Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a San Jose Sharks sweater
← Tue, Nov 11 · the slate
Breakdown · SJS at MIN

Y. Askarov stands tall as the Sharks edge the Wild

Final / OTTue, Nov 11
SJSSan Jose Sharks2MINMinnesota Wild1
The verdict · stolen

The Sharks stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 2.93–3.73 and won anyway.

SJS 2 · MIN 1
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:34 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

Minnesota controlled this game and lost. The Wild dominated expected goals at 56%, generating 3.73 xG to San Jose's 2.93, yet fell 2-1 in overtime—a complete divergence between what the math predicts and what happened.

Minnesota held the ice: 62% of shot attempts (29–18 on goal), six high-danger chances to three. Y. Askarov saved 2.73 goals above expected, denying Minnesota's advantage from translating to the scoreboard. F. Gustavsson posted a 0.889 SV%. Minnesota's underlying issue was efficiency: they underperformed their expected goals by 2.73, squandering their dominant possession.

San Jose capitalized off the rush: two goals on 20 rush chances. Minnesota generated four rebound opportunities but converted none, amplifying the gap between their control and their finish.

Collin Graf's backhander from the doorstep at 02:41 of overtime sealed it—the moment Minnesota's dominance became irrelevant.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · OT · Nov 11
SJS
2
MIN
1

Y. Askarov stands tall as the Sharks edge the Wild

Chances 2.9 – 3.7Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Wild deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
SJS
2.93
MIN
3.73
44% of the chances56%

The board read SJS 2, MIN 1. The chances read SJS 2.9, MIN 3.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
SJS
−0.9
goals above expected
SJS2.93 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored
MIN3.73 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Wild left 2.7 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. P2 05:02MINM. BoldyPP0–1
  2. P3 11:57SJSW. SmithPP1–1
  3. OT 02:41SJSC. Graf2–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
SJS
31 shots
2
Final
76 shots
MIN
45 shots
1
SJS attackMIN attack
SJS MIN Goal
31
shots · 2 in
45
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
SJSMIN
2 / 6
1.51 xG
High danger
1 / 3
0.62 xG
0 / 9
1.04 xG
Medium
0 / 21
2.62 xG
0 / 34
0.37 xG
Low
0 / 34
0.48 xG

The Sharks buried 2 of 6 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
Y. Askarov
+2.7
SJS · 28/29
B+
F. Gustavsson
+0.9
MIN · 16/18
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Y. Askarov stands tall as the Sharks edge the Wild

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 5–8no goals
    2ndshots 5–15
    1. 05:02MINM. Boldypower play(M. Zuccarello, Z. Buium)0–1
    3rdshots 7–6
    1. 11:57SJSW. Smithpower play(M. Celebrini, T. Toffoli)1–1
    OTshots 1–0
    1. 02:41SJSC. Graf(M. Celebrini, S. Dickinson)2–1

    score reads SJS–MIN

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    2.93
    SJS chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    −0.9
    Finishing
    Goals below what those chances were worth
    1.024
    SJS puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    45.8%
    Shot attempts
    Under half — they were outshot
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    2.93Expected goals3.73
    MIN 56% of the chance quality
    18Shots on goal29
    6High-danger chances3
    49All attempts (Corsi)58
    Adjusted for score: SJS 48% · MIN 53%
    Faceoffs · MIN won40%off60%neu52%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    SJS2 / 6 · 1.51 xG
    MIN1 / 3 · 0.62 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    SJS0 / 9 · 1.04 xG
    MIN0 / 21 · 2.62 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    SJS0 / 34 · 0.37 xG
    MIN0 / 34 · 0.48 xG

    MIN went 0-for-21 from medium danger on 2.62 expected goals — 2.6 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    SJS
    2 G · 2.93 xG · -0.9
    MIN
    1 G · 3.73 xG · -2.7
    012345

    SJS finished -0.9 against expected, MIN -2.7.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    SJS
    WRIST0/15
    SNAP1/7
    TIP IN0/3
    BACKHAND1/3
    SLAP0/2
    DEFLECTED0/1
    OTHER0/18
    MIN
    WRIST0/23
    SNAP1/6
    TIP IN0/7
    BACKHAND0/6
    SLAP0/3
    DEFLECTED0/0
    OTHER0/13
    SJS
    MIN
    Off the rush
    2 G on 20
    2.46 xG
    1 G on 31
    2.83 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 1
    0.16 xG
    0 G on 4
    0.57 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: SJS went 0-for-15, MIN 0-for-23. SJS 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
    Y. Askarov
    SJS · 28/29 · .966
    +2.7
    saved above expected
    A+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/30.6-0.4
    Medium0/212.6+2.6
    Low0/340.5+0.5

    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

    F. Gustavsson
    MIN · 16/18 · .889
    +0.9
    saved above expected
    B+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger2/61.5-0.5
    Medium0/91.0+1.0
    Low0/340.4+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

    76 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    SJS
    31 shots
    2
    Final
    76 shots
    MIN
    45 shots
    1
    SJS attackMIN attack
    SJS MIN Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — SJS left, MIN 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
    0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 19:03 on ice · +1
    Z. Buium
    #8 · D · MIN
    0 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 26:08 on ice
    M. Boldy
    #12 · L · MIN
    1 G · 0 A · 5 SOG · 23:15 on ice
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Tue, Nov 11
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:32 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 projects a 2.4-2.7 game with Minnesota at 56% win probability. The Wild earn that edge through structural advantage at five-on-five: they generate 52.0% expected goals to San Jose's 48.0%, and control 48.0% of shot attempts to the Sharks' 47.0%. These are small margins, but they compound over time, especially when coupled with Minnesota's 1.007 PDO to San Jose's 0.998—Minnesota's conversion efficiency should persist while San Jose's should regress.

    San Jose enters hotter, 7-2-1 in their last ten games, but recent momentum doesn't erase season-long underlying patterns. The Sharks' offensive load rests on Pavol Regenda (1.10 expected goals per 60 minutes, 5 goals, 1 assist, 2 high-danger goals, 16.1% shooting) and Igor Chernyshov (0.91 xG/60, 6 goals, 8 assists, 1 high-danger goal, 15.0% shooting). Both carry scoring weight individually, but neither generates enough volume to overcome Minnesota's depth.

    Matt Boldy leads the Wild at 0.89 xG/60 with 22 goals, 18 assists, and 5 high-danger goals. His output alone exceeds San Jose's top scorers. Robby Fabbri (0.88 xG/60, 2 goals, 3 assists, 1 high-danger goal, 6.9% shooting) is likely out, removing Minnesota's secondary threat without material impact.

    J. Wallstedt faces a back-to-back assignment, a vulnerability worth noting. A tired starter or backup move favors San Jose's hot streak. But even tired goaltending rarely overturns underlying-play advantages this large.

    The math holds: Minnesota's shot-quality and volume edge should narrow San Jose's momentum. Trust the underlying play.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    MIN 56%
    56%
    MIN
    Model favorite
    44%
    56%
    SJS50MIN

    MIN by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score SJS 2.4–2.7 MIN; 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
    SJS← edge
    edge →MIN
    48.0%52.0%
    47.0%48.0%
    2.332.55
    2.562.40
    1.992.04
    2.321.93
    0.9981.007

    MIN holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.998 vs 1.007) says MIN has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    SJS
    7-2-1
    +10 GD · 2d rest
    MIN
    4-4-2
    -4 GD · 1d rest
    0.998
    SJS PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    1.007
    MIN PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Where the edges live
    • The Wild own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
    Things to watch
    • The Wild own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
    • J. Wallstedt is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • The Sharks are the hotter team by points pace (7-2-1 in their last 10).
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    SJS
    Expected in goal
    Y. Askarov
    2 days rest.974 last start
    Backup Yaroslav Askarov · -18.9 GSAx this season

    No completed game on file for this club yet.

    MIN
    Expected in goal
    J. Wallstedt
    back-to-back1.000 last start
    Backup Filip Gustavsson · +1.4 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
    MIN
    Matt Boldy22G 18A
    0.89 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh
    Robby Fabbri2G 3A
    0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.9% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next

    Back to the front page