Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Florida Panthers sweater
← Mon, Nov 10 · the slate
Breakdown · FLA at VGK

Panthers hold off the Golden Knights

FinalMon, Nov 10
FLAFlorida Panthers3VGKVegas Golden Knights2
The verdict · stolen

The Panthers stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 2.50–2.99 and won anyway.

FLA 3 · VGK 2
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:30 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

Vegas dominated the underlying metrics and still lost. The Golden Knights held 62% of shot attempts (32–20 on goal) and led expected goals 2.99–2.50, yet fell 3-2 to Florida.

S. Bobrovsky was the difference. He stopped 30 of 32 shots, posting a 0.938 save percentage—a 0.99 overperformance versus expected. Vegas squandered their advantage: C. Lindbom surrendered 3 goals on 20 shots (0.850 SV%), and the Knights underperformed their 2.99 expected goals by 0.99, missing chances their volume should have converted.

High-danger situations favored Vegas 4-3, but Florida's breakthrough came via the rush. The Panthers converted 3 goals on 25 rush chances (12% conversion), exploiting Vegas's transition defense. The Knights created 3 rebound opportunities and converted one.

Ivan Barbashev's snap shot from a sharp angle at 9:04 of the third period marked the game's turning point. Florida's rush efficiency and Bobrovsky's hot goaltending proved sufficient.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 10
FLA
3
VGK
2

Panthers hold off the Golden Knights

Chances 2.5 – 3.0Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Golden Knights deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
FLA
2.50
VGK
2.99
46% of the chances54%

The board read FLA 3, VGK 2. The chances read FLA 2.5, VGK 3.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
FLA
+0.5
goals above expected
FLA2.50 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
VGK2.99 expected · 2 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
  1. P1 14:47FLAJ. Boqvist1–0
  2. P2 10:54FLAB. Marchand2–0
  3. P3 01:25VGKT. Hertl2–1
  4. P3 04:54FLAS. ReinhartPP3–1
  5. P3 09:04VGKI. Barbashev3–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
FLA
37 shots
3
Final
82 shots
VGK
45 shots
2
FLA attackVGK attack
FLA VGK Goal
37
shots · 3 in
45
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
FLAVGK
0 / 4
0.97 xG
High danger
1 / 3
0.70 xG
2 / 10
0.95 xG
Medium
1 / 11
1.50 xG
1 / 38
0.58 xG
Low
0 / 44
0.79 xG

High-danger looks: FLA 0 of 4, VGK 1 of 3.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
S. Bobrovsky
+1.0
FLA · 30/32
D
C. Lindbom
−0.5
VGK · 17/20
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Panthers hold off the Golden Knights

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 10–13
  1. 14:47FLAJ. Boqvist(D. Sebrango, J. Petry)1–0
2ndshots 9–7
  1. 10:54FLAB. Marchand(G. Forsling, D. Sebrango)2–0
3rdshots 1–12
  1. 01:25VGKT. Hertl(S. Theodore)2–1
  2. 04:54FLAS. Reinhartpower play(S. Jones, B. Marchand)3–1
  3. 09:04VGKI. Barbashev(B. McNabb, M. Marner)3–2

score reads FLA–VGK

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
2.50
FLA chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.5
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.023
FLA puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
47.3%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.50Expected goals2.99
VGK 54% of the chance quality
20Shots on goal32
4High-danger chances3
52All attempts (Corsi)58
Adjusted for score: FLA 44% · VGK 56%
Faceoffs · VGK won59%off38%neu44%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
FLA0 / 4 · 0.97 xG
VGK1 / 3 · 0.70 xG
Medium dangermid-range
FLA2 / 10 · 0.95 xG
VGK1 / 11 · 1.50 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
FLA1 / 38 · 0.58 xG
VGK0 / 44 · 0.79 xG

FLA went 2-for-10 from medium danger on 0.95 expected goals — 1.1 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
FLA
3 G · 2.50 xG · +0.5
VGK
2 G · 2.99 xG · -1.0
01234

FLA finished +0.5 against expected, VGK -1.0.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
FLA
WRIST0/14
SNAP0/12
SLAP1/3
TIP IN1/4
BACKHAND1/3
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/15
VGK
WRIST1/18
SNAP1/9
SLAP0/11
TIP IN0/4
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/13
FLA
VGK
Off the rush
3 G on 25
1.98 xG
1 G on 23
2.13 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 0
0.00 xG
1 G on 3
0.50 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: FLA went 0-for-14, VGK 1-for-18. FLA 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
S. Bobrovsky
FLA · 30/32 · .938
+1.0
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/30.7-0.3
Medium1/111.5+0.5
Low0/440.8+0.8

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. Lindbom
VGK · 17/20 · .850
-0.5
saved above expected
D
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/41.0+1.0
Medium2/100.9-1.1
Low1/380.6-0.4

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

82 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
FLA
37 shots
3
Final
82 shots
VGK
45 shots
2
FLA attackVGK attack
FLA VGK Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — FLA left, VGK 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
B. Marchand
#63 · L · FLA
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 18:52 on ice · +1
D. Sebrango
#6 · D · FLA
0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 12:18 on ice · +2
G. Forsling
#42 · D · FLA
0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 24:14 on ice
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Nov 10
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:47 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

Vegas owns this matchup on paper. The model projects a 2.3–2.7 game with the Golden Knights at 56% win probability, a cushion built on superior underlying play.

The possession advantage is clear. Vegas controls 54.0% xG% to Florida's 49.0%, an eight-point edge reflecting consistent superiority in chance creation. Both teams sit at 52.0% Corsi%, but xG% splits reveal the real separation: Vegas generates cleaner looks. Florida's recent form compounds the problem—the Panthers are -6 in goal differential over their last 10, suggesting execution has lagged process.

Regression math favors Vegas. The Golden Knights' 0.983 PDO indicates bad luck—they're underperforming their actual shot quality. Florida's 0.989 PDO runs closer to neutral, meaning Vegas is mathematically due for better puck luck. Small shot-conversion improvements can swing close games.

Goaltending adds uncertainty. Both A. Schmid and D. Tarasov face back-to-backs, creating a realistic path to tired starters or mid-game swaps. That fatigue can swing variance in an otherwise lean matchup.

Florida's scoring depends on two elite threats. Sam Bennett (18G 19A, 0.97 xG/60) is creating and finishing at elite rates—his 13.1% shooting is well above sustainable. Brad Marchand's 19.5% shooting clip on 17G 9A carries equal regression risk. Vegas counters with distributed scoring: Tomas Hertl (5G 17A, 0.88 xG/60) generates high volume despite modest goal totals. Brandon Saad, normally a third scoring layer, is marked inactive.

Brad Marchand represents Florida's defensive vulnerability; Rasmus Andersson occupies that role for Vegas. Vegas's shot-quality advantage should allow them to repeatedly test these weaknesses.

Neither team has built wins on high-danger opportunities. Both register 0% high-danger goal rates and 0% rebound goal rate—suggesting neither has leaned on greasy goals. This possession game should break Vegas's way if regression plays out on schedule.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

VGK 56%
56%
VGK
Model favorite
44%
56%
FLA50VGK

VGK by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score FLA 2.3–2.7 VGK; 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 →VGK
49.0%54.0%
52.0%52.0%
2.482.52
2.562.11
1.982.12
2.212.10
0.9890.983

VGK holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.989 vs 0.983) 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
-6 GD · 1d rest
VGK
5-3-2
+3 GD · 1d rest
0.989
FLA PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.983
VGK PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Golden Knights own the underlying play — 54.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
Regression watch
  • The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Things to watch
  • The Golden Knights own the underlying play — 54.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
  • A. Schmid is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • D. Tarasov is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Panthers are underwater at -6 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
FLA
Expected in goal
D. Tarasov
back-to-back.909 last start
Backup Sergei Bobrovsky · -12.2 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.

VGK
Expected in goal
A. Schmid
back-to-back.862 last start
Backup Akira Schmid · -1.0 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
VGK
Brandon Saad3G 6A
0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.1% sh
Tomas Hertl5G 17A
0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.3% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page