Motion-blurred skater in a Edmonton Oilers sweater
Breakdown · EDM at SEA

Oilers shut out the Kraken, 4-0

The verdict · coin flip

The Oilers won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

EDM 4 · SEA 0
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 6:14 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

Seattle generated 3.72 expected goals. They scored zero. The four-goal gap between expected and actual belongs entirely to S. Skinner: a 1.000 save percentage, 3.72 goals saved above what his defensive support deserved.

The Kraken's profile was strong. They held 51% of shot attempts (26–25 on goal) and created seven high-danger chances to Edmonton's six. In a league where shot volume predicts scoring, a team generating 3.72 xG should not lose 4-0. S. Skinner delivered the difference: 26 saves on 26 shots. J. Daccord faced 25 and gave up four (0.840 SV%).

Neither team finished its high-danger looks—Seattle 0 for 6, Edmonton 0 for 7. Edmonton's four goals came from elsewhere: on 22 rush chances, a conversion rate that won't repeat. The turning point came with Connor McDavid's wrist shot from a sharp angle at 6:25 of the third period. After that, the Kraken had opportunities and no finish.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 29
EDM
4
SEA
0

Oilers shut out the Kraken, 4-0

Chances 3.6 – 3.7Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Oilers took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value
EDM
3.61
SEA
3.72
49% of the chances51%

The board read EDM 4, SEA 0. The chances read EDM 3.6, SEA 3.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
EDM
+0.4
goals above expected
EDM3.61 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
SEA3.72 expected · 0 scored
Expected
Scored

The Kraken left 3.7 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 11:29EDMR. Nugent-HopkinsPP1–0
  2. P2 12:30EDML. Draisaitl2–0
  3. P2 18:51EDMZ. HymanPP3–0
  4. P3 06:25EDMC. McDavid4–0
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
EDM
40 shots
4
Final
82 shots
SEA
42 shots
0
EDM attackSEA attack
EDM SEA Goal
40
shots · 4 in
42
shots · 0 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
EDMSEA
0 / 7
1.76 xG
High danger
0 / 6
1.28 xG
4 / 13
1.50 xG
Medium
0 / 18
1.97 xG
0 / 32
0.35 xG
Low
0 / 37
0.46 xG

The Kraken went 0 for 6 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
S. Skinner
+3.7
EDM · 26/26
D
J. Daccord
−0.4
SEA · 21/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Oilers shut out the Kraken, 4-0

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 11–12
  1. 11:29EDMR. Nugent-Hopkinspower play(E. Bouchard, C. McDavid)1–0
2ndshots 8–6
  1. 12:30EDML. Draisaitl(A. Mangiapane, T. Emberson)2–0
  2. 18:51EDMZ. Hymanpower play(L. Draisaitl, R. Nugent-Hopkins)3–0
3rdshots 6–8
  1. 06:25EDMC. McDavid(Z. Hyman, M. Ekholm)4–0

score reads EDM–SEA

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.61
EDM chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.4
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.077
EDM puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
46.0%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.61Expected goals3.72
SEA 51% of the chance quality
25Shots on goal26
7High-danger chances6
52All attempts (Corsi)61
Adjusted for score: EDM 41% · SEA 59%
Faceoffs · SEA won72%off63%neu35%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
EDM0 / 7 · 1.76 xG
SEA0 / 6 · 1.28 xG
Medium dangermid-range
EDM4 / 13 · 1.50 xG
SEA0 / 18 · 1.97 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
EDM0 / 32 · 0.35 xG
SEA0 / 37 · 0.46 xG

EDM went 4-for-13 from medium danger on 1.50 expected goals — 2.5 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
EDM
4 G · 3.61 xG · +0.4
SEA
0 G · 3.72 xG · -3.7
012345

EDM finished +0.4 against expected, SEA -3.7.

Source · Backcheck xG model
Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
EDM
WRIST3/26
SLAP0/2
BACKHAND0/6
TIP IN0/3
SNAP0/2
DEFLECTED1/1
BAT0/0
OTHER0/12
SEA
WRIST0/17
SLAP0/10
BACKHAND0/4
TIP IN0/5
SNAP0/3
DEFLECTED0/2
BAT0/1
OTHER0/19
EDM
SEA
Off the rush
4 G on 22
2.28 xG
0 G on 28
2.84 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 2
0.41 xG
0 G on 3
0.35 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: EDM went 3-for-26, SEA 0-for-17. EDM 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
S. Skinner
EDM · 26/26 · 1.000
+3.7
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/61.3+1.3
Medium0/182.0+2.0
Low0/370.5+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

J. Daccord
SEA · 21/25 · .840
-0.4
saved above expected
D
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/71.8+1.8
Medium4/131.5-2.5
Low0/320.3+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

82 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
EDM
40 shots
4
Final
82 shots
SEA
42 shots
0
EDM attackSEA attack
EDM SEA Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — EDM 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
L. Draisaitl
#29 · C · EDM
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 21:15 on ice · +1
R. Nugent-Hopkins
#93 · C · EDM
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 17:41 on ice
C. McDavid
#97 · C · EDM
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 17:39 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Nov 29
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 6:13 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 Edmonton at 53% win probability — a 2.6-2.4 game that's about as close to a pick'em as the mathematics allows. What matters is the dynamic underneath.

Edmonton owns the underlying play. At 5v5, the Oilers generate 52.0% of expected goals and control possession at 50.0% Corsi, facts that indicate they impose their system on opponents. Seattle sits at 46.0% xG and 45.0% Corsi — outplayed, not by a little.

But Edmonton is running cold while Seattle runs hot. The Oilers' PDO of 0.982 means they finish below average; they're overdue for regression upward. The Kraken's 1.011 PDO means they're burying chances at an unsustainable clip. This is the script for a reversal: the superior team unlucky, the inferior team lucky.

Edmonton's recent form supports this. Over the last 10 games, the Oilers are -16 in goal differential, a steeper hole than the season trend would suggest. That gap likely closes.

The game hinges on depth scoring. Zach Hyman drives play at 1.23 expected goals per 60, has 14 goals and 13 assists, and shoots at 13.0%. Connor McDavid is McDavid — 25 goals, 33 assists, operating at 0.92 xG/60 and 13.7% on the shot clock. Seattle answers with Shane Wright at 0.77 xG/60 (8 goals, 10 assists, 10.4% shooting) and Berkly Catton at 0.68 xG/60 (6 goals, 8 assists, 8.8% shooting) — both productive, both more dependent on volume to impact play.

Defensively, Edmonton's weakness is Jake Walman. For Seattle, it's Chandler Stephenson.

The outcome likely turns on whether Edmonton's edge in play finally converts to luck, or whether Seattle's hot hand sustains. The Oilers should win this more often than not — yet the 53% line means Seattle's PDO is carrying real weight. If Edmonton establishes territorial control early and forces Seattle to react, the talent will eventually find the scoreboard.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

EDM 53%
53%
EDM
Model favorite
53%
47%
EDM50SEA

EDM by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score EDM 2.6–2.4 SEA; 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
EDM← edge
edge →SEA
52.0%46.0%
50.0%45.0%
2.642.13
2.472.51
2.131.87
2.291.95
0.9821.011

EDM holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.982 vs 1.011) says SEA has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
EDM
4-5-1
-16 GD · 3d rest
SEA
5-3-2
+2 GD · 2d rest
0.982
EDM 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 Oilers own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.
  • The Oilers drive Corsi at 50.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Oilers' PDO is 0.982 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Things to watch
  • The Oilers own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.
  • The Oilers drive Corsi at 50.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • The Oilers are underwater at -16 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Oilers' PDO is 0.982 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
EDM
Expected in goal
C. Pickard
3 days rest.818 last start
Backup Connor Ingram · +1.7 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

SEA
Expected in goal
J. Daccord
2 days rest.857 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
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
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