Motion-blurred skater in a Nashville Predators sweater

Breakdown · NSH at DET

Predators pull away from the Red Wings

FinalWed, Nov 26

NSHNashville Predators6 DETDetroit Red Wings3

The verdict · earned

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

NSH 6 · DET 3

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 5:37 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

Nashville controlled the game despite Detroit holding the shot advantage. The Predators won 6–3 while ceding 52% of shot attempts (31–29)—a gap that reflected how cleanly each team converted.

The xG numbers explained why. Nashville's 56–44 edge in 5v5 expected goals (3.98–3.12) predicted the result. High-danger chances split further: NSH 8, DET 3. C. Talbot (0.821 SV%) struggled against the assault; J. Annunen (0.903 SV%) benefited from Nashville's rebound control (5 created, 2 converted; Detroit 3 created, 1 converted).

Nashville's rush efficiency—three goals on 26 chances—was the difference-maker. Steven Stamkos's snap shot from the top of the circles (third period, 18:45) crystallized control. Detroit answered through its power play: two goals on 15 shots (1.60 xG). Against a team controlling play, even two power-play goals weren't enough.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Nov 26

NSH

DET

Predators pull away from the Red Wings

Chances 4.0 – 3.1Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Predators earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

NSH

3.98

DET

3.12

56% of the chances44%

The board read NSH 6, DET 3. The chances read NSH 4.0, DET 3.1.

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

Luck check

NSH

+2.0

goals above expected

NSH3.98 expected · 6 scored

Expected

Scored

DET3.12 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

The Predators 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 15:48NSHM. BuntingPP1–0
P2 05:30DETA. DeBrincatPP1–1
P2 16:34DETJ. van RiemsdykPP1–2
P3 02:05NSHN. Blankenburg2–2
P3 02:20NSHR. Josi3–2
P3 03:04DETB. Chiarot3–3
P3 14:14NSHR. O'Reilly4–3

+2 more on the full breakdown

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

Where the shots came from

NSH

43 shots

Final

89 shots

DET

46 shots

NSH DET GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 6 in

shots · 3 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

NSHDET

3 / 8

2.41 xG

High danger

1 / 3

0.72 xG

3 / 8

0.87 xG

Medium

1 / 14

1.72 xG

0 / 48

0.70 xG

Low

1 / 38

0.68 xG

The Predators buried 3 of 8 high-danger looks.

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

In the net

J. Annunen

+0.1

NSH · 28/31

D-

C. Talbot

−1.0

DET · 23/28

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Predators pull away from the Red Wings

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 12–7

15:48NSHM. Buntingpower play(N. Blankenburg, E. Haula)1–0

2ndshots 8–10

05:30DETA. DeBrincatpower play(D. Larkin, L. Raymond)1–1
16:34DETJ. van Riemsdykpower play(P. Kane, N. Danielson)1–2

3rdshots 9–14

02:05NSHN. Blankenburg(R. O'Reilly)2–2
02:20NSHR. Josi(M. Bunting, M. McCarron)3–2
03:04DETB. Chiarot(M. Appleton, J. Compher)3–3
14:14NSHR. O'Reilly(L. Evangelista, S. Stamkos)4–3
14:42NSHE. Haula(F. Forsberg, J. Marchessault)5–3
18:45NSHS. Stamkosempty net(R. O'Reilly, L. Evangelista)6–3

score reads NSH–DET

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.98

NSH chances

Goals their shots were worth

+2.0

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.039

NSH puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

53.8%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.98Expected goals3.12

NSH 56% of the chance quality

29Shots on goal31

8High-danger chances3

64All attempts (Corsi)55

Adjusted for score: NSH 53% · DET 47%

Faceoffs · DET won59%off48%neu47%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

NSH3 / 8 · 2.41 xG

DET1 / 3 · 0.72 xG

Medium dangermid-range

NSH3 / 8 · 0.87 xG

DET1 / 14 · 1.72 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

NSH0 / 48 · 0.70 xG

DET1 / 38 · 0.68 xG

NSH went 3-for-8 from medium danger on 0.87 expected goals — 2.1 above expected.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

NSH

6 G · 3.98 xG · +2.0

DET

3 G · 3.12 xG · -0.1

01234567

NSH finished +2.0 against expected, DET -0.1.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

NSH

SNAP4/20

WRIST0/13

SLAP0/4

TIP IN1/2

BACKHAND1/2

BAT0/1

WRAP AROUND0/1

OTHER0/21

DET

SNAP2/18

WRIST1/19

SLAP0/4

TIP IN0/5

BACKHAND0/0

BAT0/0

WRAP AROUND0/0

OTHER0/9

NSH

DET

Off the rush

3 G on 26

2.12 xG

1 G on 27

2.01 xG

Off rebounds

2 G on 5

0.99 xG

1 G on 3

0.55 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: NSH went 4-for-20, DET 2-for-18. NSH 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

J. Annunen

NSH · 28/31 · .903

+0.1

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/30.7-0.3

Medium1/141.7+0.7

Low1/380.7-0.3

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

C. Talbot

DET · 23/28 · .821

-1.0

saved above expected

D-

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger3/82.4-0.6

Medium3/80.9-2.1

Low0/480.7+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

89 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

NSH

43 shots

Final

89 shots

DET

46 shots

NSH DET GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — NSH left, DET 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

R. O'Reilly

#90 · C · NSH

1 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 20:02 on ice · +3

S. Stamkos

#91 · C · NSH

1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 18:28 on ice · +2

L. Evangelista

#77 · R · NSH

0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 16:55 on ice · +3

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Wed, Nov 26

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 5:35 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 Nashville at 2.5 expected goals and Detroit at 2.6, giving the Red Wings 52% win probability. The underlying play is this close: both teams sit at 49.0% expected-goal share at 5v5, while Nashville and Detroit's Corsi% diverge by only one point (50.0% vs. 49.0%). Detroit's PDO (0.985) trails Nashville's (0.992), a gap that could flip either team's luck in a tight game.

The telling detail is recent momentum. Detroit is underwater at -8 goal differential over their last 10; Nashville worse at -17. Both teams are generating chances on par, but finishing has abandoned them. DET's team PDO of 0.985 suggests they're due for positive regression, while NSH's 0.992 is marginally softer—the kind of variance that swings even matchups.

Goaltending adds volatility. C. Talbot is on a back-to-back for Nashville, as is J. Annunen for Detroit. Whichever team gets fresher goaltending—or which starter is gassed—could carry the night. This is the closest game on the board.

Nashville's offense leans on Zachary L'Heureux, who is generating 0.85 xG/60 while shooting at 16.0% (4 goals). He has scored 1 high-danger goal. Filip Forsberg operates just below at 0.80 xG/60, a more complete threat: 23 goals on the season, 13.6% shooting, 4 high-danger goals. Forsberg is the engine Nashville depends on.

Detroit counters with Alex DeBrincat generating 0.88 xG/60—the game's highest shot-quality rate—though his 9.0% shooting (17 goals) suggests he's underperforming his chances. Marco Kasper at 0.81 xG/60 mirrors Forsberg's volume, though on just 7 goals and 6.1% shooting. DeBrincat's upside in a tight game is pronounced; Kasper's underperformance leaves room for variance.

Both teams carry identical liabilities: 0% high-danger goal rate and 0% rebound goal rate indicate neither is converting the messes in front. Jonathan Marchessault for Nashville and Axel Sandin-Pellikka for Detroit represent defensive exposure—spots to attack.

This is a game where health, fresh goaltending, and hot hands separate a coin flip into a winner. The models can't find separation because there isn't one.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DET 52%

52%

DET

Model favorite

48%

52%

NSH50DET

DET by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score NSH 2.5–2.6 DET; 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

NSH← edge

edge →DET

49.0%49.0%

50.0%49.0%

2.482.38

2.582.50

1.841.73

2.212.07

0.9920.985

The season numbers split 3–3 — no clear process edge — and the luck row (0.992 vs 0.985) says NSH has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

NSH

2-6-2

-17 GD · 1d rest

DET

4-5-1

-8 GD · 1d rest

0.992

NSH PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.985

DET PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Things to watch

C. Talbot is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
J. Annunen is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Red Wings are underwater at -8 goal differential over their last 10.
The Predators are underwater at -17 goal differential over their last 10.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

NSH

Expected in goal

J. Annunen

back-to-back.700 last start

Backup Juuse Saros · -9.3 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.

DET

Expected in goal

C. Talbot

back-to-back.800 last start

Backup John Gibson · +11.7 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

NSH

Zachary L'Heureux4G 0A

0.85 xG/60 · 1 HD · 16.0% sh

Filip Forsberg23G 17A

0.80 xG/60 · 4 HD · 13.6% sh

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

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page