Motion-blurred skater in a green sweater
Breakdown · DAL at NSH

Stars run the Predators off the ice on the underlying numbers

The verdict · earned

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

DAL 3 · NSH 2
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 1:22 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

Dallas dominated by the numbers in ways the scoreboard barely reflected. The 3-2 final masked a 65-35 expected-goal split — the Stars generated 5.18 xG to Nashville's 2.80, the kind of gap that usually yields a three-or four-goal margin, not a single one.

The Predators had the shot volume (47% of attempts, 25 shots on goal to Dallas' 28) but not the danger. Nashville generated just 0.049 xG per shot; Dallas created three times that rate at 0.096. High-danger chances went 3–9 in Dallas' favor.

Here's where the evening fractured from the scoreboard: C. DeSmith stopped 23 of 25 shots (0.920 SV%), beating his expected save percentage by 0.80 goals — solid work. But J. Annunen, Nashville's goaltender, stopped 25 of 28 and finished 2.18 goals above expected, effectively stealing back what Dallas' dominant underlying play should have delivered. Annunen was near-perfect on high-danger attempts, saving all nine.

Dallas got their chances. They went 0 for 9 on high-danger looks — a brutal conversion rate that won't repeat. They were lethal off the rush, though, converting three of 24 chances. M. Rantanen's wrist shot from the slot in the third period exemplified Dallas' efficiency on simpler plays.

The Stars' depth offensive attack shone in their top names: J. Robertson collected two assists in nearly 25 minutes of ice time, while T. Harley chipped in one assist from the blue line.

Nashville created four rebound opportunities and converted one. Dallas created five and converted none — marginal differences, but they add up when your goaltender isn't bailing you out.

The underlying dominance eventually mattered, even if barely.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Oct 26
DAL
3
NSH
2

Stars run the Predators off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 5.2 – 2.8Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Stars earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
DAL
5.18
NSH
2.80
65% of the chances35%

The board read DAL 3, NSH 2. The chances read DAL 5.2, NSH 2.8.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
DAL
−2.2
goals above expected
DAL5.18 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
NSH2.80 expected · 2 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 08:02NSHJ. MarchessaultPP0–1
  2. P2 07:15NSHS. Stastney0–2
  3. P2 09:36DALO. Bäck1–2
  4. P2 16:29DALW. Johnston2–2
  5. P3 10:44DALM. RantanenPP3–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
DAL
46 shots
3
Final
87 shots
NSH
41 shots
2
DAL attackNSH attack
DAL NSH Goal
46
shots · 3 in
41
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
DALNSH
0 / 9
2.47 xG
High danger
0 / 3
0.61 xG
3 / 19
2.17 xG
Medium
2 / 14
1.48 xG
0 / 26
0.54 xG
Low
0 / 40
0.71 xG

The Predators went 0 for 3 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
J. Annunen
+2.2
NSH · 25/28
B+
C. DeSmith
+0.8
DAL · 23/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Stars run the Predators 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 6–8
  1. 08:02NSHJ. Marchessaultpower play(R. O'Reilly, F. Forsberg)0–1
2ndshots 13–8
  1. 07:15NSHS. Stastney(L. Evangelista, J. Barron)0–2
  2. 09:36DALO. Bäck(R. Faksa, T. Harley)1–2
  3. 16:29DALW. Johnston(J. Robertson)2–2
3rdshots 9–9
  1. 10:44DALM. Rantanenpower play(M. Bourque, J. Robertson)3–2

score reads DAL–NSH

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
5.18
DAL chances
Goals their shots were worth
−2.2
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.020
DAL puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
48.6%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

5.18Expected goals2.80
DAL 65% of the chance quality
28Shots on goal25
9High-danger chances3
54All attempts (Corsi)57
Adjusted for score: DAL 50% · NSH 50%
Faceoffs · NSH won48%off41%neu56%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
DAL0 / 9 · 2.47 xG
NSH0 / 3 · 0.61 xG
Medium dangermid-range
DAL3 / 19 · 2.17 xG
NSH2 / 14 · 1.48 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
DAL0 / 26 · 0.54 xG
NSH0 / 40 · 0.71 xG

DAL went 0-for-9 from high danger on 2.47 expected goals — 2.5 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
DAL
3 G · 5.18 xG · -2.2
NSH
2 G · 2.80 xG · -0.8
0123456

DAL finished -2.2 against expected, NSH -0.8.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
DAL
WRIST1/24
SNAP0/8
TIP IN1/6
SLAP0/2
BACKHAND1/5
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/8
NSH
WRIST0/15
SNAP2/7
TIP IN0/6
SLAP0/8
BACKHAND0/4
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/16
DAL
NSH
Off the rush
3 G on 24
2.41 xG
1 G on 25
1.68 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 5
1.04 xG
1 G on 4
0.72 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: DAL went 1-for-24, NSH 0-for-15. DAL 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
C. DeSmith
DAL · 23/25 · .920
+0.8
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/30.6+0.6
Medium2/141.5-0.5
Low0/400.7+0.7

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. Annunen
NSH · 25/28 · .893
+2.2
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/92.5+2.5
Medium3/192.2-0.8
Low0/260.5+0.5

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

87 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
DAL
46 shots
3
Final
87 shots
NSH
41 shots
2
DAL attackNSH attack
DAL NSH Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — DAL 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
J. Robertson
#21 · L · DAL
0 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 24:41 on ice · +1
T. Harley
#55 · D · DAL
0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 25:17 on ice · +1
M. Rantanen
#96 · R · DAL
1 G · 0 A · 5 SOG · 21:32 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, 1:21 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 sees Dallas and Nashville as dead even: the Predators at 50% win probability, the projected score a flat 2.5-2.5. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

The problem is form and fortune. Nashville sits underwater at -7 goal differential over their last 10, while Dallas carries a PDO of 1.024—the Stars are running hot, and regression is coming.

On the ice, Nashville owns territorial advantage. The Predators drive Corsi at 50.0%, Dallas at 47.0%. But expected goals tell a different story: Dallas leads 51.0% xG% to 49.0%. Nashville's PDO of 0.992 sits closer to sustainable; the team is generating but not converting at the rate underlying play suggests.

Watch Jason Robertson for Dallas. He carries 0.96 xG/60, has 25G 21A with two high-danger goals, and is shooting at 12.4%. Michael Bunting operates at 0.83 xG/60 with 8G 14A on a 7.6% shooting rate—secondary, but still a threat.

Nashville counters with Zachary L'Heureux at 0.85 xG/60 with 4G, one high-danger goal, and a 16.0% shooting rate. His low output despite strong underlying numbers suggests a regression brewing his way. Filip Forsberg, meanwhile, sits at trend: 0.80 xG/60, 23G 17A, four high-danger goals, and 13.6% shooting.

A wrinkle: neither team shows depth scoring from high-danger chances. Both list 0% HD goal rate and 0% rebound goal rate. In a close contest, that's a liability. Dallas's defensive weak link is Tyler Myers; Nashville leans on Jonathan Marchessault.

The projection lands here because neither side owns an obvious edge. Dallas has puck-luck regression hanging over it; Nashville has recent form working against it. Robertson could tilt Dallas's way. Forsberg and an L'Heureux correction could tilt it Nashville's direction. The Predators' territorial control doesn't guarantee an expected-goals win.

This is genuinely a coin flip.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

NSH 51%
50%
NSH
Model favorite
50%
50%
DAL50NSH

NSH by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score DAL 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
DAL← edge
edge →NSH
51.0%49.0%
47.0%50.0%
2.362.48
2.292.58
2.071.84
1.682.21
1.0240.992

DAL holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.024 vs 0.992) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
DAL
5-4-1
-4 GD · 2d rest
NSH
4-4-2
-7 GD · 2d rest
1.024
DAL 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 drive Corsi at 50.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Predators drive Corsi at 50.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • The Predators are underwater at -7 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
DAL
Expected in goal
J. Oettinger
2 days rest.880 last start
Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

NSH
Expected in goal
J. Saros
2 days rest.955 last start
Backup Juuse Saros · -9.3 GSAx this season

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
DAL
Jason Robertson25G 21A
0.96 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.4% sh
Michael Bunting8G 14A
0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 7.6% 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