Motion-blurred skater in a San Jose Sharks sweater
Breakdown · SJS at SEA

Y. Askarov stands tall as the Sharks edge the Kraken

The verdict · stolen

The Sharks stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 2.19–4.62 and won anyway.

SJS 6 · SEA 1
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:43 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 Sharks won 6-1, but Seattle owned the game that mattered most: they controlled 68% of expected goals and dominated shot quality. Y. Askarov made it irrelevant.

The Kraken generated 4.62 expected goals against Sharks 2.19, built on 57% of shot attempts and 12 high-danger chances to San Jose's 2. Seattle crashed relentlessly, combining higher-quality looks (0.066 xG per shot vs. 0.049) with 9 rebound opportunities — all for naught. This should have been a Kraken victory.

Instead, Y. Askarov stopped 3.62 goals above expectation. He made 29 saves on 30 shots with a 0.967 save percentage, surrendering only his expected output on high-danger chances: 92% on 12 HD shots. San Jose's goaltending wall held Seattle at arm's length.

The Kraken's collapse at the other end sealed the heist. J. Daccord gave up 3.09 goals above expected on just 20 shots (0.750 SV%), while M. Murray saw three shots and stopped two. Seattle's expected goals advantage meant nothing when they needed it most.

San Jose escaped with a smash-and-grab thanks to ruthless transition play: 4 goals from 21 rush chances, converting positional disadvantage into victory. Tyler Toffoli's wrist shot from the high slot at 3:54 of the third period exemplified their efficiency.

M. Celebrini (1G, 2A) led the assault; J. Klingberg (1G, 1A) and W. Smith (1G, 1A) added finishing touches.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 5
SJS
6
SEA
1

Y. Askarov stands tall as the Sharks edge the Kraken

Chances 2.2 – 4.6Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Kraken deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
SJS
2.19
SEA
4.62
32% of the chances68%

The board read SJS 6, SEA 1. The chances read SJS 2.2, SEA 4.6.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
SJS
+3.8
goals above expected
SJS2.19 expected · 6 scored
Expected
Scored
SEA4.62 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Sharks scored 3.8 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 01:08SJSM. Celebrini1–0
  2. P1 16:30SEAR. Winterton1–1
  3. P1 18:42SJSE. Cardwell2–1
  4. P2 11:21SJSJ. KlingbergPP3–1
  5. P3 01:02SJSW. Smith4–1
  6. P3 03:24SJST. DellandreaSH5–1
  7. P3 03:54SJST. Toffoli6–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
SJS
33 shots
6
Final
81 shots
SEA
48 shots
1
SJS attackSEA attack
SJS SEA Goal
33
shots · 6 in
48
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
SJSSEA
1 / 2
0.51 xG
High danger
1 / 12
2.47 xG
4 / 12
1.24 xG
Medium
0 / 12
1.46 xG
1 / 31
0.45 xG
Low
0 / 46
0.69 xG

High-danger looks: SJS 1 of 2, SEA 1 of 12.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
Y. Askarov
+3.6
SJS · 29/30
B+
M. Murray
+1.2
SEA · 2/3
+1 more on the full breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Y. Askarov stands tall as the Sharks edge the Kraken

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 6–11
  1. 01:08SJSM. Celebrini(T. Toffoli, J. Klingberg)1–0
  2. 16:30SEAR. Winterton(R. Lindgren, S. Wright)1–1
  3. 18:42SJSE. Cardwell(A. Wennberg, J. Skinner)2–1
2ndshots 11–5
  1. 11:21SJSJ. Klingbergpower play(W. Smith, M. Celebrini)3–1
3rdshots 6–14
  1. 01:02SJSW. Smith(M. Ferraro, M. Celebrini)4–1
  2. 03:24SJST. Dellandreashorthanded(C. Graf)5–1
  3. 03:54SJST. Toffoli(S. Mukhamadullin)6–1

score reads SJS–SEA

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
2.19
SJS chances
Goals their shots were worth
+3.8
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.119
SJS puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
39.1%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.19Expected goals4.62
SEA 68% of the chance quality
23Shots on goal30
2High-danger chances12
45All attempts (Corsi)70
Adjusted for score: SJS 34% · SEA 66%
Faceoffs · SEA won65%off57%neu46%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
SJS1 / 2 · 0.51 xG
SEA1 / 12 · 2.47 xG
Medium dangermid-range
SJS4 / 12 · 1.24 xG
SEA0 / 12 · 1.46 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
SJS1 / 31 · 0.45 xG
SEA0 / 46 · 0.69 xG

SJS went 4-for-12 from medium danger on 1.24 expected goals — 2.8 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
SJS
6 G · 2.19 xG · +3.8
SEA
1 G · 4.62 xG · -3.6
01234567

SJS finished +3.8 against expected, SEA -3.6.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
SJS
WRIST3/21
SLAP1/3
TIP IN0/3
SNAP2/6
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/12
SEA
WRIST1/33
SLAP0/7
TIP IN0/5
SNAP0/1
DEFLECTED0/2
OTHER0/22
SJS
SEA
Off the rush
4 G on 21
1.70 xG
0 G on 27
2.35 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 1
0.26 xG
0 G on 9
1.67 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: SJS went 3-for-21, SEA 1-for-33. SJS 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
Y. Askarov
SJS · 29/30 · .967
+3.6
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/122.5+1.5
Medium0/121.5+1.5
Low0/460.7+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

M. Murray
SEA · 2/3 · .667
+1.2
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/20.5-0.5
Medium4/121.2-2.8
Low1/310.5-0.6

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

J. Daccord
SEA · 15/20 · .750
-2.8
saved above expected
F
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/20.5-0.5
Medium4/121.2-2.8
Low1/310.5-0.6

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

81 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
SJS
33 shots
6
Final
81 shots
SEA
48 shots
1
SJS attackSEA attack
SJS SEA Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — SJS left, SEA 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
M. Celebrini
#71 · C · SJS
1 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 18:34 on ice · +2
J. Klingberg
#3 · D · SJS
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 16:14 on ice · +2
W. Smith
#2 · C · SJS
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 14:43 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Wed, Nov 5
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:42 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 Kraken are favored at 51% win probability in a game the models project to land near 2.4-2.5 goals. This is as close to a pick'em as hockey gets.

That near-parity reflects the teams' underlying numbers. San Jose holds an edge in shot quality, with a 48.0% expected goals share against Seattle's 46.0%, and a similar small advantage in Corsi at 47.0% to 45.0%. Yet Seattle's PDO sits at 1.011—the Kraken are converting better than their shot metrics suggest—while the Sharks' 0.998 indicates they're underperforming their own chance creation.

Recent context tilts the scales. San Jose is -5 on goal differential over its last 10 games, meaning the team's underlying edge has yet to materialize into wins.

Pavol Regenda was San Jose's primary scoring threat on paper: 1.10 expected goals per 60, 5 goals, 2 high-danger chances, 16.1% shooting. He's marked inactive for this matchup. Igor Chernyshov inherits the load with 0.91 xG/60, 6 goals, 8 assists, and 15.0% shooting. Seattle counters with Shane Wright (0.77 xG/60, 8 goals, 10 assists, 4 high-danger chances) and Berkly Catton (0.68 xG/60, 6 goals, 8 assists, 5 HD goals), representing the Kraken's depth scoring punch.

J. Daccord is on the back-to-back, creating the added variable of either a backup or a fatigued starter between the pipes.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

SEA 51%
51%
SEA
Model favorite
49%
51%
SJS50SEA

SEA by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score SJS 2.4–2.5 SEA; 19% 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 →SEA
48.0%46.0%
47.0%45.0%
2.332.13
2.562.51
1.991.87
2.321.95
0.9981.011

SJS holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.998 vs 1.011) says SEA has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
SJS
4-5-1
-5 GD · 2d rest
SEA
4-2-4
-3 GD · 1d rest
0.998
SJS PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.011
SEA PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Things to watch
  • J. Daccord is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Sharks are underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
SJS
Expected in goal
A. Nedeljkovic
2 days rest.938 last start
Backup Yaroslav Askarov · -18.9 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

SEA
Expected in goal
J. Daccord
back-to-back.967 last start
Backup Joey Daccord · -6.2 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
SEA
Shane Wright8G 10A
0.77 xG/60 · 4 HD · 10.4% sh
Berkly Catton6G 8A
0.68 xG/60 · 5 HD · 8.8% sh
Keep going

Where to next