Motion-blurred skater in a green sweater
Breakdown · SEA at DAL

Stars hold off the Kraken

The verdict · earned

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

SEA 1 · DAL 2
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:22 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

Dallas won despite fewer shots—31 on goal for Seattle versus 25 for Dallas—a sign of dominance through efficiency. Expected goals bore this out: 3.82–2.88 for Dallas, a 57–43 advantage. The Stars generated 0.071 xG per shot to Seattle's 0.050. Dallas was lethal off the rush, converting 2 goals on 29 chances, while Seattle's 3 rebound opportunities produced nothing.

Both teams underperformed their expected goals against stellar goaltending. Dallas generated 3.82 xG but scored 2; Seattle generated 2.88 but scored 1. C. DeSmith allowed just 1 goal on 31 shots (0.968 SV%, +1.88 above expected), but the high-danger disparity was stark: Dallas generated 6, Seattle 1. M. Murray stopped 23 of 25 (0.920 SV%, +1.82 vs expected) but couldn't overcome the quality advantage. Tyler Seguin's backhander from the doorstep (19:26, P1) sealed it.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 9
SEA
1
DAL
2

Stars hold off the Kraken

Chances 2.9 – 3.8Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Stars earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
SEA
2.88
DAL
3.82
43% of the chances57%

The board read SEA 1, DAL 2. The chances read SEA 2.9, DAL 3.8.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
DAL
−1.8
goals above expected
DAL3.82 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored
SEA2.88 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Kraken left 1.9 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 03:15SEAJ. Schwartz1–0
  2. P1 04:24DALW. JohnstonPP1–1
  3. P1 19:26DALT. Seguin1–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
SEA
41 shots
1
Final
78 shots
DAL
37 shots
2
SEA attackDAL attack
SEA DAL Goal
41
shots · 1 in
37
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
SEADAL
0 / 1
0.21 xG
High danger
1 / 6
1.48 xG
0 / 22
2.27 xG
Medium
1 / 17
1.91 xG
1 / 35
0.41 xG
Low
0 / 31
0.42 xG

High-danger looks: SEA 0 of 1, DAL 1 of 6.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
C. DeSmith
+1.9
DAL · 30/31
A
M. Murray
+1.8
SEA · 23/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Stars hold off 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 7–10
  1. 03:15SEAJ. Schwartz(A. Larsson, V. Dunn)1–0
  2. 04:24DALW. Johnstonpower play(J. Robertson, M. Heiskanen)1–1
  3. 19:26DALT. Seguin(R. Hintz, M. Heiskanen)1–2
2ndshots 15–8no goals
    3rdshots 9–7no goals

      score reads SEA–DAL

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

      The numbers

      XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
      3.82
      DAL chances
      Goals their shots were worth
      −1.8
      Finishing
      Goals below what those chances were worth
      1.020
      DAL puck luck
      About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
      48.2%
      Shot attempts
      Under half — they were outshot
      Split by club

      Who controlled the game

      2.88Expected goals3.82
      DAL 57% of the chance quality
      31Shots on goal25
      1High-danger chances6
      58All attempts (Corsi)54
      Adjusted for score: SEA 54% · DAL 46%
      Faceoffs · DAL won45%off75%neu89%def
      Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
      How the game was won

      The danger ladder

      shotsgoalsexpected
      High dangerslot & crease
      SEA0 / 1 · 0.21 xG
      DAL1 / 6 · 1.48 xG
      Medium dangermid-range
      SEA0 / 22 · 2.27 xG
      DAL1 / 17 · 1.91 xG
      Low dangerperimeter & point
      SEA1 / 35 · 0.41 xG
      DAL0 / 31 · 0.42 xG

      SEA went 0-for-22 from medium danger on 2.27 expected goals — 2.3 left on the table.

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

      Finishing vs expected

      expectedactual
      SEA
      1 G · 2.88 xG · -1.9
      DAL
      2 G · 3.82 xG · -1.8
      012345

      SEA finished -1.9 against expected, DAL -1.8.

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

      Shot diet

      goalsshots
      SEA
      SNAP0/24
      SLAP0/7
      WRIST0/6
      BACKHAND0/2
      TIP IN1/2
      OTHER0/17
      DAL
      SNAP1/23
      SLAP0/2
      WRIST0/2
      BACKHAND1/6
      TIP IN0/4
      OTHER0/17
      SEA
      DAL
      Off the rush
      0 G on 26
      1.78 xG
      2 G on 29
      3.10 xG
      Off rebounds
      0 G on 3
      0.51 xG
      0 G on 2
      0.38 xG

      Snap shots carried the volume: SEA went 0-for-24, DAL 1-for-23. DAL 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
      M. Murray
      SEA · 23/25 · .920
      +1.8
      saved above expected
      A
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger1/61.5+0.5
      Medium1/171.9+0.9
      Low0/310.4+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

      C. DeSmith
      DAL · 30/31 · .968
      +1.9
      saved above expected
      A
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger0/10.2+0.2
      Medium0/222.3+2.3
      Low1/350.4-0.6

      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

      78 shots · press play to watch the game back

      Where the shots came from

      NHL play-by-play coordinates
      SEA
      41 shots
      1
      Final
      78 shots
      DAL
      37 shots
      2
      SEA attackDAL attack
      SEA DAL Goal

      Each club shoots toward its own end — SEA left, DAL 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. Heiskanen
      #4 · D · DAL
      0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 23:43 on ice
      V. Dunn
      #29 · D · SEA
      0 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 23:58 on ice · +1
      A. Larsson
      #6 · D · SEA
      0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 21:07 on ice · +1
      Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
      What the model said beforehand

      Before the game

      Written Sun, Nov 9
      Open the pre-game read
      Written from the numbers

      The read

      Edited for clarity
      ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:44 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

      Dallas is the model's lean at 56% win probability, with the projection landing at 2.2–2.5 goals scored. The edge stems from superior underlying play—the Stars generate 51.0% expected goals to Seattle's 46.0%—but that advantage comes partially baked into an inflated PDO of 1.024. PDO regression is the tax on Dallas's outperformance.

      The Stars' possession metrics support the model. At 5v5, they hold a 47.0%–45.0% Corsi advantage, reflecting both shot volume and quality control. Seattle, by contrast, is underwater at -7 in goal differential over its last 10 games, a sign the Kraken are generating more chances against than for.

      A close contest would mean Dallas's PDO regression reverses some of the underlying advantage. Seattle's 1.011 is more sustainable, though still above neutral. When unsustainable scoring environments collapse—and they do—Dallas loses a margin that looks comfortable today.

      The Stars get a rest edge; they come in on one day off to Seattle's three. More consequential is J. Oettinger's schedule: he's on the back end of a back-to-back and may not start. A tired Oettinger or a backup goalie significantly narrows the Stars' margin.

      Shane Wright drives Seattle's offense at 0.77 expected goals per 60 minutes, posting eight goals, ten assists, and four high-danger chances on a 10.4% shooting rate—elite conversion that outpaces even his strong shot quality. Berkly Catton ranks second at 0.68 xG/60, with six goals, eight assists, and five high-danger chances at 8.8% shooting.

      Jason Robertson anchors Dallas at 0.96 xG/60, 25 goals, 21 assists, and just two high-danger goals, signaling he's earned his totals through volume rather than variance. Michael Bunting provides secondary scoring at 0.83 xG/60, eight goals, 14 assists, and a 7.6% shooting rate that underperforms relative to his shot attempts.

      The model is right to favor Dallas. The underlying play is real. But PDO regression and a potentially compromised Oettinger keep this from being a lock.

      What the model said beforehand

      The model's lean

      DAL 56%
      56%
      DAL
      Model favorite
      44%
      56%
      SEA50DAL

      DAL by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score SEA 2.2–2.5 DAL; 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
      SEA← edge
      edge →DAL
      46.0%51.0%
      45.0%47.0%
      2.132.36
      2.512.29
      1.872.07
      1.951.68
      1.0111.024

      DAL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.011 vs 1.024) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

      Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
      Form · Last 10
      SEA
      4-3-3
      -7 GD · 3d rest
      DAL
      5-2-3
      -4 GD · 1d rest
      1.011
      SEA PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      1.024
      DAL PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      What decides it

      Keys to the game

      Where the edges live
      • The Stars own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.
      Regression watch
      • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
      Things to watch
      • The Stars own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.
      • J. Oettinger is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
      • The Kraken are underwater at -7 goal differential over their last 10.
      • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
      • The Kraken have 2 more days of rest.
      Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

      Lineups

      NHL box score
      SEA
      Expected in goal
      J. Daccord
      3 days rest.750 last start
      Backup Joey Daccord · -6.2 GSAx this season

      No completed game on file for this club yet.

      DAL
      Expected in goal
      J. Oettinger
      back-to-back.810 last start
      Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 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
      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
      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
      Keep going

      Where to next