Motion-blurred skater in a Florida Panthers sweater

Breakdown · DAL at FLA

Panthers edge the Stars in a shootout

Final / OTSat, Nov 1

The verdict · earned

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

DAL 3 · FLA 4

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:18 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 Panthers held 60% of expected goals but couldn't finish — 0 for 5 on high-danger chances — and needed a shootout against Dallas despite dominating play.

Panthers controlled the shot count (56% attempt share, 28–22 on goal), accumulating volume that should have built distance. But volume means nothing against a hot goalie. C. DeSmith (DAL) stopped 25 of 28 shots and overperformed his expected save percentage by 0.86 — the difference between a rout and a shootout.

The Panthers' misfires on their best chances tell the real story. FLA also created 10 rebound opportunities and converted only one — dead-stick finishes at the door when pressure should have buried Dallas. Meanwhile, Dallas was ruthless on the rush: three goals on 22 chances, compared to FLA's two on 20. In a tight game, it was the difference.

DeSmith did the heavy lifting. On Dallas's five high-danger shots, he was perfect — 100% save percentage. S. Bobrovsky (FLA) allowed 3 of 22 shots and posted an 0.864 save percentage, holding his ground but not stealing moments the way Dallas's netminder did.

Brad Marchand's wrist shot from the slot in the shootout ended it, the exclamation point on Dallas's overachievement. Panthers had the play; Stars had the goalie. In extra time, it was Dallas who blinked less.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · SO · Nov 1

DAL

FLA

Panthers edge the Stars in a shootout

Chances 2.6 – 3.9Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Panthers earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

DAL

2.61

FLA

3.86

40% of the chances60%

The board read DAL 3, FLA 4. The chances read DAL 2.6, FLA 3.9.

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

Luck check

FLA

+0.1

goals above expected

FLA3.86 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

DAL2.61 expected · 3 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

P2 01:48FLAB. Marchand0–1
P2 04:02FLAS. Reinhart0–2
P2 14:47DALW. JohnstonPP1–2
P2 15:01DALJ. HryckowianPP2–2
P3 12:26FLAS. Bennett2–3
P3 17:19DALM. Rantanen3–3
SO 00:00FLAB. MarchandPP3–3

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

Where the shots came from

DAL

33 shots

Final

80 shots

FLA

47 shots

DAL FLA GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 3 in

shots · 4 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

DALFLA

1 / 4

1.01 xG

High danger

0 / 5

1.35 xG

2 / 12

1.19 xG

Medium

3 / 20

2.17 xG

0 / 27

0.40 xG

Low

0 / 41

0.34 xG

High-danger looks: DAL 1 of 4, FLA 0 of 5.

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

In the net

B+

C. DeSmith

+0.9

DAL · 25/28

S. Bobrovsky

−0.4

FLA · 19/22

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Panthers edge the Stars 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 5–6no goals

2ndshots 7–12

01:48FLAB. Marchand(E. Luostarinen, A. Lundell)0–1
04:02FLAS. Reinhart(C. Verhaeghe, E. Rodrigues)0–2
14:47DALW. Johnstonpower play(S. Steel, M. Rantanen)1–2
15:01DALJ. Hryckowianpower play(T. Harley, S. Steel)2–2

3rdshots 5–7

12:26FLAS. Bennett(G. Forsling, M. Samoskevich)2–3
17:19DALM. Rantanen(S. Steel, J. Robertson)3–3

OTshots 5–3no goals

00:00FLAB. Marchandpower play3–3

score reads DAL–FLA

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.86

FLA chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.1

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

0.976

FLA puck luck

Below 1.000 — the bounces went against them

60.6%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.61Expected goals3.86

FLA 60% of the chance quality

22Shots on goal28

4High-danger chances5

43All attempts (Corsi)66

Adjusted for score: DAL 41% · FLA 59%

Faceoffs · FLA won33%off44%neu21%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

DAL1 / 4 · 1.01 xG

FLA0 / 5 · 1.35 xG

Medium dangermid-range

DAL2 / 12 · 1.19 xG

FLA3 / 20 · 2.17 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

DAL0 / 27 · 0.40 xG

FLA0 / 41 · 0.34 xG

FLA went 0-for-5 from high danger on 1.35 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

DAL

3 G · 2.61 xG · +0.4

FLA

4 G · 3.86 xG · +0.1

012345

DAL finished +0.4 against expected, FLA +0.1.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

DAL

WRIST0/6

SNAP1/15

TIP IN1/4

BACKHAND1/2

SLAP0/3

DEFLECTED0/0

OTHER0/13

FLA

WRIST2/29

SNAP0/3

TIP IN0/3

BACKHAND1/5

SLAP0/3

DEFLECTED0/1

OTHER0/22

DAL

FLA

Off the rush

3 G on 22

2.12 xG

2 G on 20

2.05 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 1

0.20 xG

1 G on 10

1.38 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: DAL went 0-for-6, FLA 2-for-29. 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 · 25/28 · .893

+0.9

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/51.4+1.4

Medium3/202.2-0.8

Low0/410.3+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

S. Bobrovsky

FLA · 19/22 · .864

-0.4

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/41.0+0.0

Medium2/121.2-0.8

Low0/270.4+0.4

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

80 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

DAL

33 shots

Final

80 shots

FLA

47 shots

DAL FLA GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — DAL left, FLA 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

S. Steel

#18 · C · DAL

0 G · 3 A · 0 SOG · 18:04 on ice

M. Rantanen

#96 · R · DAL

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 23:08 on ice · -1

T. Harley

#55 · D · DAL

0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 26:47 on ice · -2

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Nov 1

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:09 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 Panthers have a 51% win probability—models can't split Dallas and Florida. This is as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

The projection is Dallas 2.5 goals, Florida 2.5 goals. That symmetry breaks down underneath: Dallas holds a 51.0% expected goals share at 5-on-5, but Florida counters with 52.0% shot attempts. The Panthers will own territorial possession while the Stars generate quality looks on their possessions. Dallas's PDO is 1.024—elite puck luck. Florida sits at 0.989, closer to sustainable reality. Someone has to regress, and the smart money says Dallas.

Florida also holds a rest advantage: four days to Dallas's two. That matters for depth and injury recovery.

Jason Robertson drives Dallas at 0.96 expected goals per 60 minutes, backing up 25 goals and 21 assists with 12.4% conversion and two high-danger goals. Michael Bunting sits at 0.83 xG/60 with eight goals and 14 assists, though his 7.6% shooting rate suggests regression coming. Sam Bennett matches Robertson's offensive ceiling for Florida at 0.97 xG/60, pairing 18 goals with 19 assists and six high-danger chances. Brad Marchand adds 0.93 xG/60 with 17 goals, nine assists, three high-danger goals, and 19.5% shooting—a conversion rate destined to normalize.

Both teams register implausible 0% high-danger goal rate and 0% rebound goal rate, suggesting either incomplete data or genuine excellence. Tyler Myers is Dallas's back-end liability. For Florida, Brad Marchand carries defensive weakness despite offensive production.

This matchup hinges on whether Dallas's puck luck holds or Florida's territorial control translates to goals. The rest edge and Florida's PDO closer to sustainable truth favor the Panthers. But at 51%, this remains a genuine flip.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

FLA 51%

51%

FLA

Model favorite

49%

51%

DAL50FLA

FLA by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score DAL 2.5–2.5 FLA; 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 →FLA

51.0%49.0%

47.0%52.0%

2.362.48

2.292.56

2.071.98

1.682.21

1.0240.989

DAL holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.024 vs 0.989) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

DAL

5-3-2

-3 GD · 2d rest

FLA

4-5-1

-5 GD · 4d rest

1.024

DAL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.989

FLA PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Panthers drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.

Regression watch

The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.

Things to watch

The Panthers drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
The Panthers are underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10.
The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
The Panthers have 2 more days of rest.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

DAL

Expected in goal

J. Oettinger

2 days rest.939 last start

Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

FLA

Expected in goal

D. Tarasov

4 days rest.882 last start

Backup Sergei Bobrovsky · -12.2 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

FLA

Sam Bennett18G 19A

0.97 xG/60 · 6 HD · 13.1% sh

Brad Marchand17G 9A

0.93 xG/60 · 3 HD · 19.5% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page