Backcheck
Recap · EDM at FLA

Oilers pull away from the Panthers

The Oilers stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.88–5.43 and won anyway.

By the ModelJul 11, 5:17 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
EDM
Edmonton Oilers
6
Home
FLA
Florida Panthers
3
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

4.88Expected goals5.43
53% share for the better side
31Shot attempts (SOG)38
7High-danger chances9
62Corsi (all attempts)82
Score-adjusted: 37% / 63%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

The Panthers held underlying advantages—55% shot attempts, 5.43 expected goals versus Edmonton's 4.88—and lost 6-3. The victory hinged on execution, not possession.

Edmonton's goaltending was the separator. S. Skinner saved 2.4 goals above expected — his 0.921 SV% on 35 shots denied the Panthers' chances to close. D. Tarasov stopped all 12 shots for a perfect SV%. S. Bobrovsky's 0.765 SV% on 17 shots cost Florida 1.1 goals relative to expected.

Edmonton finished ruthlessly where it mattered. In the high-danger zone, they converted 3 of 7 chances (43%), while Florida managed 0 for 9. Edmonton also capitalized off the rush: 6 goals on 30 rush attempts.

Florida created more chances. They generated 9 high-danger looks to Edmonton's 7, and crashed the net for 10 rebound opportunities, converting 2. Yet they underperformed expected goals by 2.4, wasting quality. Matt Savoie's wrist shot from the wing (17:47, third period) marked where Edmonton's margin became secure.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
EDM3 / 7 · 2.16 xG
FLA0 / 9 · 1.92 xG
Medium dangermid-range
EDM2 / 16 · 1.94 xG
FLA3 / 26 · 2.74 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
EDM1 / 39 · 0.78 xG
FLA0 / 47 · 0.78 xG

FLA went 0-for-9 from high danger on 1.92 expected goals — 1.9 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
EDM
6 G · 4.88 xG · +1.1
FLA
3 G · 5.43 xG · -2.4
01234567
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
S. SkinnerEDM
+2.4
D. TarasovFLA
+2.0
S. BobrovskyFLA
-1.1

EDM finished +1.1 against expected, FLA -2.4 — S. Skinner (EDM) saved 2.4 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
EDM
WRIST5/20
SNAP1/10
BACKHAND0/6
TIP IN0/5
SLAP0/8
BAT0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/12
FLA
WRIST0/36
SNAP0/6
BACKHAND1/9
TIP IN0/9
SLAP2/6
BAT0/0
WRAP AROUND0/1
OTHER0/15
EDM
FLA
Off the rush
6 G on 30 · 3.39 xG
1 G on 46 · 3.40 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 7 · 1.01 xG
2 G on 10 · 1.36 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: EDM went 5-for-20, FLA 0-for-36. EDM scored 6 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
E. Bouchard
#2 · D · EDM
0 G · 3 A · 1 SOG · 22:12 TOI · +5
M. Ekholm
#14 · D · EDM
1 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 20:37 TOI · +5
A. Lundell
#15 · C · FLA
1 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 18:33 TOI · -4
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • S. Skinner (EDM) stopped 2.4 goals above expected.
  • S. Bobrovsky (FLA) gave up 1.1 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
  • Open game — 16 high-danger chances combined (FLA 9, EDM 7).
  • FLA couldn't convert — 0/9 on high-danger chances. That won't happen often.
  • EDM was clinical in the high-danger zone — 3/7 on HD chances (43%).
  • EDM was lethal off the rush — 6 goals on 30 rush chances.
  • FLA created 10 rebound opportunities (2 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • EDM created 7 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • FLA underperformed xG by 2.4 — wasted quality chances.
  • S. Skinner (EDM) saved 2.4 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • S. Skinner was a wall on HD chances — 100% SV on 9 high-danger shots.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · EDM at FLA · 7:00 PM ET

Oilers at Panthers: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 5:14 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

50%
EDM
Model favorite
50%
50%
EDM50FLA

EDM by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score EDM 2.62.6 FLA; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

EDM← edge
edge →FLA
52.0%5v5 xG%49.0%
50.0%Corsi%52.0%
2.64xGF / 602.48
2.47xGA / 602.56
2.13Goals for / gm1.98
2.29Goals against / gm2.21
0.982PDO — luck, not skill0.989

EDM holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.982 vs 0.989) says FLA has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.6-2.6 game with the Oilers at 50% win probability—as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

Edmonton owns the underlying play. At 5v5, the Oilers generate 52.0% expected goals against Florida's 49.0%, suggesting higher-quality chances. But their 0.982 PDO indicates they're converting below trend; positive regression would turn that small edge into wins. Florida's shot-attempt advantage (52.0% Corsi to Edmonton's 50.0%) hasn't translated to the same expected-goal share, implying Edmonton is more efficient with volume.

The Panthers, though, are 6-3-1 in their last 10 games. Edmonton sits -16 in goal differential over the same span. Hot teams can beat spreadsheets, at least temporarily.

The goaltending adds uncertainty. Both S. Bobrovsky and C. Pickard are on back-to-backs, making it unclear whether either starts fresh.

Edmonton's offense flows through Connor McDavid (25 goals, 33 assists, 13.7% shooting), but Zach Hyman is the difference-maker. He's generating 1.23 expected goals per 60 minutes with 14 goals and 13 assists—a sharp 13.0% shooting rate tied to 1 high-danger goal. When Hyman operates freely in space, Edmonton's metrics become wins. When he's hemmed in, Edmonton's underlying edge stalls.

Florida counters with Sam Bennett at 0.97 expected goals per 60, 18 goals and 19 assists. His 13.1% shooting rate suggests elite finishing that complements his volume. Brad Marchand (17 goals, 9 assists at 0.93 xG/60) adds depth, though his 19.5% shooting rate is unsustainable—the kind of number due to regress downward.

One team's edge lies in what they're supposed to do. The other's lies in what they've been doing recently. The even split reflects a genuine standoff: neither advantage has overtaken the other.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

EDM
Zach Hyman14G 13A
1.23 xG/60 · 1 HD · 13.0% sh
Connor McDavid25G 33A
0.92 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh
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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters