Motion-blurred skater in a Anaheim Ducks sweater
Breakdown · FLA at ANA

Ducks pull away from the Panthers

The verdict · earned

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

FLA 3 · ANA 7
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:50 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 Ducks defeated the Panthers 7–3, controlling 60% of shot attempts (32–21) and 58% of expected goals while scoring 2.57 goals above their underlying play—a blend of dominance and clinical finishing.

Anaheim's underlying metrics were comprehensive. They generated 4.43–3.24 expected goals, with high-danger chances favoring the visitors 11–4. Yet the 4–goal margin exceeded what their production warranted: S. Bobrovsky conceded 2.57 goals above expected, a dramatic shortfall that expanded the scoreline.

L. Dostal faced fewer chances and converted efficiently at 0.857 save percentage. The disparity between starters—Bobrovsky -2.57, Dostal stable—explained a significant portion of the final spread.

Anaheim's execution elsewhere was lethal. They scored four times on 30 rush attempts, a rate that signifies elite transition positioning. Florida managed two on 27. Crashing the net yielded dividends too: Anaheim created six rebound chances and converted three, reflecting relentless forechecking. The power play was decisive—two goals on 11 shots with 0.99 expected goals, showing premium positioning even in limited volume.

Jansen Harkins's wrist shot from the slot in the third period (14:47) marked the moment Anaheim's depth overwhelmed their opponent entirely.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 4
FLA
3
ANA
7

Ducks pull away from the Panthers

Chances 3.2 – 4.4Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Ducks earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
FLA
3.24
ANA
4.43
42% of the chances58%

The board read FLA 3, ANA 7. The chances read FLA 3.2, ANA 4.4.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
ANA
+2.6
goals above expected
ANA4.43 expected · 7 scored
Expected
Scored
FLA3.24 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored

The Ducks scored 2.6 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 03:09ANAC. Gauthier0–1
  2. P1 10:14FLAB. Marchand1–1
  3. P1 15:17ANAC. GauthierPP1–2
  4. P2 05:21FLAE. Rodrigues2–2
  5. P2 10:37FLAE. LuostarinenPP3–2
  6. P2 15:36ANAC. GauthierPP3–3
  7. P2 17:19ANAN. Nesterenko3–4
+3 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
FLA
39 shots
3
Final
86 shots
ANA
47 shots
7
FLA attackANA attack
FLA ANA Goal
39
shots · 3 in
47
shots · 7 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
FLAANA
1 / 4
0.96 xG
High danger
3 / 11
2.57 xG
2 / 15
1.72 xG
Medium
3 / 13
1.25 xG
0 / 29
0.56 xG
Low
1 / 40
0.61 xG

The Ducks buried 3 of 11 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
C
L. Dostal
+0.2
ANA · 18/21
F
S. Bobrovsky
−2.6
FLA · 25/32
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Ducks pull away from the Panthers

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 9–9
  1. 03:09ANAC. Gauthier(L. Carlsson)0–1
  2. 10:14FLAB. Marchand(J. Petry)1–1
  3. 15:17ANAC. Gauthierpower play(T. Terry)1–2
2ndshots 10–10
  1. 05:21FLAE. Rodrigues(M. Samoskevich, G. Forsling)2–2
  2. 10:37FLAE. Luostarinenpower play(E. Rodrigues, S. Bennett)3–2
  3. 15:36ANAC. Gauthierpower play(J. LaCombe, L. Carlsson)3–3
  4. 17:19ANAN. Nesterenko(R. Poehling, A. Killorn)3–4
3rdshots 2–13
  1. 11:43ANAJ. Trouba(C. Gauthier, M. McTavish)3–5
  2. 13:21ANAC. Kreider(N. Nesterenko, T. Terry)3–6
  3. 14:47ANAJ. Harkins3–7

score reads FLA–ANA

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.43
ANA chances
Goals their shots were worth
+2.6
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.047
ANA puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
57.1%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.24Expected goals4.43
ANA 58% of the chance quality
21Shots on goal32
4High-danger chances11
48All attempts (Corsi)64
Adjusted for score: FLA 45% · ANA 55%
Faceoffs · ANA won56%off59%neu50%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
FLA1 / 4 · 0.96 xG
ANA3 / 11 · 2.57 xG
Medium dangermid-range
FLA2 / 15 · 1.72 xG
ANA3 / 13 · 1.25 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
FLA0 / 29 · 0.56 xG
ANA1 / 40 · 0.61 xG

ANA went 3-for-13 from medium danger on 1.25 expected goals — 1.8 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
FLA
3 G · 3.24 xG · -0.2
ANA
7 G · 4.43 xG · +2.6
012345678

FLA finished -0.2 against expected, ANA +2.6.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
FLA
WRIST3/22
SNAP0/5
SLAP0/5
TIP IN0/5
BACKHAND0/2
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/9
ANA
WRIST3/24
SNAP2/10
SLAP1/6
TIP IN0/4
BACKHAND0/2
DEFLECTED1/1
OTHER0/17
FLA
ANA
Off the rush
2 G on 27
2.43 xG
4 G on 30
2.95 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 2
0.37 xG
3 G on 6
1.07 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: FLA went 3-for-22, ANA 3-for-24. ANA scored 4 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
S. Bobrovsky
FLA · 25/32 · .781
-2.6
saved above expected
F
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger3/112.6-0.4
Medium3/131.3-1.8
Low1/400.6-0.4

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

L. Dostal
ANA · 18/21 · .857
+0.2
saved above expected
C
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/41.0-0.0
Medium2/151.7-0.3
Low0/290.6+0.6

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

86 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
FLA
39 shots
3
Final
86 shots
ANA
47 shots
7
FLA attackANA attack
FLA ANA Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — FLA left, ANA 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
C. Gauthier
#61 · L · ANA
3 G · 1 A · 6 SOG · 14:48 on ice
T. Terry
#19 · R · ANA
0 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 19:53 on ice
N. Nesterenko
#13 · C · ANA
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 16:35 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Nov 4
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:38 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 this as fundamentally even: Florida 2.5–2.8 xG, Anaheim at 55% win probability. A closer look doesn't settle it.

The Ducks bring momentum. They're 7-2-1 in their last 10 and own the underlying play—52.0% 5v5 xG versus 49.0%. Their PDO of 0.981 suggests they're running cold and should benefit from positive regression.

Florida is underwater. Their -5 goal differential over the last 10 games reflects outplay and punishment. Unlike some teams in decline, their PDO of 0.989 indicates the damage isn't due to variance.

Anaheim has the rest edge: one day to Florida's three. L. Dostal faces a back-to-back; expect either a backup start or diminished performance.

At forward, depth breaks toward Anaheim. Sam Bennett drives Florida's offense, but his production relies on sustained volume. Brad Marchand's efficiency is elevated and due for regression. For Anaheim, Beckett Sennecke is both a high-volume generator and efficient finisher. Cutter Gauthier converts at a rate suggesting execution above chance.

Both teams generate at identical 52.0% Corsi, but Anaheim's shot quality advantage should compound.

Players to Watch

  • Sam Bennett (FLA)—0.97 xG/60, 18G 19A, 6 HD goals, 13.1% shooting
  • Brad Marchand (FLA)—0.93 xG/60, 17G 9A, 3 HD goals, 19.5% shooting
  • Beckett Sennecke (ANA)—1.03 xG/60, 20G 19A, 8 HD goals, 13.5% shooting
  • Cutter Gauthier (ANA)—0.99 xG/60, 25G 16A, 2 HD goals, 12.9% shooting

This is a pick'em because neither team has seized control. Ducks own the play; Panthers haven't conceded it yet.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

ANA 55%
55%
ANA
Model favorite
45%
55%
FLA50ANA

ANA by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score FLA 2.5–2.8 ANA; 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
FLA← edge
edge →ANA
49.0%52.0%
52.0%52.0%
2.482.80
2.562.59
1.982.09
2.212.32
0.9890.981

ANA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.989 vs 0.981) says FLA has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
FLA
4-5-1
-5 GD · 3d rest
ANA
7-2-1
+9 GD · 1d rest
0.989
FLA PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.981
ANA PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Ducks own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
Regression watch
  • The Ducks' PDO is 0.981 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Things to watch
  • The Ducks own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
  • L. Dostal is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Ducks are the hotter team by points pace (7-2-1 in their last 10).
  • The Panthers are underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Ducks' PDO is 0.981 — running cold, due for positive regression.
  • The Panthers have 2 more days of rest.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
FLA
Expected in goal
S. Bobrovsky
3 days rest.864 last start
Backup Sergei Bobrovsky · -12.2 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

ANA
Expected in goal
L. Dostal
back-to-back.970 last start
Backup Lukas Dostal · -2.9 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
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
ANA
Beckett Sennecke20G 19A
1.03 xG/60 · 8 HD · 13.5% sh
Cutter Gauthier25G 16A
0.99 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.9% sh
Keep going

Where to next