Motion-blurred skater in a San Jose Sharks sweater

Breakdown · SJS at MIN

Sharks steal one from the Wild against the run of play

Final / OTSun, Oct 26

The verdict · stolen

The Sharks stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.26–4.64 and won anyway.

SJS 6 · MIN 5

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 1:20 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

San Jose won 6-5 in overtime despite creating just 3.26 expected goals to Minnesota's 4.64. The Wild owned 57% of shot attempts (33 to 25 on goal), dominated the metrics, and still left empty-handed. This was a steal.

Y. Askarov stopped 28 of 33 shots for a 0.848 save percentage. J. Wallstedt allowed 19 of 25 for 0.760 — 2.74 goals worse than expected. That gap decided the game.

The Sharks' efficiency in high-danger areas was the difference. They converted 2 of 4 (50%), while Minnesota managed 0 of 5. San Jose feasted on the rush, scoring 5 times on 23 chances. Minnesota's 3 goals on 39 rush attempts showed the opposite problem — speed without finish.

Minnesota scored 2 goals from low-danger spots, plays Askarov had no business allowing. The Wild created 5 rebound opportunities without converting any, while San Jose turned 1 of 3 into a goal. These small edges compound into losses.

Macklin Celebrini's wrist shot from the high slot at 3:47 of overtime ended it.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · OT · Oct 26

SJS

MIN

Sharks steal one from the Wild against the run of play

Chances 3.3 – 4.6Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Wild deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

SJS

3.26

MIN

4.64

41% of the chances59%

The board read SJS 6, MIN 5. The chances read SJS 3.3, MIN 4.6.

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

Luck check

SJS

+2.7

goals above expected

SJS3.26 expected · 6 scored

Expected

Scored

MIN4.64 expected · 5 scored

Expected

Scored

The Sharks scored 2.7 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season

Every goal, in order

P1 05:28SJSW. EklundPP1–0
P1 13:35SJSM. Misa2–0
P1 17:02MINM. JohanssonPP2–1
P1 17:34MINM. Rossi2–2
P2 11:15SJSW. Eklund3–2
P2 11:34SJSR. Reaves4–2
P3 04:28MINR. HartmanPP4–3

+4 more on the full breakdown

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

Where the shots came from

SJS

32 shots

Final

89 shots

MIN

57 shots

SJS MIN GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 6 in

shots · 5 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

SJSMIN

2 / 4

1.22 xG

High danger

0 / 5

1.28 xG

4 / 14

1.72 xG

Medium

3 / 23

2.44 xG

0 / 28

0.33 xG

Low

2 / 49

0.92 xG

The Wild went 0 for 5 from the slot.

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

In the net

Y. Askarov

−0.4

SJS · 28/33

J. Wallstedt

−2.7

MIN · 19/25

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Sharks steal one from the Wild against the run of play

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 10–8

05:28SJSW. Eklundpower play(M. Celebrini, D. Orlov)1–0
13:35SJSM. Misa(T. Liljegren)2–0
17:02MINM. Johanssonpower play(M. Rossi, B. Faber)2–1
17:34MINM. Rossi(K. Kaprizov)2–2

2ndshots 9–6

11:15SJSW. Eklund(P. Kurashev)3–2
11:34SJSR. Reaves(B. Goodrow, T. Dellandrea)4–2

3rdshots 5–17

04:28MINR. Hartmanpower play(K. Kaprizov, B. Faber)4–3
07:52SJST. Toffolipower play(M. Celebrini, W. Eklund)5–3
08:28MINZ. Buium(R. Hartman, Y. Trenin)5–4
17:42MINJ. Eriksson Ek(K. Kaprizov, B. Faber)5–5

OTshots 1–2

03:47SJSM. Celebrini6–5

score reads SJS–MIN

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.26

SJS chances

Goals their shots were worth

+2.7

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.065

SJS puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

37.4%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.26Expected goals4.64

MIN 59% of the chance quality

25Shots on goal33

4High-danger chances5

46All attempts (Corsi)77

Adjusted for score: SJS 34% · MIN 66%

Faceoffs · MIN won69%off43%neu36%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

SJS2 / 4 · 1.22 xG

MIN0 / 5 · 1.28 xG

Medium dangermid-range

SJS4 / 14 · 1.72 xG

MIN3 / 23 · 2.44 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

SJS0 / 28 · 0.33 xG

MIN2 / 49 · 0.92 xG

SJS went 4-for-14 from medium danger on 1.72 expected goals — 2.3 above expected.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

SJS

6 G · 3.26 xG · +2.7

MIN

5 G · 4.64 xG · +0.4

01234567

SJS finished +2.7 against expected, MIN +0.4.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

SJS

WRIST5/23

TIP IN0/2

SLAP0/2

SNAP0/1

DEFLECTED1/2

BACKHAND0/1

BAT0/1

OTHER0/14

MIN

WRIST3/33

TIP IN2/11

SLAP0/6

SNAP0/5

DEFLECTED0/1

BACKHAND0/1

BAT0/0

OTHER0/20

SJS

MIN

Off the rush

5 G on 23

2.61 xG

3 G on 39

3.35 xG

Off rebounds

1 G on 3

0.56 xG

0 G on 5

0.69 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: SJS went 5-for-23, MIN 3-for-33. SJS scored 5 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

Y. Askarov

SJS · 28/33 · .848

-0.4

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/51.3+1.3

Medium3/232.4-0.6

Low2/490.9-1.1

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. Wallstedt

MIN · 19/25 · .760

-2.7

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/41.2-0.8

Medium4/141.7-2.3

Low0/280.3+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

89 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

SJS

32 shots

Final

89 shots

MIN

57 shots

SJS MIN GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — SJS left, MIN 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

K. Kaprizov

#97 · L · MIN

0 G · 3 A · 3 SOG · 27:08 on ice

B. Faber

#7 · D · MIN

0 G · 3 A · 5 SOG · 26:26 on ice · +1

W. Eklund

#72 · L · SJS

2 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 25:29 on ice

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sun, Oct 26

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 1:18 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

Minnesota's 5v5 advantage—52.0% expected goals to San Jose's 48.0%—powers the model's projection: an SJS 2.4–2.7 MIN game, with the Wild at 56% win probability. The Corsi split (Minnesota 48.0%, San Jose 47.0%) reinforces the underlying picture.

Both teams are wounded. Minnesota sits -9 in goal differential over their last 10; San Jose is -13. The divergence in PDO tells the story. Minnesota's 1.007 sits above neutral—they're getting friendly bounces—yet they've still fallen into a hole. San Jose's 0.998 PDO means they're experiencing expected results, which in their case means bad underlying play manifesting in losses. The Wild's shot-generation advantage should persist; the Sharks' deficit should too.

F. Gustavsson faces a back-to-back, with either a backup start or a tired starter possible.

Pavol Regenda is the Sharks' primary threat: 1.10 xG per 60, 5 goals, 2 high-danger chances, and a likely unsustainable 16.1% shooting rate. Igor Chernyshov (0.91 xG/60, 6 goals, 15.0% shooting) has threaded chances and finished them, but he represents a defensive liability as well. Minnesota will target both.

Matt Boldy anchors Minnesota's offense. At 0.89 xG per 60 with 22 goals and 5 high-danger chances on 13.7% shooting, he's hit elite efficiency marks. The team leans on him heavily; San Jose's path forward involves shadowing Boldy and forcing secondary scorers. Matt Kiersted is the defensive weak link to exploit.

Players to Watch

San Jose: Pavol Regenda (1.10 xG/60, 5G 1A, 2 HD goals), Igor Chernyshov (0.91 xG/60, 6G 8A, 1 HD goals)

Minnesota: Matt Boldy (0.89 xG/60, 22G 18A, 5 HD goals)

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

MIN 56%

56%

MIN

Model favorite

44%

56%

SJS50MIN

MIN by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score SJS 2.4–2.7 MIN; 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

SJS← edge

edge →MIN

48.0%52.0%

47.0%48.0%

2.332.55

2.562.40

1.992.04

2.321.93

0.9981.007

MIN holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.998 vs 1.007) says MIN has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

SJS

2-6-2

-13 GD · 2d rest

MIN

4-5-1

-9 GD · 1d rest

0.998

SJS PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.007

MIN PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Wild own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.

Things to watch

The Wild own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
F. Gustavsson is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Wild are underwater at -9 goal differential over their last 10.
The Sharks are underwater at -13 goal differential over their last 10.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

SJS

Expected in goal

Y. Askarov

2 days rest.929 last start

Backup Yaroslav Askarov · -18.9 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

MIN

Expected in goal

F. Gustavsson

back-to-back.875 last start

Backup Filip Gustavsson · +1.4 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

SJS

Pavol Regenda5G 1A

1.10 xG/60 · 2 HD · 16.1% sh

Igor Chernyshov6G 8A

0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh

MIN

Matt Boldy22G 18A

0.89 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh

Robby Fabbri2G 3A

0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.9% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page