Motion-blurred skater in a San Jose Sharks sweater

Breakdown · LAK at SJS

Sharks edge the Kings in a shootout

Final / OTThu, Nov 20

LAKLos Angeles Kings3 SJSSan Jose Sharks4

The verdict · stolen

The Sharks stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.47–3.84 and won anyway.

LAK 3 · SJS 4

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 5:05 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 Sharks won 4–3 in a shootout despite the expected-goals disadvantage. Los Angeles generated 4.47 xG to San Jose's 3.84, but the Kings underperformed by 1.47 goals.

San Jose's offense was quieter but sharper. The Sharks held 41% of shot attempts (24 to 34 on goal) and generated 0.082 xG per shot versus Los Angeles's 0.055—a quality gap producing 10 high-danger chances to the Kings' 8. The Sharks converted none of them: 0 for 10 on those looks.

Y. Askarov stopped 31 of 34 shots (0.912 SV%), beating expected performance by 1.47 goals. A. Forsberg kept Los Angeles in it with perfect execution on high-danger chances (10 of 10 saves) but finished 21 for 24 overall (0.875 SV%), 0.84 above expected. Askarov's extra margin made the difference in a close game.

On the rush, San Jose was efficient: 3 goals on 22 chances. Los Angeles managed 2 on 36—volume without accuracy.

Philipp Kurashev's wrist shot from the high slot settled the shootout.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · SO · Nov 20

LAK

SJS

Sharks edge the Kings in a shootout

Chances 4.5 – 3.8Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Kings deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

LAK

4.47

SJS

3.84

54% of the chances46%

The board read LAK 3, SJS 4. The chances read LAK 4.5, SJS 3.8.

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

Luck check

SJS

+0.2

goals above expected

SJS3.84 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

LAK4.47 expected · 3 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

P1 02:33SJSA. Gaudette0–1
P1 16:04LAKJ. ArmiaSH1–1
P1 19:50SJST. Dellandrea1–2
P2 01:47LAKA. Kopitar2–2
P2 17:04SJSP. Kurashev2–3
P3 19:01LAKA. KempePP3–3
SO 00:00SJSP. KurashevPP3–3

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

Where the shots came from

LAK

58 shots

Final

98 shots

SJS

40 shots

LAK SJS GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 3 in

shots · 4 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

LAKSJS

2 / 8

1.91 xG

High danger

0 / 10

2.25 xG

1 / 15

1.65 xG

Medium

2 / 8

1.04 xG

0 / 59

0.91 xG

Low

1 / 29

0.55 xG

High-danger looks: LAK 2 of 8, SJS 0 of 10.

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

In the net

B+

Y. Askarov

+1.5

SJS · 31/34

B+

A. Forsberg

+0.8

LAK · 21/24

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Sharks edge the Kings 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 9–9

02:33SJSA. Gaudette(T. Dellandrea, C. Graf)0–1
16:04LAKJ. Armiashorthanded1–1
19:50SJST. Dellandrea(C. Graf, D. Orlov)1–2

2ndshots 12–7

01:47LAKA. Kopitar(T. Moore, C. Ceci)2–2
17:04SJSP. Kurashev(W. Smith, M. Celebrini)2–3

3rdshots 13–6

19:01LAKA. Kempepower play(K. Fiala, A. Kopitar)3–3

OTshots 0–2no goals

00:00SJSP. Kurashevpower play3–3

score reads LAK–SJS

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.84

SJS chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.2

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.027

SJS puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

36.4%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.47Expected goals3.84

LAK 54% of the chance quality

34Shots on goal24

8High-danger chances10

82All attempts (Corsi)47

Adjusted for score: LAK 66% · SJS 34%

Faceoffs · SJS won46%off33%neu64%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

LAK2 / 8 · 1.91 xG

SJS0 / 10 · 2.25 xG

Medium dangermid-range

LAK1 / 15 · 1.65 xG

SJS2 / 8 · 1.04 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

LAK0 / 59 · 0.91 xG

SJS1 / 29 · 0.55 xG

SJS went 0-for-10 from high danger on 2.25 expected goals — 2.3 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

LAK

3 G · 4.47 xG · -1.5

SJS

4 G · 3.84 xG · +0.2

012345

LAK finished -1.5 against expected, SJS +0.2.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

LAK

WRIST2/32

SLAP0/11

TIP IN0/6

BACKHAND1/4

SNAP0/1

DEFLECTED0/1

BETWEEN LEGS0/0

OTHER0/27

SJS

WRIST2/21

SLAP0/4

TIP IN0/4

BACKHAND0/2

SNAP0/4

DEFLECTED1/1

BETWEEN LEGS0/1

OTHER0/10

LAK

SJS

Off the rush

2 G on 36

3.38 xG

3 G on 22

2.72 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 1

0.04 xG

0 G on 5

0.72 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: LAK went 2-for-32, SJS 2-for-21. SJS 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

A. Forsberg

LAK · 21/24 · .875

+0.8

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/102.3+2.3

Medium2/81.0-1.0

Low1/290.6-0.5

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

Y. Askarov

SJS · 31/34 · .912

+1.5

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/81.9-0.1

Medium1/151.6+0.7

Low0/590.9+0.9

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

98 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

LAK

58 shots

Final

98 shots

SJS

40 shots

LAK SJS GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — LAK left, SJS 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

A. Kopitar

#11 · C · LAK

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 20:31 on ice · +1

C. Graf

#51 · R · SJS

0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 14:32 on ice

T. Dellandrea

#10 · C · SJS

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 13:37 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Thu, Nov 20

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 5:02 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 2.5–2.4 Kings victory with Los Angeles at 52% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

The Kings own the underlying play. They hold 52.0% expected goals share at 5v5 and 52.0% Corsi, suggesting they'll tilt the territorial balance—the Sharks will spend the night defending.

San Jose isn't being run off the ice, though. At 48.0% xG and 47.0% Corsi, the Sharks have tightened the margins. PDO readings—Los Angeles at 1.002, San Jose at 0.998—suggest neither team has luck on its side. The tighter the underlying metrics, the tighter the final score.

Y. Askarov is on a back-to-back; watch for a backup or a tired starter.

Personnel availability matters more. Pavol Regenda is marked inactive but was shooting at a 16.1% clip with 5 goals on 1.10 xG/60—elite finishing. Without him, San Jose loses its most dangerous player. Alex Laferriere carries 16 goals and 18 assists on 0.87 xG/60, but his 9.9% shooting rate suggests he's due for a breakout; two percentage points of reversion and he's a pace-setter. Igor Chernyshov provides San Jose secondary scoring with 6 goals, 8 assists, 0.91 xG/60, and 15.0% shooting.

Jared Wright has 0 goals on 4 assists at 0.83 xG/60—creating without finishing.

This is a game where territory favors Los Angeles but San Jose's efficiency could steal one. Neither team has converted chances into enough volume to dominate. Pick the Kings for underlying play; pick the Sharks if Askarov is sharp and Regenda's absence opens ice for Chernyshov.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

LAK 52%

52%

LAK

Model favorite

52%

48%

LAK50SJS

LAK by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score LAK 2.5–2.4 SJS; 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

LAK← edge

edge →SJS

52.0%48.0%

52.0%47.0%

2.422.33

2.202.56

1.851.99

1.712.32

1.0020.998

LAK holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.002 vs 0.998) says LAK has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

LAK

6-3-1

+3 GD · 2d rest

SJS

7-2-1

+8 GD · 1d rest

1.002

LAK PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.998

SJS PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Kings own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
The Kings drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.

Things to watch

The Kings own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
The Kings drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Y. Askarov is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

LAK

Expected in goal

D. Kuemper

2 days rest.920 last start

Backup Darcy Kuemper · -5.8 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

SJS

Expected in goal

Y. Askarov

back-to-back.923 last start

Backup Yaroslav Askarov · -18.9 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

LAK

Alex Laferriere16G 18A

0.87 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.9% sh

Jared Wright0G 4A

0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% sh

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

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page