Motion-blurred skater in a New Jersey Devils sweater

Breakdown · DET at NJD

Devils steal one from the Red Wings against the run of play

FinalMon, Nov 24

DETDetroit Red Wings3 NJDNew Jersey Devils4

The verdict · stolen

The Devils stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 5.06–2.00 and won anyway.

DET 3 · NJD 4

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 5:29 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

New Jersey won 4-3 because J. Markstrom played a different sport than C. Talbot. The Devils controlled 28% of expected goals at 5v5 (2.00–5.06), and yet they left Detroit with two points. This was theft.

The gap between process and result was staggering. Detroit dominated high-danger chances 8–2, generating 0.060 expected goals per shot versus New Jersey's 0.040. The Red Wings created 35 shot attempts to the Devils' 20. On a neutral night, this is a 5–2 final. It wasn't neutral.

J. Markstrom saved 2.06 goals above expected. C. Talbot gave up 2.00 more than expected. Together, they accounted for the entire 4-goal swing—the Devils' 2.00-goal overperformance and Detroit's 2.06-goal underperformance are basically the same thing viewed through opposite goalie masks. J. Markstrom finished with a 0.914 SV% on 32 stops. C. Talbot made 16 of 20.

New Jersey's three drivers were efficiency and desperation. They outscored Detroit 4–3 on inferior chances because they converted at a lethal clip off the rush (four goals on 21 chances). Detroit crashed the net well—eight rebound opportunities, two converted—but couldn't bury the looks that mattered. The Devils' finishers capitalized on scraps; the Red Wings' didn't.

Three Stars

#53 M. Seider (DET) — 2A in 25:04
#13 N. Hischier (NJD) — 1G, 1A in 21:15
#16 C. Brown (NJD) — 1G, 1A in 17:42

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Nov 24

DET

NJD

Devils steal one from the Red Wings against the run of play

Chances 5.1 – 2.0Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Red Wings deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

DET

5.06

NJD

2.00

72% of the chances28%

The board read DET 3, NJD 4. The chances read DET 5.1, NJD 2.0.

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

Luck check

NJD

+2.0

goals above expected

NJD2.00 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

DET5.06 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

The Devils scored 2.0 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 12:54NJDT. Meier0–1
P1 16:33DETA. DeBrincat1–1
P1 17:58NJDN. Hischier1–2
P1 19:04NJDC. Glass1–3
P2 01:30DETJ. van RiemsdykPP2–3
P2 08:38NJDC. Brown2–4
P3 10:12DETD. Larkin3–4

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

Where the shots came from

DET

62 shots

Final

92 shots

NJD

30 shots

DET NJD GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 3 in

shots · 4 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

DETNJD

1 / 8

1.67 xG

High danger

0 / 2

0.37 xG

2 / 24

2.70 xG

Medium

3 / 12

1.26 xG

0 / 52

0.69 xG

Low

1 / 36

0.37 xG

High-danger looks: DET 1 of 8, NJD 0 of 2.

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

In the net

J. Markstrom

+2.1

NJD · 32/35

C. Talbot

−2.0

DET · 16/20

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Devils steal one from the Red Wings against the run of play

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 7–9

12:54NJDT. Meier(S. Noesen, N. Hischier)0–1
16:33DETA. DeBrincat(P. Kane, M. Seider)1–1
17:58NJDN. Hischier(J. Bratt, T. Meier)1–2
19:04NJDC. Glass(L. Hughes, C. Brown)1–3

2ndshots 15–6

01:30DETJ. van Riemsdykpower play(A. Copp, E. Finnie)2–3
08:38NJDC. Brown(D. Mercer)2–4

3rdshots 13–5

10:12DETD. Larkin(L. Raymond, M. Seider)3–4

score reads DET–NJD

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

2.00

NJD chances

Goals their shots were worth

+2.0

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.044

NJD puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

37.3%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

5.06Expected goals2.00

DET 72% of the chance quality

35Shots on goal20

8High-danger chances2

84All attempts (Corsi)50

Adjusted for score: DET 66% · NJD 34%

Faceoffs · NJD won25%off40%neu44%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

DET1 / 8 · 1.67 xG

NJD0 / 2 · 0.37 xG

Medium dangermid-range

DET2 / 24 · 2.70 xG

NJD3 / 12 · 1.26 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

DET0 / 52 · 0.69 xG

NJD1 / 36 · 0.37 xG

NJD went 3-for-12 from medium danger on 1.26 expected goals — 1.7 above expected.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

DET

3 G · 5.06 xG · -2.1

NJD

4 G · 2.00 xG · +2.0

0123456

DET finished -2.1 against expected, NJD +2.0.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

DET

WRIST1/32

TIP IN0/10

SNAP0/7

SLAP0/8

BACKHAND2/4

BAT0/1

DEFLECTED0/0

OTHER0/22

NJD

WRIST1/10

TIP IN2/6

SNAP1/7

SLAP0/3

BACKHAND0/2

BAT0/1

DEFLECTED0/1

OTHER0/20

DET

NJD

Off the rush

1 G on 35

3.08 xG

4 G on 21

1.61 xG

Off rebounds

2 G on 8

1.35 xG

0 G on 1

0.19 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: DET went 1-for-32, NJD 1-for-10. NJD 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

C. Talbot

DET · 16/20 · .800

-2.0

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/20.4+0.4

Medium3/121.3-1.7

Low1/360.4-0.6

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

J. Markstrom

NJD · 32/35 · .914

+2.1

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/81.7+0.7

Medium2/242.7+0.7

Low0/520.7+0.7

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

92 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

DET

62 shots

Final

92 shots

NJD

30 shots

DET NJD GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — DET left, NJD 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. Seider

#53 · D · DET

0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 25:04 on ice · +2

N. Hischier

#13 · C · NJD

1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 21:15 on ice · +1

C. Brown

#16 · R · NJD

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 17:42 on ice · +2

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Nov 24

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 5:27 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 DET 2.4 - 2.6 NJD game with the Devils at 53% win probability—about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

Both teams sit underwater on recent form. Detroit is -6 goal differential over their last 10; New Jersey -5. Neither is generating convincing underlying metrics. Detroit's 5v5 xG% and Corsi% both sit at 49.0%. New Jersey edges up to 50.0% xG% and 51.0% Corsi%, but that margin is immaterial.

The Devils' PDO of 0.971 is the tell: they're running cold and statistically due for positive regression. Detroit's 0.985 suggests similar fortune-dependency rather than structural superiority.

Goaltending adds a variable. J. Allen is on a back-to-back, which raises odds of either a backup start or a worn-out starter taking the net.

Players to Watch

DET Alex DeBrincat — 0.88 xG/60, 17G 28A, 2 high-danger goals, 9.0% shooting Marco Kasper — 0.81 xG/60, 7G 8A, 1 high-danger goal, 6.1% shooting

NJD Timo Meier — 1.08 xG/60, 13G 15A, 3 high-danger goals, 6.7% shooting Jack Hughes — 0.88 xG/60, 18G 17A, 1 high-danger goal, 11.5% shooting

Meier's 1.08 xG/60 and 3 high-danger goals make him the matchup's primary threat. Hughes and DeBrincat both operate at 0.88 xG/60, but Hughes' 11.5% shooting (18G 17A) outpaces DeBrincat's 9.0% (17G 28A). Kasper ranks below at 0.81 xG/60 with one high-danger goal and 6.1% shooting.

Both clubs have defensive cracks. Axel Sandin-Pellikka for Detroit and Johnathan Kovacevic for New Jersey present matchup vulnerabilities. Secondary scoring has dried up: both recorded 0% high-danger goal rate and 0% rebound goal rate.

New Jersey holds a modest structural edge in shot generation. The 53% win probability reflects that lean. But J. Allen's back-to-back status muddies the matchup, and Detroit's habit of scoring above expected could swing it. In a true coin flip, execution in one period decides the game.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

NJD 53%

53%

NJD

Model favorite

47%

53%

DET50NJD

NJD by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score DET 2.4–2.6 NJD; 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

DET← edge

edge →NJD

49.0%50.0%

49.0%51.0%

2.382.45

2.502.50

1.731.66

2.072.23

0.9850.971

The season numbers split 3–3 — no clear process edge — and the luck row (0.985 vs 0.971) says DET has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

DET

5-4-1

-6 GD · 2d rest

NJD

5-4-1

-5 GD · 1d rest

0.985

DET PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.971

NJD PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch

The Devils' PDO is 0.971 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Things to watch

J. Allen is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Devils are underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10.
The Red Wings are underwater at -6 goal differential over their last 10.
The Devils' PDO is 0.971 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

DET

Expected in goal

C. Talbot

2 days rest.914 last start

Backup John Gibson · +11.7 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

NJD

Expected in goal

J. Allen

back-to-back.793 last start

Backup Jacob Markstrom · -11.9 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

DET

Alex DeBrincat17G 28A

0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.0% sh

Marco Kasper7G 8A

0.81 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.1% sh

NJD

Timo Meier13G 15A

1.08 xG/60 · 3 HD · 6.7% sh

Jack Hughes18G 17A

0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.5% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page