Backcheck
Recap · WPG at MIN

Jets steal one from the Wild against the run of play

The Jets stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 2.69–4.32 and won anyway.

By the ModelJul 11, 1:41 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
WPG
Winnipeg Jets
4
Home
MIN
Minnesota Wild
3
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

2.69Expected goals4.32
62% share for the better side
21Shot attempts (SOG)35
3High-danger chances6
48Corsi (all attempts)76
Score-adjusted: 37% / 63%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Winnipeg won 4–3 in overtime despite finishing with 38% of expected goals. The Wild owned 62% of the xG battle (4.32–2.69) and controlled 62% of shot attempts at 5v5 — this was a heist driven entirely by goaltending.

C. Hellebuyck stopped 1.32 more goals than expected, while F. Gustavsson allowed 1.31 more than his workload deserved. The gap was stark enough to flip the game: subtract Hellebuyck's overperformance and add Gustavsson's underperformance, and Minnesota wins. The Wild also created more high-danger looks (6–3) and generated nine rebound opportunities to Winnipeg's three, but couldn't finish.

Winnipeg was efficient in transition, scoring twice on 25 rush attempts while Minnesota couldn't capitalize on net-front traffic. Kyle Connor's wrist shot from the high slot at 00:46 of overtime ended it.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
WPG1 / 3 · 0.84 xG
MIN1 / 6 · 1.42 xG
Medium dangermid-range
WPG3 / 11 · 1.20 xG
MIN2 / 20 · 2.27 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
WPG0 / 34 · 0.65 xG
MIN0 / 50 · 0.64 xG

WPG went 3-for-11 from medium danger on 1.20 expected goals — 1.8 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
WPG
4 G · 2.69 xG · +1.3
MIN
3 G · 4.32 xG · -1.3
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
C. HellebuyckWPG
+1.3
F. GustavssonMIN
-1.3

WPG finished +1.3 against expected, MIN -1.3 — C. Hellebuyck (WPG) saved 1.3 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
WPG
WRIST2/20
SLAP0/7
BACKHAND0/2
SNAP0/2
TIP IN0/4
BAT1/1
DEFLECTED1/1
OTHER0/11
MIN
WRIST2/37
SLAP1/3
BACKHAND0/6
SNAP0/5
TIP IN0/3
BAT0/1
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/21
WPG
MIN
Off the rush
2 G on 25 · 2.10 xG
1 G on 29 · 2.11 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 3 · 0.29 xG
1 G on 9 · 1.26 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: WPG went 2-for-20, MIN 2-for-37. WPG scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
L. Stanley
#64 · D · WPG
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 22:45 TOI · +2
B. Faber
#7 · D · MIN
1 G · 1 A · 7 SOG · 21:25 TOI · -1
M. Scheifele
#55 · C · WPG
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 19:09 TOI · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • WPG stole this one. MIN owned 62% of the xG and lost.
  • C. Hellebuyck (WPG) stopped 1.3 goals above expected.
  • F. Gustavsson (MIN) gave up 1.3 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
  • WPG was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 25 rush chances.
  • MIN created 9 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • WPG created 3 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · WPG at MIN · 8:00 PM ET

The Wild are the model's lean over the Jets on the underlying numbers

By the ModelJul 11, 1:31 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

55%
MIN
Model favorite
45%
55%
WPG50MIN

MIN by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score WPG 2.42.7 MIN; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

WPG← edge
edge →MIN
48.0%5v5 xG%52.0%
49.0%Corsi%48.0%
2.34xGF / 602.55
2.55xGA / 602.40
1.90Goals for / gm2.04
2.10Goals against / gm1.93
0.998PDO — luck, not skill1.007

MIN holds 5 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.998 vs 1.007) says MIN has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

Minnesota projects as the lean: the model favors the Wild at 55% win probability, pricing a 2.4–2.7 goal spread in their favor. This verdict rests on superior underlying play at 5v5, where Minnesota owns 52.0% in expected goals compared to Winnipeg's 48.0%—a meaningful edge that typically predicts shot volume and scoring opportunity.

Recent form tells a different story. Winnipeg has momentum at 7-3-0 over their last 10 games, while Minnesota has struggled to convert, sitting at -11 goal differential in the same span. Both teams run 0% on high-danger goals and 0% on rebounds, a paradox that leaves some of their scoring potential on the table.

Kyle Connor (25G, 30A) and Nino Niederreiter (6G, 6A) drive Winnipeg's offense. Connor shoots 13.0%, well above league average, while Niederreiter generates 0.87 expected goals per 60 and has three high-danger chances converted to goals. Defensively, Colin Miller is the weak link.

Matt Boldy (22G, 18A) leads Minnesota with 0.89 xG/60 and five high-danger goals, matching or exceeding Niederreiter's efficiency. Robby Fabbri (0.88 xG/60) offers secondary creation but is likely unavailable. Matt Kiersted represents the defensive liability.

The underlying advantage belongs to the Wild, but Winnipeg's recent execution and Connor's elite conversion keep this closer than MoneyPuck's baseline would suggest.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

WPG
Nino Niederreiter6G 6A
0.87 xG/60 · 3 HD · 8.6% sh
Kyle Connor25G 30A
0.83 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.0% 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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters