Backcheck
Recap · EDM at SEA

Kraken hold off the Oilers

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

By the ModelJul 11, 1:16 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
EDM
Edmonton Oilers
2
Home
SEA
Seattle Kraken
3
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

2.92Expected goals3.99
58% share for the better side
33Shot attempts (SOG)23
2High-danger chances4
71Corsi (all attempts)51
Score-adjusted: 63% / 37%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Seattle outshot Edmonton 33-23 but lost the underlying game by a large margin—the Kraken dominated expected goals 3.99-2.92, a 58-42 split that explains the 3-2 final. Quality of chances, not volume, determined the outcome.

The difference in shot value was stark. Seattle generated 0.078 expected goals per shot; Edmonton managed 0.041. High-danger chances backed the xG (4-2 Kraken), and the Kraken converted them more efficiently on the rush: 3 goals on 25 chances versus Edmonton's 2 on 31.

The Oilers generated higher-quality looks than their shot total suggests. They crashed the net effectively, creating 5 rebound opportunities, but converted zero. Both goaltenders overperformed their expected save percentage—J. Daccord finished 31 of 33 at 0.939; S. Skinner stopped 20 of 23 at 0.870.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
EDM0 / 2 · 0.40 xG
SEA0 / 4 · 1.77 xG
Medium dangermid-range
EDM1 / 17 · 1.77 xG
SEA3 / 16 · 1.75 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
EDM1 / 52 · 0.76 xG
SEA0 / 31 · 0.47 xG

SEA went 0-for-4 from high danger on 1.77 expected goals — 1.8 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
EDM
2 G · 2.92 xG · -0.9
SEA
3 G · 3.99 xG · -1.0
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
S. SkinnerEDM
+1.0
J. DaccordSEA
+0.9

EDM finished -0.9 against expected, SEA -1.0 — S. Skinner (EDM) saved 1.0 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
EDM
WRIST0/31
SNAP0/6
SLAP1/4
TIP IN1/5
BACKHAND0/3
BAT0/0
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/21
SEA
WRIST3/27
SNAP0/2
SLAP0/3
TIP IN0/1
BACKHAND0/2
BAT0/2
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/14
EDM
SEA
Off the rush
2 G on 31 · 1.97 xG
3 G on 25 · 2.13 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 5 · 0.62 xG
0 G on 1 · 0.22 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: EDM went 0-for-31, SEA 3-for-27. SEA scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
L. Draisaitl
#29 · C · EDM
0 G · 2 A · 5 SOG · 21:59 TOI · +1
J. Eberle
#7 · R · SEA
2 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 21:19 TOI · +2
M. Beniers
#10 · C · SEA
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 19:58 TOI · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • EDM generated higher-quality looks than the shot total suggests.
  • SEA generated far more dangerous chances — 0.078 xG/shot vs 0.041. Quality over quantity.
  • SEA was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 25 rush chances.
  • EDM was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 31 rush chances.
  • EDM created 5 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · EDM at SEA · 10:00 PM ET

Oilers at Kraken: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 1:15 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

53%
EDM
Model favorite
53%
47%
EDM50SEA

EDM by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score EDM 2.62.4 SEA; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

EDM← edge
edge →SEA
52.0%5v5 xG%46.0%
50.0%Corsi%45.0%
2.64xGF / 602.13
2.47xGA / 602.51
2.13Goals for / gm1.87
2.29Goals against / gm1.95
0.982PDO — luck, not skill1.011

EDM holds 5 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.982 vs 1.011) says SEA has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.6–2.4 Edmonton victory with the Oilers at 53% win probability. This is a coin flip.

Edmonton owns the underlying play. The Oilers control 52.0% 5v5 expected goals versus Seattle's 46.0%. They own 50.0% Corsi, which tilts possession toward the Kraken end. But Edmonton's PDO sits at 0.982—they're running cold and due for positive regression. Seattle's 1.011 PDO is the inverse: they're running hot and vulnerable to correction.

Offensive efficiency is where this game lives. Connor McDavid (25G, 33A, 0.92 xG/60, 13.7% shooting, 5 HD goals) and Zach Hyman (14G, 13A, 1.23 xG/60, 13.0% shooting, 1 HD goal) operate at elite rates. Hyman's 1.23 xG/60 is exceptional; his 13.0% shooting sits well above average. That just 1 of his 14 goals comes from high-danger chances suggests his scoring mix skews toward medium-danger opportunities—skill-based, but worth monitoring. McDavid's 13.7% shooting is equally elite. Seattle's top scorers, Shane Wright (8G, 10A, 0.77 xG/60, 10.4% shooting, 4 HD goals) and Berkly Catton (6G, 8A, 0.68 xG/60, 8.8% shooting, 5 HD goals), lag in both volume and efficiency.

Defensively, Jake Walman is Edmonton's weak link. Chandler Stephenson is Seattle's.

Three Stars to Watch

  • Connor McDavid (EDM)
  • Zach Hyman (EDM)
  • Shane Wright (SEA)
Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

EDM
Zach Hyman14G 13A
1.23 xG/60 · 1 HD · 13.0% sh
Connor McDavid25G 33A
0.92 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh
SEA
Shane Wright8G 10A
0.77 xG/60 · 4 HD · 10.4% sh
Berkly Catton6G 8A
0.68 xG/60 · 5 HD · 8.8% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters