Motion-blurred skater in a green sweater

Breakdown · DAL at SEA

Stars hold off the Kraken

FinalWed, Nov 26

The verdict · earned

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

DAL 3 · SEA 2

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 5:51 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

Dallas held off Seattle 3-2, and the underlying numbers validate the outcome — Dallas controlled 58% of expected goals and generated far more dangerous chances.

The Kraken dominated volume: 28 shot attempts to Dallas's 21. But their shots lacked teeth. Dallas created 3.51 expected goals to Seattle's 2.51, a gap that reflects Dallas's efficiency edge — 0.092 xG per attempt versus Seattle's 0.048. In plain terms: Dallas's shots were more than three times as likely to score.

High-danger chances made the difference starker. Dallas generated six; Seattle managed one. C. DeSmith (DAL) saved 26 of 28 for a 0.929 SV%, outperforming his expected save percentage by 0.51. J. Daccord (SEA) saved 18 of 21 for a 0.857 SV%, also outperforming by 0.51. Both goalies bailed out their teams.

The shot execution revealed the paradox. Dallas went 0-for-6 on high-danger chances yet scored twice from low-danger spots — inefficiency that usually costs games. Seattle capitulated twice on low-danger shots while Daccord locked all high-danger looks. Dallas's superior shot quality overcame its finishing woes.

E. Lindell and T. Seguin (2A in 16:03) led Dallas. V. Dunn scored for Seattle.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Nov 26

DAL

SEA

Stars hold off the Kraken

Chances 3.5 – 2.5Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Stars earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

DAL

3.51

SEA

2.51

58% of the chances42%

The board read DAL 3, SEA 2. The chances read DAL 3.5, SEA 2.5.

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

Luck check

DAL

−0.5

goals above expected

DAL3.51 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

SEA2.51 expected · 2 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 05:52DALR. Hintz1–0
P1 09:06SEAB. Montour1–1
P2 06:13DALE. Lindell2–1
P3 00:18SEAV. Dunn2–2
P3 14:16DALV. Kolyachonok3–2

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

Where the shots came from

DAL

30 shots

Final

69 shots

SEA

39 shots

DAL SEA GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 3 in

shots · 2 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

DALSEA

0 / 6

1.88 xG

High danger

0 / 1

0.19 xG

1 / 10

1.27 xG

Medium

0 / 14

1.66 xG

2 / 22

0.37 xG

Low

2 / 37

0.66 xG

High-danger looks: DAL 0 of 6, SEA 0 of 1.

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

In the net

C. DeSmith

+0.5

DAL · 26/28

J. Daccord

+0.5

SEA · 18/21

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Stars hold off the Kraken

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 10–10

05:52DALR. Hintz(A. Petrovic, J. Benn)1–0
09:06SEAB. Montour(S. Wright, B. Catton)1–1

2ndshots 9–9

06:13DALE. Lindell(J. Hryckowian, T. Seguin)2–1

3rdshots 2–9

00:18SEAV. Dunn(J. McCann)2–2
14:16DALV. Kolyachonok(T. Seguin, K. Capobianco)3–2

score reads DAL–SEA

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.51

DAL chances

Goals their shots were worth

−0.5

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.040

DAL puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

42.2%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.51Expected goals2.51

DAL 58% of the chance quality

21Shots on goal28

6High-danger chances1

38All attempts (Corsi)52

Adjusted for score: DAL 41% · SEA 59%

Faceoffs · SEA won61%off54%neu29%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

DAL0 / 6 · 1.88 xG

SEA0 / 1 · 0.19 xG

Medium dangermid-range

DAL1 / 10 · 1.27 xG

SEA0 / 14 · 1.66 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

DAL2 / 22 · 0.37 xG

SEA2 / 37 · 0.66 xG

DAL went 0-for-6 from high danger on 1.88 expected goals — 1.9 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

DAL

3 G · 3.51 xG · -0.5

SEA

2 G · 2.51 xG · -0.5

01234

DAL finished -0.5 against expected, SEA -0.5.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

DAL

WRIST2/17

SNAP0/6

SLAP0/1

BACKHAND0/3

DEFLECTED1/1

TIP IN0/2

BAT0/0

OTHER0/8

SEA

WRIST2/19

SNAP0/7

SLAP0/7

BACKHAND0/2

DEFLECTED0/2

TIP IN0/1

BAT0/1

OTHER0/13

DAL

SEA

Off the rush

1 G on 18

1.58 xG

1 G on 23

1.89 xG

Off rebounds

1 G on 5

0.92 xG

1 G on 2

0.16 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: DAL went 2-for-17, SEA 2-for-19.

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. DeSmith

DAL · 26/28 · .929

+0.5

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/10.2+0.2

Medium0/141.7+1.7

Low2/370.7-1.3

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

J. Daccord

SEA · 18/21 · .857

+0.5

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/61.9+1.9

Medium1/101.3+0.3

Low2/220.4-1.6

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

69 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

DAL

30 shots

Final

69 shots

SEA

39 shots

DAL SEA GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — DAL left, SEA 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

T. Seguin

#91 · C · DAL

0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 16:03 on ice · +3

E. Lindell

#23 · D · DAL

1 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 28:16 on ice · -1

V. Dunn

#29 · D · SEA

1 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 24:13 on ice · -2

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, 5:48 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

Dallas is a slight favorite, but barely. The model projects a 2.4–2.3 Stars win and assigns Dallas 52% win probability—as close to even as forecasts get.

The gap stems from underlying play. Dallas owns 51.0% expected goals at 5v5 versus Seattle's 46.0%, and leads 47.0% to 45.0% in Corsi. It's a consistent edge without being overwhelming.

The complication: Dallas's PDO of 1.024 means the Stars are running hot. Regression is coming.

Jason Robertson drives Dallas's attack at 0.96 xG/60 with 25 goals and 21 assists, including 2 high-danger goals, benefiting from a 12.4% shooting rate that will almost certainly decline. Michael Bunting adds depth at 0.83 xG/60 with 8 goals and 14 assists. Seattle counters with Shane Wright at 0.77 xG/60, 8 goals and 10 assists with 4 high-danger goals, and Berkly Catton at 0.68 xG/60, 6 goals and 8 assists with 5 high-danger goals.

Both teams sit at 0% on high-danger and rebound goal rates, a quirk that figures to normalize. Dallas's defensive weak link is Tyler Myers; Seattle's is Chandler Stephenson.

What this game turns on: Dallas has the underlying metrics but relies on shooting luck to sustain its edge. Seattle projects worse on the skill sheet but stays close enough that variance decides outcomes. That's why the model splits the difference.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DAL 52%

52%

DAL

Model favorite

52%

48%

DAL50SEA

DAL by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score DAL 2.4–2.3 SEA; 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

DAL← edge

edge →SEA

51.0%46.0%

47.0%45.0%

2.362.13

2.292.51

2.071.87

1.681.95

1.0241.011

DAL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.024 vs 1.011) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

DAL

7-2-1

+13 GD · 3d rest

SEA

5-3-2

-2 GD · 3d rest

1.024

DAL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.011

SEA PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Stars own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.

Regression watch

The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.

Things to watch

The Stars own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.
The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

DAL

Expected in goal

C. DeSmith

3 days rest.939 last start

Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

SEA

Expected in goal

J. Daccord

3 days rest1.000 last start

Backup Joey Daccord · -6.2 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

DAL

Jason Robertson25G 21A

0.96 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.4% sh

Michael Bunting8G 14A

0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 7.6% sh

SEA

Shane Wright8G 10A

0.77 xG/60 · 4 HD · 10.4% sh

Berkly Catton6G 8A

0.68 xG/60 · 5 HD · 8.8% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page