Motion-blurred skater in a Vegas Golden Knights sweater

Breakdown · SJS at VGK

Golden Knights hold off the Sharks

FinalSat, Nov 29

SJSSan Jose Sharks3 VGKVegas Golden Knights4

The verdict · earned

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

SJS 3 · VGK 4

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 6:24 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

San Jose matched Vegas with four high-danger chances apiece, yet the Knights won 4–3—a result explained by their dominance in overall control: 58% of expected goals (3.43–2.48), 53% of shot attempts (24–21). The Sharks' efficient finishing in dangerous areas kept the game competitive, but Vegas's depth prevailed.

Both teams scored three rush goals. Vegas required 31 chances to find the net three times; San Jose needed only 20. That efficiency gap reflected the Sharks' precision in high-leverage moments—they converted two of four high-danger chances (50%)—yet lacked the territorial dominance to sustain their efficiency.

William Eklund's backhander from the doorstep in the second period marked the game's turning point. Vegas's depth prevented San Jose's dangerous chances from multiplying. The Sharks created three rebound opportunities but converted none, a microcosm of their night: sharp in tight spaces, yet overwhelmed by a more complete, more controlled opponent.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Nov 29

SJS

VGK

Golden Knights hold off the Sharks

Chances 2.5 – 3.4Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Golden Knights earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

SJS

2.48

VGK

3.43

42% of the chances58%

The board read SJS 3, VGK 4. The chances read SJS 2.5, VGK 3.4.

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

Luck check

VGK

+0.6

goals above expected

VGK3.43 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

SJS2.48 expected · 3 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 07:34SJSW. Smith1–0
P1 16:13VGKT. Hertl1–1
P2 05:36VGKC. Sissons1–2
P2 07:02VGKM. Marner1–3
P2 12:38VGKT. HertlPP1–4
P2 14:40SJSW. SmithPP2–4
P2 19:35SJSW. Eklund3–4

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

Where the shots came from

SJS

35 shots

Final

78 shots

VGK

43 shots

SJS VGK GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 3 in

shots · 4 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

SJSVGK

2 / 4

0.99 xG

High danger

1 / 4

1.27 xG

1 / 14

1.17 xG

Medium

2 / 14

1.42 xG

0 / 37

0.32 xG

Low

1 / 48

0.74 xG

High-danger looks: SJS 2 of 4, VGK 1 of 4.

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

In the net

C. Lindbom

−0.5

VGK · 18/21

A. Nedeljkovic

−0.6

SJS · 20/24

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Golden Knights hold off the Sharks

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

07:34SJSW. Smith(T. Toffoli, D. Orlov)1–0
16:13VGKT. Hertl(P. Dorofeyev, B. Hutton)1–1

2ndshots 9–10

05:36VGKC. Sissons(K. Kolesar, C. Reinhardt)1–2
07:02VGKM. Marner(B. Howden, M. Stone)1–3
12:38VGKT. Hertlpower play(M. Marner, J. Eichel)1–4
14:40SJSW. Smithpower play(M. Celebrini)2–4
19:35SJSW. Eklund(A. Gaudette, M. Ferraro)3–4

3rdshots 5–5no goals

score reads SJS–VGK

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.43

VGK chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.6

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.006

VGK puck luck

About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces

54.5%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.48Expected goals3.43

VGK 58% of the chance quality

21Shots on goal24

4High-danger chances4

55All attempts (Corsi)66

Adjusted for score: SJS 48% · VGK 52%

Faceoffs · VGK won65%off57%neu60%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

SJS2 / 4 · 0.99 xG

VGK1 / 4 · 1.27 xG

Medium dangermid-range

SJS1 / 14 · 1.17 xG

VGK2 / 14 · 1.42 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

SJS0 / 37 · 0.32 xG

VGK1 / 48 · 0.74 xG

SJS went 2-for-4 from high danger on 0.99 expected goals — 1.0 above expected.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

SJS

3 G · 2.48 xG · +0.5

VGK

4 G · 3.43 xG · +0.6

012345

SJS finished +0.5 against expected, VGK +0.6.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

SJS

WRIST0/19

SNAP2/9

SLAP0/4

TIP IN0/2

DEFLECTED0/0

BACKHAND1/1

POKE0/0

WRAP AROUND0/0

OTHER0/20

VGK

WRIST1/23

SNAP0/8

SLAP0/3

TIP IN1/5

DEFLECTED0/2

BACKHAND0/0

POKE1/1

WRAP AROUND1/1

OTHER0/23

SJS

VGK

Off the rush

3 G on 20

1.92 xG

3 G on 31

2.24 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 3

0.30 xG

1 G on 2

0.39 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: SJS went 0-for-19, VGK 1-for-23. SJS 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

A. Nedeljkovic

SJS · 20/24 · .833

-0.6

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/41.3+0.3

Medium2/141.4-0.6

Low1/480.7-0.3

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. Lindbom

VGK · 18/21 · .857

-0.5

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/41.0-1.0

Medium1/141.2+0.2

Low0/370.3+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

78 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

SJS

35 shots

Final

78 shots

VGK

43 shots

SJS VGK GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — SJS left, VGK 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

W. Smith

#2 · C · SJS

2 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 19:53 on ice

T. Hertl

#48 · C · VGK

2 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 17:22 on ice · -1

M. Marner

#93 · R · VGK

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 16:31 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, 6:19 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 SJS 2.2–2.7 VGK outcome with the Golden Knights at 58% win probability. Vegas has earned that edge.

The Golden Knights own the underlying play. They generate 54.0% of the 5v5 xG and control 52.0% Corsi—a tilt in shot quality and territory that should separate the teams. This is not noise; this is a team that should be ahead.

The catch is recent. Vegas is underwater at -5 goal differential over their last ten, a reminder that underlying metrics and actual goals sometimes diverge. More pressing: their PDO sits at 0.983—running cold enough to expect regression toward the mean. San Jose's 0.998 PDO is closer to neutral. When Vegas' luck normalizes, their expected play should bleed into their results.

Goaltending adds uncertainty. Both A. Schmid and Y. Askarov are on back-to-backs, a setup where either starter is at risk of a tired outing or a backup insertion. Check pregame lineups.

Players to Watch

SJS

Pavol Regenda — 1.10 xG/60, 5G 1A, 16.1% shooting
Igor Chernyshov — 0.91 xG/60, 6G 8A, 15.0% shooting

VGK

Brandon Saad — 0.91 xG/60, 3G 6A, 4.1% shooting
Tomas Hertl — 0.88 xG/60, 5G 17A, 4.3% shooting

Igor Chernyshov is San Jose's engine at 0.91 xG/60 and a league-leading 15.0% shooting rate—he can torch Vegas if he touches a puck with space. For Vegas, Tomas Hertl anchors the efficiency: 0.88 xG/60 but only 4.3% shooting, leaving room to climb if his shot quality tightens. Brandon Saad operates at the same expected-goal rate as Chernyshov but shoots just 4.1%, a sign his impact has been volume-based.

Vegas is the play. Their edge in underlying metrics is real, their PDO regression is inevitable, and San Jose has no structural counter—only the hope that shooting luck holds or Vegas' recent goal-differential slide extends. It won't. The model knows. Lean Golden Knights.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

VGK 58%

58%

VGK

Model favorite

42%

58%

SJS50VGK

VGK by 16 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score SJS 2.2–2.7 VGK; 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

SJS← edge

edge →VGK

48.0%54.0%

47.0%52.0%

2.332.52

2.562.11

1.992.12

2.322.10

0.9980.983

VGK holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.998 vs 0.983) says SJS has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

SJS

6-4-0

-4 GD · 1d rest

VGK

3-3-4

-5 GD · 1d rest

0.998

SJS PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.983

VGK PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Golden Knights own the underlying play — 54.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
The Golden Knights drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.

Regression watch

The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Things to watch

The Golden Knights own the underlying play — 54.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
The Golden Knights drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
A. Schmid is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
Y. Askarov is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Golden Knights are underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10.
The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

SJS

Expected in goal

Y. Askarov

back-to-back.941 last start

Backup Yaroslav Askarov · -18.9 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.

VGK

Expected in goal

A. Schmid

back-to-back.833 last start

Backup Akira Schmid · -1.0 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

SJS

Pavol Regenda5G 1A

1.10 xG/60 · 2 HD · 16.1% sh

Igor Chernyshov6G 8A

0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh

VGK

Brandon Saad3G 6A

0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.1% sh

Tomas Hertl5G 17A

0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.3% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page