Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Vegas Golden Knights sweater
← Sat, Nov 15 · the slate
Breakdown · VGK at STL

Golden Knights run the Blues off the ice on the underlying numbers

FinalSat, Nov 15
VGKVegas Golden Knights4STLSt. Louis Blues1
The verdict · earned

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

VGK 4 · STL 1
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 4:43 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 Blues scored once on 2.28 expected goals in a 4-1 loss to Vegas. That 1.28-goal underperformance was the story of the game.

Vegas controlled play with 60% of 5v5 expected goals (3.49–2.28). The Blues managed 23 shot attempts to Vegas's 34. In high-danger chances, Vegas led 5–2.

A. Schmid saved 22 of 23 (0.957 SV%), outperforming expected by 1.28 goals. J. Hofer stopped 30 of 34 (0.882 SV%), underperforming expected by 0.51 goals. The gap in goaltending reflected the gap in the game.

P. Broberg's wrist shot from the point at 15:57 of the first period was the turning point. Vegas dominated after.

Both teams crashed the net inefficiently — the Blues generated six rebound chances and converted zero, Vegas generated four and converted zero. The difference was elsewhere: Vegas found the net on other chances while controlling play; St. Louis didn't.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 15
VGK
4
STL
1

Golden Knights run the Blues off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 3.5 – 2.3Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Golden Knights earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
VGK
3.49
STL
2.28
61% of the chances40%

The board read VGK 4, STL 1. The chances read VGK 3.5, STL 2.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
VGK
+0.5
goals above expected
VGK3.49 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
STL2.28 expected · 1 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 12:52VGKB. Saad1–0
  2. P1 14:58VGKB. BowmanPP2–0
  3. P2 00:36VGKN. Hanifin3–0
  4. P3 11:20VGKT. Hertl4–0
  5. P3 15:57STLP. Broberg4–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
VGK
55 shots
4
Final
89 shots
STL
34 shots
1
VGK attackSTL attack
VGK STL Goal
55
shots · 4 in
34
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
VGKSTL
0 / 5
0.96 xG
High danger
0 / 2
0.46 xG
3 / 16
1.65 xG
Medium
0 / 12
1.31 xG
1 / 51
0.88 xG
Low
1 / 34
0.51 xG

High-danger looks: VGK 0 of 5, STL 0 of 2.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
A. Schmid
+1.3
VGK · 22/23
D
J. Hofer
−0.5
STL · 30/34
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Golden Knights run the Blues off the ice on the underlying numbers

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 13–8
  1. 12:52VGKB. Saad(R. Smith, B. Howden)1–0
  2. 14:58VGKB. Bowmanpower play(P. Dorofeyev, J. Eichel)2–0
2ndshots 15–7
  1. 00:36VGKN. Hanifin(Z. Whitecloud, R. Smith)3–0
3rdshots 6–8
  1. 11:20VGKT. Hertl(P. Dorofeyev)4–0
  2. 15:57STLP. Broberg(R. Thomas, J. Snuggerud)4–1

score reads VGK–STL

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.49
VGK chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.5
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.035
VGK puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
60.0%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.49Expected goals2.28
VGK 61% of the chance quality
34Shots on goal23
5High-danger chances2
72All attempts (Corsi)48
Adjusted for score: VGK 54% · STL 46%
Faceoffs · STL won35%off64%neu56%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
VGK0 / 5 · 0.96 xG
STL0 / 2 · 0.46 xG
Medium dangermid-range
VGK3 / 16 · 1.65 xG
STL0 / 12 · 1.31 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
VGK1 / 51 · 0.88 xG
STL1 / 34 · 0.51 xG

VGK went 3-for-16 from medium danger on 1.65 expected goals — 1.4 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
VGK
4 G · 3.49 xG · +0.5
STL
1 G · 2.28 xG · -1.3
012345

VGK finished +0.5 against expected, STL -1.3.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
VGK
WRIST2/31
SLAP1/10
SNAP0/5
TIP IN1/3
BACKHAND0/3
BAT0/2
WRAP AROUND0/0
DEFLECTED0/0
POKE0/1
OTHER0/17
STL
WRIST1/18
SLAP0/7
SNAP0/2
TIP IN0/3
BACKHAND0/0
BAT0/0
WRAP AROUND0/2
DEFLECTED0/2
POKE0/0
OTHER0/14
VGK
STL
Off the rush
2 G on 26
2.00 xG
0 G on 18
1.40 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 4
0.52 xG
0 G on 6
0.62 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: VGK went 2-for-31, STL 1-for-18. VGK 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
A. Schmid
VGK · 22/23 · .957
+1.3
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/20.5+0.5
Medium0/121.3+1.3
Low1/340.5-0.5

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

J. Hofer
STL · 30/34 · .882
-0.5
saved above expected
D
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/51.0+1.0
Medium3/161.6-1.4
Low1/510.9-0.1

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

89 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
VGK
55 shots
4
Final
89 shots
STL
34 shots
1
VGK attackSTL attack
VGK STL Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — VGK 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
P. Dorofeyev
#16 · R · VGK
0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 17:45 on ice · +1
R. Smith
#19 · R · VGK
0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 14:08 on ice · +2
N. Hanifin
#15 · D · VGK
1 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 23:37 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Nov 15
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 4:13 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 2.5-2.3 Golden Knights victory with Vegas at 52% win probability — this is a coin flip.

Vegas owns the underlying play. The Golden Knights possess 54.0% expected goals at 5v5 and drive territorial control at 52.0% Corsi, pinning St. Louis into a defensive posture. Yet the Blues' season metrics (49.0% xG%, 48.0% Corsi%) hide an alarming fact: St. Louis sits -11 goal differential over its last 10 games. Vegas is underwater too, at -5, but running cold. The Golden Knights' 0.983 PDO suggests positive regression is likely. The Blues' 1.000 PDO means their underlying play has already translated to results — any slip in execution gets punished.

Rest favors St. Louis. The Blues arrive with three days between games; Vegas plays on one day of rest. A. Schmid faces a back-to-back start, opening a path to exploit tired goaltending.

The Golden Knights' offense starts with Brandon Saad, who generates 0.91 expected goals per 60 minutes and has tallied 3 goals with 6 assists despite shooting just 4.1% — pure positive variance waiting to correct. Tomas Hertl pairs 0.88 xG/60 with 5 goals and 17 assists, also at 4.3% shooting, another player whose output lags his process.

St. Louis counters with Jimmy Snuggerud, who has found 15 goals and 22 assists while generating 0.86 xG/60, his 11.9% shooting rate reflecting elite efficiency. Dylan Holloway complements him with 13 goals and 24 assists at 0.82 xG/60, posting a 10.8% shot conversion that's neither fluky nor broken — just consistently above expectation.

The gap between creation and result is the spine of this game. Vegas creates more but converts less; St. Louis creates less but converts more. For Vegas, the question is whether process wins out, whether Saad and Hertl's shooting luck reverses. For St. Louis, the risk is regression that doesn't arrive. A team already hitting its underlying play doesn't usually sustain -11 goal deficits without deeper structural issues.

Rasmus Andersson's defensive vulnerability for Vegas and Jimmy Snuggerud's defensive exposure for St. Louis are potential avenues, but neither reshapes a game this tight.

The model knows: this is a pick'em. Lean toward Vegas if you believe in process and regression. Lean toward St. Louis if you trust results.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

VGK 52%
52%
VGK
Model favorite
52%
48%
VGK50STL

VGK by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score VGK 2.5–2.3 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
VGK← edge
edge →STL
54.0%49.0%
52.0%48.0%
2.522.34
2.112.40
2.122.00
2.102.12
0.9831.000

VGK holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.983 vs 1.000) says STL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
VGK
3-4-3
-5 GD · 1d rest
STL
3-5-2
-11 GD · 3d rest
0.983
VGK PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.000
STL 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%.
  • The Golden Knights drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
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%.
  • The Golden Knights drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • A. Schmid 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.
  • The Golden Knights are underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.
  • The Blues have 2 more days of rest.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
VGK
Expected in goal
A. Schmid
back-to-back.833 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.

STL
Expected in goal
J. Binnington
3 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
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
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