Motion-blurred skater in a Philadelphia Flyers sweater
Breakdown · PHI at NSH

D. Vladar stands tall as the Flyers edge the Predators

The verdict · stolen

The Flyers stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.66–4.35 and won anyway.

PHI 3 · NSH 1
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:15 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

Nashville generated superior scoring chances and lost 3-1. Expected goals favored the Predators 4.35–3.66, a 54-46 split — yet the scoreboard belonged to Philadelphia. D. Vladar's goaltending turned a numbers game into a one-way result.

The Flyers' netminder saved 3.35 goals above expected with a 0.958 save percentage. On high-danger chances, he stopped all six he faced. Nashville generated six high-danger chances of its own and converted zero — a disconnect between opportunity and execution that usually corrects itself.

That's where the breakdown lived. The Predators held 48% of shot attempts (24–26 on goal) and created six rebound opportunities without landing any. They had the better underlying game. J. Saros, facing 25 shots, actually outperformed expected by 1.66 goals, but Vladar's performance didn't allow that competence to register on the scoreboard.

Philadelphia's path to victory bypassed close contests. The Flyers scored two goals on 22 rush chances, translating transition into points. T. Konecny's wrist shot from the high slot (18:47, period three) typified the approach: speed, space, precision.

The Three Stars distilled the game. C. York posted two assists in 24:55, orchestrating from the back line. Konecny added a goal and an assist in 18:43, his efficiency a counterpoint to Nashville's struggle. N. Blankenburg earned the final star with one assist in 23:10, Nashville's most consistent presence in a team that underperformed by 3.35 goals.

When one team generates better chances and loses, the scoresheet credits execution. It should credit D. Vladar.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 6
PHI
3
NSH
1

D. Vladar stands tall as the Flyers edge the Predators

Chances 3.7 – 4.3Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Predators deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
PHI
3.66
NSH
4.35
46% of the chances54%

The board read PHI 3, NSH 1. The chances read PHI 3.7, NSH 4.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
PHI
−0.7
goals above expected
PHI3.66 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
NSH4.35 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Predators left 3.4 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 01:44NSHR. O'Reilly0–1
  2. P2 04:43PHIM. Michkov1–1
  3. P2 17:37PHIN. Cates2–1
  4. P3 18:47PHIT. KonecnyEN3–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
PHI
34 shots
3
Final
83 shots
NSH
49 shots
1
PHI attackNSH attack
PHI NSH Goal
34
shots · 3 in
49
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
PHINSH
2 / 6
2.18 xG
High danger
0 / 6
1.41 xG
1 / 10
1.05 xG
Medium
1 / 20
2.35 xG
0 / 32
0.43 xG
Low
0 / 40
0.59 xG

The Predators went 0 for 6 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
D. Vladar
+3.4
PHI · 23/24
A
J. Saros
+1.7
NSH · 23/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

D. Vladar stands tall as the Flyers edge the Predators

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 7–10
  1. 01:44NSHR. O'Reilly(F. Forsberg, N. Blankenburg)0–1
2ndshots 10–10
  1. 04:43PHIM. Michkov(C. York, S. Couturier)1–1
  2. 17:37PHIN. Cates(J. Drysdale, T. Konecny)2–1
3rdshots 9–4
  1. 18:47PHIT. Konecnyempty net(C. Dvorak, C. York)3–1

score reads PHI–NSH

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.66
PHI chances
Goals their shots were worth
−0.7
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.047
PHI puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
42.1%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.66Expected goals4.35
NSH 54% of the chance quality
26Shots on goal24
6High-danger chances6
48All attempts (Corsi)66
Adjusted for score: PHI 42% · NSH 58%
Faceoffs · NSH won50%off61%neu46%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
PHI2 / 6 · 2.18 xG
NSH0 / 6 · 1.41 xG
Medium dangermid-range
PHI1 / 10 · 1.05 xG
NSH1 / 20 · 2.35 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
PHI0 / 32 · 0.43 xG
NSH0 / 40 · 0.59 xG

NSH went 0-for-6 from high danger on 1.41 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
PHI
3 G · 3.66 xG · -0.7
NSH
1 G · 4.35 xG · -3.4
012345

PHI finished -0.7 against expected, NSH -3.4.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
PHI
WRIST3/21
TIP IN0/2
SLAP0/3
SNAP0/4
BACKHAND0/3
WRAP AROUND0/0
POKE0/1
DEFLECTED0/0
BAT0/0
OTHER0/14
NSH
WRIST0/19
TIP IN0/11
SLAP0/7
SNAP0/5
BACKHAND0/3
WRAP AROUND0/2
POKE0/0
DEFLECTED1/1
BAT0/1
OTHER0/17
PHI
NSH
Off the rush
2 G on 22
2.48 xG
1 G on 28
3.01 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 3
0.44 xG
0 G on 6
0.91 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: PHI went 3-for-21, NSH 0-for-19. PHI scored 2 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
D. Vladar
PHI · 23/24 · .958
+3.4
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/61.4+1.4
Medium1/202.4+1.4
Low0/400.6+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

J. Saros
NSH · 23/25 · .920
+1.7
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/62.2+0.2
Medium1/101.1+0.1
Low0/320.4+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

83 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
PHI
34 shots
3
Final
83 shots
NSH
49 shots
1
PHI attackNSH attack
PHI NSH Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — PHI 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
C. York
#8 · D · PHI
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 24:55 on ice · +3
T. Konecny
#11 · R · PHI
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 18:43 on ice · +1
N. Blankenburg
#37 · D · NSH
0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 23:10 on ice
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Thu, Nov 6
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:52 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 models won't pick a winner. Projections land Philadelphia between 2.4 and 2.5 goals, Nashville at 51%—a differential so slight it barely separates prediction from tossing a coin.

Nashville sits -11 in goal differential over its last 10, a genuine warning sign beneath the close projection. The underlying numbers don't explain away that deficit: Philadelphia leads 51.0% to 49.0% in expected goals, though Nashville edges the shot volume race at 50.0% Corsi% to 48.0%. The real problem is luck. Nashville's PDO sits at 0.992 while Philadelphia sits at 1.008—a gap suggesting variance is working against the Predators.

Both teams face back-to-back fatigue. J. Annunen and D. Vladar each carry the toll; watch for a backup appearance or a starter running on fumes.

Offense tilts toward Philadelphia, barely. Owen Tippett generates 0.88 expected goals per 60 and has scored 19 times on 12.1% shooting—the kind of efficiency that tends to hold, backed by two high-danger goals. Christian Dvorak sits at 0.81 xG/60 with 12 goals on 11.2% shooting and three high-danger goals, a secondary threat worth monitoring.

Nashville's two scorers cut different profiles. Zachary L'Heureux owns a 16.0% shooting rate on just four goals; his expected output far exceeds what he's scored, making him volatile and potentially due for regression. Filip Forsberg, meanwhile, has produced at volume: 23 goals and a 13.6% shooting rate, with four high-danger goals.

Each team has a defensive weak link the other will hunt: Christian Dvorak for Philadelphia, Jonathan Marchessault for Nashville. Not catastrophes, just angles.

Neither team shoots well on high-danger chances or rebounds—both sit at 0%. It's a statistical oddity, but if either finds a rebound goal or a tip-in, the illusion of tightness breaks fast.

The projection holds: too even to call.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

NSH 51%
51%
NSH
Model favorite
49%
51%
PHI50NSH

NSH by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score PHI 2.4–2.5 NSH; 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
PHI← edge
edge →NSH
51.0%49.0%
48.0%50.0%
2.262.48
2.202.58
1.961.84
1.822.21
1.0080.992

PHI holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.008 vs 0.992) says PHI has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
PHI
6-4-0
+2 GD · 1d rest
NSH
3-5-2
-11 GD · 1d rest
1.008
PHI PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.992
NSH PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Things to watch
  • J. Annunen is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • D. Vladar is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Predators are underwater at -11 goal differential over their last 10.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
PHI
Expected in goal
D. Vladar
back-to-back.800 last start
Backup Dan Vladar · +13.8 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.

NSH
Expected in goal
J. Annunen
back-to-back.917 last start
Backup Juuse Saros · -9.3 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
PHI
Owen Tippett19G 18A
0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.1% sh
Christian Dvorak12G 21A
0.81 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.2% 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