Backcheck
Recap · MIN at EDM

Wild shut out the Oilers, 1-0

The Wild stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 2.46–3.49 and won anyway.

By the ModelJul 11, 6:44 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
MIN
Minnesota Wild
1
Home
EDM
Edmonton Oilers
0
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

2.46Expected goals3.49
59% share for the better side
24Shot attempts (SOG)33
3High-danger chances6
51Corsi (all attempts)71
Score-adjusted: 39% / 61%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Edmonton controlled 59% of expected goals at 5v5 and 58% of shot attempts, yet lost 1-0. J. Wallstedt's exceptional performance explains the gap: 3.49 goals saved above expected.

The Oilers generated 3.49 xG to Minnesota's 2.46 and won high-danger chances 6–3. Wallstedt faced all six difficult looks without allowing a goal. Edmonton created four rebound opportunities and converted none.

Jonas Brodin's slap shot from the point at 13:11 of the first period was the only goal.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
MIN0 / 3 · 0.78 xG
EDM0 / 6 · 1.37 xG
Medium dangermid-range
MIN0 / 10 · 1.00 xG
EDM0 / 14 · 1.41 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
MIN1 / 38 · 0.69 xG
EDM0 / 51 · 0.71 xG

EDM went 0-for-14 from medium danger on 1.41 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
MIN
1 G · 2.46 xG · -1.5
EDM
0 G · 3.49 xG · -3.5
01234
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
J. WallstedtMIN
+3.5
S. SkinnerEDM
+1.5

MIN finished -1.5 against expected, EDM -3.5 — J. Wallstedt (MIN) saved 3.5 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
MIN
SNAP0/20
WRIST0/4
SLAP1/3
TIP IN0/5
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/0
POKE0/1
BAT0/0
OTHER0/15
EDM
SNAP0/9
WRIST0/24
SLAP0/11
TIP IN0/1
BACKHAND0/2
DEFLECTED0/2
POKE0/0
BAT0/1
OTHER0/21
MIN
EDM
Off the rush
0 G on 25 · 1.92 xG
0 G on 29 · 2.46 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3 · 0.40 xG
0 G on 4 · 0.68 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: MIN went 0-for-20, EDM 0-for-9.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
J. Brodin
#25 · D · MIN
1 G · 0 A · 1 SOG · 25:46 TOI · +1
N. Sturm
#78 · C · MIN
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 16:21 TOI · +1
E. Bouchard
#2 · D · EDM
0 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 25:46 TOI · -1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • MIN stole this one. EDM owned 59% of the xG and lost.
  • J. Wallstedt (MIN) stopped 3.5 goals above expected.
  • EDM couldn't convert — 0/6 on high-danger chances. That won't happen often.
  • EDM created 4 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • MIN created 3 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • EDM underperformed xG by 3.5 — wasted quality chances.
  • J. Wallstedt (MIN) saved 3.5 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • J. Wallstedt was a wall on HD chances — 100% SV on 6 high-danger shots.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · MIN at EDM · 9:00 PM ET

Wild at Oilers: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 6:42 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

52%
EDM
Model favorite
48%
52%
MIN50EDM

EDM by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score MIN 2.52.6 EDM; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

MIN← edge
edge →EDM
52.0%5v5 xG%52.0%
48.0%Corsi%50.0%
2.55xGF / 602.64
2.40xGA / 602.47
2.04Goals for / gm2.13
1.93Goals against / gm2.29
1.007PDO — luck, not skill0.982

EDM holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.007 vs 0.982) says MIN has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.5–2.6 goal game with Edmonton at 52% win probability—as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

Minnesota is the hotter team, running 8-0-2 over their last ten games. On season 5v5 metrics, the clubs are virtually indistinguishable. Both carry 52.0% expected goals share. Corsi is nearly flat: 48.0% for the Wild, 50.0% for Edmonton. The real separation comes from luck. Minnesota's 1.007 PDO sits at expectation—goals matching the quality and volume of chances. Edmonton's 0.982 is underperforming, a deficit that tends to reverse.

Matt Boldy anchors Minnesota's attack: 0.89 expected goals per 60 minutes, 22 goals, 18 assists, 13.7% shooting, five high-danger conversions. He's the engine. Robby Fabbri would provide secondary punch—0.88 xG/60 represents legitimate volume—but he's produced just 2 goals and 3 assists on 6.9% shooting and is likely out. That absence is significant.

Zach Hyman fronts Edmonton's offensive assault at 1.23 xG/60, generating the highest volume in this matchup. His 14 goals sit on 13.0% shooting, but only one came from a high-danger chance. Edmonton's role players are converting from modest individual looks—efficient depth. Connor McDavid operates differently. At 0.92 xG/60, he's not the volume driver, yet he's compiled 25 goals and 33 assists, including five high-danger conversions at 13.7% shooting. Elite ceilings don't require shot volume.

Both teams display an odd profile: zero high-danger goals, zero rebound goals. Either their finish rates are unusually clinical, or the underlying data is incomplete. Watch for clarification.

Minnesota's Matt Kiersted is a defensive vulnerability; Edmonton's Jake Walman presents a similar liability. Form favors Minnesota—an 8-0-2 run is not accidental. But Edmonton's ceiling at forward is formidable, and the Oilers' PDO gap is the kind of structural underperformance that demands correction. A genuine flip.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

MIN
Matt Boldy22G 18A
0.89 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh
Robby Fabbri2G 3A
0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.9% sh
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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters