Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Nashville Predators sweater
← Sat, Oct 25 · the slate
Breakdown · LAK at NSH

Predators edge the Kings in a shootout

Final / OTSat, Oct 25
LAKLos Angeles Kings4NSHNashville Predators5
The verdict · stolen

The Predators stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.84–3.70 and won anyway.

LAK 4 · NSH 5
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:23 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

The Predators won a shootout they had no business winning. Nashville trailed 4.84–3.70 in expected goals and controlled just 43% of the xG at 5v5, yet edged Los Angeles 5–4 in a shootout.

The Kings were the better team by most measures. They generated 9 high-danger chances to Nashville's 6, and their 57% xG share reflected genuine offensive pressure. But the Predators proved that shot quality matters. Nashville's 0.093 xG per shot was sharper than L.A.'s 0.063—fewer opportunities, better positioned ones.

J. Saros stabilized the chaos. The Predators' goalie made 36 saves at a 0.900 clip, outperforming his expected outcome by 0.84 goals. D. Kuemper, by contrast, stopped just 21 of 25 for a 0.840 save percentage, falling short of expectation by the same margin.

The shootout itself pivoted on a single moment: Ozzy Wiesblatt's wrist shot from the slot, decisive in overtime's sudden-death format. Before that, the Predators had built their advantage through rush efficiency—3 goals on 20 chances—while the Kings, despite attempting 38 rush plays, converted just 3.

R. O'Reilly led Nashville's offense with 2 goals and 1 assist across 21:18. B. Clarke answered for Los Angeles with 2 assists in 17:27, but it wasn't enough to secure the result his team's underlying play deserved.

This was goaltending and shooting masking a broader reality: the Predators stole a game their metrics said they shouldn't win.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · SO · Oct 25
LAK
4
NSH
5

Predators edge the Kings in a shootout

Chances 4.8 – 3.7Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Kings deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
LAK
4.84
NSH
3.70
57% of the chances43%

The board read LAK 4, NSH 5. The chances read LAK 4.8, NSH 3.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NSH
+1.3
goals above expected
NSH3.70 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
LAK4.84 expected · 4 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. P1 07:27LAKA. Kempe1–0
  2. P1 09:00NSHR. O'Reilly1–1
  3. P2 00:36NSHF. Forsberg1–2
  4. P2 01:35LAKJ. Armia2–2
  5. P2 05:24LAKC. Perry3–2
  6. P2 07:12NSHC. Smith3–3
  7. P3 09:50LAKT. Moore4–3
+8 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
LAK
67 shots
7
Final
107 shots
NSH
40 shots
8
LAK attackNSH attack
LAK NSH Goal

Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

67
shots · 7 in
40
shots · 8 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
LAKNSH
2 / 9
2.16 xG
High danger
2 / 6
1.65 xG
1 / 18
1.96 xG
Medium
2 / 14
1.80 xG
1 / 50
0.73 xG
Low
0 / 20
0.25 xG

The Predators buried 2 of 6 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
J. Saros
+0.8
NSH · 36/40
D
D. Kuemper
−0.3
LAK · 21/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Predators edge the Kings in a shootout

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 13–12
  1. 07:27LAKA. Kempe(B. Clarke, A. Kuzmenko)1–0
  2. 09:00NSHR. O'Reilly(S. Stastney)1–1
2ndshots 14–4
  1. 00:36NSHF. Forsberg(M. Wood, R. O'Reilly)1–2
  2. 01:35LAKJ. Armia(A. Turcotte)2–2
  3. 05:24LAKC. Perry(J. Armia)3–2
  4. 07:12NSHC. Smith3–3
3rdshots 12–2
  1. 09:50LAKT. Moore(B. Clarke, J. Edmundson)4–3
  2. 14:44NSHR. O'Reilly(F. Forsberg, N. Hague)4–4
OTshots 1–7no goals
    SO
    1. 00:00NSHR. O'Reillypower play4–4
    2. 00:00LAKA. Kempepower play4–4
    3. 00:00NSHF. Forsbergpower play4–4
    4. 00:00LAKT. Moorepower play4–4
    5. 00:00NSHE. Haulapower play4–4
    6. 00:00LAKK. Fialapower play4–4
    7. 00:00NSHO. Wiesblattpower play4–4

    score reads LAK–NSH

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    3.70
    NSH chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    +1.3
    Finishing
    Goals above what those chances were worth
    1.048
    NSH puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    34.2%
    Shot attempts
    Under half — they were outshot
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    4.84Expected goals3.70
    LAK 57% of the chance quality
    40Shots on goal25
    9High-danger chances6
    77All attempts (Corsi)40
    Adjusted for score: LAK 65% · NSH 35%
    Faceoffs · NSH won45%off48%neu71%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    LAK2 / 9 · 2.16 xG
    NSH2 / 6 · 1.65 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    LAK1 / 18 · 1.96 xG
    NSH2 / 14 · 1.80 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    LAK1 / 50 · 0.73 xG
    NSH0 / 20 · 0.25 xG

    LAK went 1-for-18 from medium danger on 1.96 expected goals — 1.0 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    LAK
    4 G · 4.84 xG · -0.8
    NSH
    5 G · 3.70 xG · +1.3
    0123456

    LAK finished -0.8 against expected, NSH +1.3.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    LAK
    WRIST4/40
    SLAP0/10
    TIP IN0/5
    SNAP0/1
    BACKHAND0/1
    BAT0/1
    DEFLECTED0/0
    OTHER0/19
    NSH
    WRIST3/23
    SLAP0/2
    TIP IN0/1
    SNAP0/2
    BACKHAND1/2
    BAT0/0
    DEFLECTED0/1
    OTHER0/9
    LAK
    NSH
    Off the rush
    3 G on 38
    3.51 xG
    3 G on 20
    2.67 xG
    Off rebounds
    1 G on 4
    0.62 xG
    1 G on 1
    0.43 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: LAK went 4-for-40, NSH 3-for-23. LAK 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
    D. Kuemper
    LAK · 21/25 · .840
    -0.3
    saved above expected
    D
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger2/61.6-0.3
    Medium2/141.8-0.2
    Low0/200.3+0.3

    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 · 36/40 · .900
    +0.8
    saved above expected
    B+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger2/92.2+0.2
    Medium1/182.0+1.0
    Low1/500.7-0.3

    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

    107 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    LAK
    67 shots
    7
    Final
    107 shots
    NSH
    40 shots
    8
    LAK attackNSH attack
    LAK NSH Goal

    Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

    Each club shoots toward its own end — LAK 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
    2 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 21:18 on ice · +3
    F. Forsberg
    #9 · L · NSH
    1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 19:00 on ice · +3
    B. Clarke
    #92 · D · LAK
    0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 17:27 on ice · +3
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Sat, Oct 25
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 1:13 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 can't pick a winner: it projects an even 2.5-2.5 game with the Kings at 51% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find, and the reason is structural—both teams are collapsing.

    Nashville has allowed more goals than it's scored over its last ten games, sitting at negative-seven in goal differential. Los Angeles is marginally better at minus-five. By any recent-form metric, both teams are underwater. The Kings own the underlying play, though, which is all that matters when neither team is rolling. At 5v5, LA generates 52.0% expected goals and controls the puck at 52.0% Corsi, while Nashville sits at 49.0% xG and 50.0% Corsi. The gap is thin but real. Neither team is shooting at an elite rate—LA's PDO is 1.002, Nashville's is 0.992—meaning both are performing at their talent level. No hidden upside or downside.

    The goaltending situation could shift the entire equation. J. Saros and D. Kuemper are both on back-to-backs, so either team could deploy a tired starter or a backup. That's a variable that favors chaos.

    For LA, Alex Laferriere is the most dangerous player on the ice. He's shooting at 9.9% with 0.87 expected goals per 60 minutes and has converted 2 high-danger chances into goals. That efficiency won't last, but it matters tonight. Jared Wright (0.83 xG/60) hasn't scored yet but is creating. Nashville counters with Zachary L'Heureux, who's shooting at an unsustainable 16.0% despite a modest 0.85 xG/60—he has four goals and one high-danger goal. Filip Forsberg (23G, 0.80 xG/60) is the other threat, with 4 high-danger conversions.

    This is a pure toss-up. The Kings have the better process but worse recent results. Both teams' goaltenders are worn down. Elite individual performances will decide it.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    LAK 51%
    51%
    LAK
    Model favorite
    51%
    49%
    LAK50NSH

    LAK by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score LAK 2.5–2.5 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
    LAK← edge
    edge →NSH
    52.0%49.0%
    52.0%50.0%
    2.422.48
    2.202.58
    1.851.84
    1.712.21
    1.0020.992

    LAK holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.002 vs 0.992) says LAK has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    LAK
    4-4-2
    -5 GD · 1d rest
    NSH
    4-4-2
    -7 GD · 1d rest
    1.002
    LAK 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 Kings own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
    Things to watch
    • The Kings own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
    • J. Saros is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • D. Kuemper is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • The Predators are underwater at -7 goal differential over their last 10.
    • The Kings are underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    LAK
    Expected in goal
    D. Kuemper
    back-to-back.935 last start
    Backup Darcy Kuemper · -5.8 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.

    NSH
    Expected in goal
    J. Saros
    back-to-back.955 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
    LAK
    Alex Laferriere16G 18A
    0.87 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.9% sh
    Jared Wright0G 4A
    0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% 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

    Back to the front page