Motion-blurred skater in a Philadelphia Flyers sweater

Breakdown · PHI at STL

Flyers edge the Blues in a shootout

Final / OTFri, Nov 14

PHIPhiladelphia Flyers6 STLSt. Louis Blues5

The verdict · earned

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

PHI 6 · STL 5

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 4:00 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 Flyers' 6-5 shootout victory masks their superiority in the danger zone—they generated six high-danger chances to St. Louis's three, a 2-to-1 edge that rarely resolves by a single goal. Both teams caught breaks: the Blues overperformed their expected goals by 2.55 and the Flyers by 2.75, with variance pulling both ways.

The shot profile reinforced the imbalance. Philadelphia out-attempted St. Louis 31–17 and controlled 57% of expected goals (3.25–2.45), a 14-percentage-point edge that typically forecasts a multi-goal margin. One shootout settled it.

Goaltending underperformed on both sides. S. Ersson stopped 12 of 17 shots (0.706 SV%), underperforming his expected performance by 2.55 goals. J. Binnington made 26 of 31 saves (0.839 SV%), underperforming by 1.75 goals. Trevor Zegras's backhander from the slot decided the game—a moment of freezeframe drama that transcended what the metrics predicted.

Three Stars

#74 O. Tippett (PHI) — 1G, 3A in 15:57
#46 T. Zegras (PHI) — 2G, 1A in 20:02
#22 C. Dvorak (PHI) — 2G, 1A in 16:14

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · SO · Nov 14

PHI

STL

Flyers edge the Blues in a shootout

Chances 3.3 – 2.5Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Flyers earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

PHI

3.25

STL

2.45

57% of the chances43%

The board read PHI 6, STL 5. The chances read PHI 3.3, STL 2.5.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations

Luck check

PHI

+2.8

goals above expected

PHI3.25 expected · 6 scored

Expected

Scored

STL2.45 expected · 5 scored

Expected

Scored

The Flyers scored 2.8 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season

Every goal, in order

P1 01:19STLJ. Kyrou0–1
P1 08:18PHIT. Zegras1–1
P1 09:42STLJ. Snuggerud1–2
P2 06:54STLJ. Faulk1–3
P2 07:17PHIC. Dvorak2–3
P2 18:24PHIT. Zegras3–3
P3 00:40STLD. Holloway3–4

+4 more on the full breakdown

NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model

Where the shots came from

PHI

42 shots

Final

74 shots

STL

32 shots

PHI STL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 6 in

shots · 5 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

PHISTL

1 / 6

1.44 xG

High danger

0 / 3

0.82 xG

3 / 12

1.36 xG

Medium

3 / 11

1.14 xG

1 / 34

0.45 xG

Low

2 / 33

0.49 xG

The Blues went 0 for 3 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance

In the net

J. Binnington

−1.8

STL · 26/31

S. Ersson

−2.5

PHI · 12/17

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Flyers edge the Blues in a shootout

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 8–8

01:19STLJ. Kyrou0–1
08:18PHIT. Zegras(C. Dvorak, T. Sanheim)1–1
09:42STLJ. Snuggerud(R. Thomas)1–2

2ndshots 11–4

06:54STLJ. Faulk(C. Fowler, O. Sundqvist)1–3
07:17PHIC. Dvorak(O. Tippett, E. Andrae)2–3
18:24PHIT. Zegras(E. Andrae, O. Tippett)3–3

3rdshots 6–4

00:40STLD. Holloway(J. Kyrou, C. Fowler)3–4
04:56STLR. Thomas(J. Snuggerud)3–5
07:53PHIC. Dvorak(O. Tippett)4–5
10:29PHIO. Tippett(T. Zegras, N. Juulsen)5–5

OTshots 6–1no goals

00:00PHIT. Zegraspower play5–5

score reads PHI–STL

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.25

PHI chances

Goals their shots were worth

+2.8

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

0.990

PHI puck luck

About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces

52.5%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.25Expected goals2.45

PHI 57% of the chance quality

31Shots on goal17

6High-danger chances3

52All attempts (Corsi)47

Adjusted for score: PHI 56% · STL 44%

Faceoffs · STL won47%off65%neu53%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

PHI1 / 6 · 1.44 xG

STL0 / 3 · 0.82 xG

Medium dangermid-range

PHI3 / 12 · 1.36 xG

STL3 / 11 · 1.14 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

PHI1 / 34 · 0.45 xG

STL2 / 33 · 0.49 xG

STL went 3-for-11 from medium danger on 1.14 expected goals — 1.9 above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

PHI

6 G · 3.25 xG · +2.8

STL

5 G · 2.45 xG · +2.5

01234567

PHI finished +2.8 against expected, STL +2.5.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

PHI

WRIST2/26

SNAP1/3

SLAP0/3

BACKHAND1/4

TIP IN1/3

DEFLECTED0/1

OTHER0/12

STL

WRIST3/17

SNAP1/5

SLAP1/4

BACKHAND0/1

TIP IN0/2

DEFLECTED0/0

OTHER0/18

PHI

STL

Off the rush

4 G on 23

2.07 xG

4 G on 21

1.87 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 3

0.62 xG

0 G on 2

0.32 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: PHI went 2-for-26, STL 3-for-17. PHI 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

S. Ersson

PHI · 12/17 · .706

-2.5

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/30.8+0.8

Medium3/111.1-1.9

Low2/330.5-1.5

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

J. Binnington

STL · 26/31 · .839

-1.8

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/61.4+0.4

Medium3/121.4-1.6

Low1/340.5-0.6

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

74 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

PHI

42 shots

Final

74 shots

STL

32 shots

PHI STL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — PHI left, STL 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

O. Tippett

#74 · R · PHI

1 G · 3 A · 4 SOG · 15:57 on ice · +4

T. Zegras

#46 · C · PHI

2 G · 1 A · 7 SOG · 20:02 on ice · +1

C. Dvorak

#22 · C · PHI

2 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 16:14 on ice · +2

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Fri, Nov 14

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 4:12 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 2.3–2.4 goal spread with the Blues at 51% win probability. This is as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

St. Louis arrives struggling. Over their last 10, they're minus-11 in goal differential—not insignificant for a single evening. But the 5v5 picture is tighter. Philadelphia's expected goals percentage is 51.0% to St. Louis's 49.0%, yet their Corsi% is locked at 48.0% for both teams. The only daylight: Philadelphia's PDO sits at 1.008 versus St. Louis's 1.000—marginal separation born of variance, not dominance.

D. Vladar enters on a back-to-back. A backup appearance or a spent starter could reshape a game this even.

Philadelphia leans on Owen Tippett, who generates 0.88 expected goals per 60 minutes while posting 19 goals and 18 assists. Two of those are high-danger chances; his 12.1% shooting rate is elite. Christian Dvorak trails marginally at 0.81 xG/60 but offsets with 12 goals, 21 assists, and three high-danger tallies at 11.2% shooting.

St. Louis counters with Jimmy Snuggerud at 0.86 xG/60, 15 goals, 22 assists, and two high-danger goals on 11.9% shooting. Dylan Holloway mirrors the profile: 0.82 xG/60, 13 goals, 24 assists, one high-danger goal, 10.8% shooting. Both wings are high-volume creators converting at top rates.

Underlying structure is present for both attacks. Whether it translates through goaltending uncertainty and St. Louis's recent funk is the test. At 51%, the model is genuinely split.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

STL 51%

51%

STL

Model favorite

49%

51%

PHI50STL

STL by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score PHI 2.3–2.4 STL; 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 →STL

51.0%49.0%

48.0%48.0%

2.262.34

2.202.40

1.962.00

1.822.12

1.0081.000

The season numbers split 3–3 — no clear process edge — and the luck row (1.008 vs 1.000) says PHI has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

PHI

5-3-2

+1 GD · 1d rest

STL

3-5-2

-11 GD · 2d rest

1.008

PHI PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.000

STL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Things to watch

D. Vladar is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Blues 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.935 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.

STL

Expected in goal

J. Binnington

2 days rest.950 last start

Backup Joel Hofer · +11.7 GSAx this season

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

STL

Jimmy Snuggerud15G 22A

0.86 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.9% sh

Dylan Holloway13G 24A

0.82 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.8% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page