN0 / 3 · 0.77 xG
    NSH0 / 4 · 1.00 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    VAN0 / 15 · 1.67 xG
    NSH2 / 12 · 1.38 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    VAN1 / 33 · 0.36 xG
    NSH0 / 47 · 0.57 xG

    VAN went 0-for-15 from medium danger on 1.67 expected goals — 1.7 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    VAN
    1 G · 2.80 xG · -1.8
    NSH
    2 G · 2.95 xG · -0.9
    01234

    VAN finished -1.8 against expected, NSH -0.9.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    VAN
    WRIST1/17
    SLAP0/4
    SNAP0/6
    TIP IN0/3
    BACKHAND0/2
    DEFLECTED0/0
    WRAP AROUND0/0
    POKE0/0
    OTHER0/19
    NSH
    WRIST1/17
    SLAP0/6
    SNAP0/3
    TIP IN1/5
    BACKHAND0/4
    DEFLECTED0/1
    WRAP AROUND0/1
    POKE0/1
    OTHER0/25
    VAN
    NSH
    Off the rush
    1 G on 23
    2.20 xG
    2 G on 26
    2.01 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 3
    0.50 xG
    0 G on 4
    0.63 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: VAN went 1-for-17, NSH 1-for-17. NSH scored 2 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
    T. Demko
    VAN · 33/35 · .943
    +0.9
    saved above expected
    B+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/41.0+1.0
    Medium2/121.4-0.6
    Low0/470.6+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

    J. Saros
    NSH · 21/22 · .955
    +1.8
    saved above expected
    A
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/30.8+0.8
    Medium0/151.7+1.7
    Low1/330.4-0.6

    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

    70 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    VAN
    32 shots
    1
    Final
    70 shots
    NSH
    38 shots
    2
    VAN attackNSH attack
    VAN NSH Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — VAN left, NSH 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
    R. O'Reilly
    #90 · C · NSH
    1 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 17:57 on ice
    M. McCarron
    #47 · C · NSH
    0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 16:22 on ice · +1
    C. Smith
    #36 · R · NSH
    1 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 15:55 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Thu, Oct 23
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 12:49 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 projects Nashville to win a 2.4–2.8 game, putting the Predators at 56% win probability. That edge rests on a clean story: Nashville owns the underlying play.

    The Predators control the territorial game at 50.0% Corsi while generating 49.0% of 5v5 expected goals to Vancouver's 44.0%. This isn't marginal—a full five percentage points in xG% is significant, and it compounds across 60 minutes. Nashville's −11 goal differential over their last 10 games reflects recent results noise, not a true quality problem. The Predators are doing the things that win hockey games; they've just been snake-bitten on finishing.

    Vancouver's vulnerability is its PDO. The Canucks are running at 0.974—substantially cold—while Nashville sits at 0.992. PDO regression is real, and it cuts both ways. Vancouver is due positive regression, which should tighten this game. But PDO doesn't drive individual performances; it masks underlying quality, and on that metric Nashville has the better of it.

    The goaltending picture tilts Nashville's way. J. Saros is on a back-to-back, which means either the Predators deploy a backup or ask their starter to grind on short rest. That's a manageable risk, but it is a risk.

    The game will likely turn on execution at the margins. Filip Chytil has been Vancouver's most dangerous 5v5 contributor at 1.03 xG/60 to go with 3 goals and a 15.0% shooting rate, including 1 high-danger goal. He'll draw Nashville's tighter checks. Drew O'Connor has been productive further down the lineup—13 goals and 11 assists with 3 high-danger tallies at 11.8% shooting—but operates at 0.85 xG/60, lower volume than Chytil.

    Nashville's star power centers on Filip Forsberg, who carries 23 goals and 17 assists with a 13.6% shooting rate. Forsberg generates 0.80 xG/60, efficient without being dominant. Zachary L'Heureux operates at the same xG/60 rate but with tighter results: 4 goals on the season with 1 high-danger goal and a 16.0% shooting rate. If L'Heureux sustains that finishing rate, he becomes dangerous in even-strength minutes.

    Defensively, Victor Mancini represents a vulnerability for Vancouver, while Jonathan Marchessault flags a soft spot on Nashville's blue line. Both teams have pathways to pounce if they identify these seams.

    The Predators' edge is real, but it's one where a Canucks team playing up to its underlying numbers can win straight up. Count on a tight game where the team that executes its chances wins.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    NSH 56%
    56%
    NSH
    Model favorite
    44%
    56%
    VAN50NSH

    NSH by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score VAN 2.4–2.8 NSH; 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
    VAN← edge
    edge →NSH
    44.0%49.0%
    46.0%50.0%
    2.222.48
    2.812.58
    1.601.84
    2.562.21
    0.9740.992

    NSH holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.974 vs 0.992) says NSH has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    VAN
    6-4-0
    +6 GD · 2d rest
    NSH
    3-5-2
    -11 GD · 1d rest
    0.974
    VAN PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    0.992
    NSH PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Where the edges live
    • The Predators own the underlying play — 49.0% 5v5 xG vs 44.0%.
    • The Predators drive Corsi at 50.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    Regression watch
    • The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.
    Things to watch
    • The Predators own the underlying play — 49.0% 5v5 xG vs 44.0%.
    • The Predators drive Corsi at 50.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    • J. Saros is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • The Predators are underwater at -11 goal differential over their last 10.
    • The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    VAN
    Expected in goal
    K. Lankinen
    2 days rest.808 last start
    Backup Kevin Lankinen · -19.3 GSAx this season

    No completed game on file for this club yet.

    NSH
    Expected in goal
    J. Saros
    back-to-back.844 last start
    Backup Juuse Saros · -9.3 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
    VAN
    Filip Chytil3G 0A
    1.03 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh
    Drew O'Connor13G 11A
    0.85 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.8% sh
    NSH
    Zachary L'Heureux4G 0A
    0.85 xG/60 · 1 HD · 16.0% sh
    Filip Forsberg23G 17A
    0.80 xG/60 · 4 HD · 13.6% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next