Motion-blurred skater in a Detroit Red Wings sweater

Breakdown · DET at SEA

Red Wings hold off the Kraken

FinalSat, Dec 6

DETDetroit Red Wings4 SEASeattle Kraken3

The verdict · earned

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

DET 4 · SEA 3

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 7:19 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 the game's best scoring chances—five high-danger opportunities to Detroit's three—yet lost 4-3. J. Daccord stopped all five of those premium looks. The Red Wings' advantage wasn't in volume but precision: they converted rush chances efficiently (3 goals on 29 attempts) while Seattle could not.

J. Gibson's 0.889 save percentage topped J. Daccord's 0.840, the difference between a win and a loss. Detroit held the edge in expected goals at 3.11–3.52, a tight margin that matched Seattle's 52% share of shot attempts. The game looked close on the surface.

Patrick Kane's wrist shot from the high slot in the third period turned it.

Detroit's shot quality was superior—0.058 expected goals per attempt versus Seattle's 0.040—meaning every Red Wing look carried more danger. Detroit couldn't convert its own high-danger chances (0 for 5), a drought unlikely to repeat. Seattle scored twice from low-danger spots, a reminder that the goaltender needs those. Rebound battles: Seattle crashed the net four times without converting; Detroit crashed six times and found one.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Dec 6

DET

SEA

Red Wings hold off the Kraken

Chances 3.5 – 3.1Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Red Wings earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

DET

3.52

SEA

3.11

53% of the chances47%

The board read DET 4, SEA 3. The chances read DET 3.5, SEA 3.1.

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

Luck check

DET

+0.5

goals above expected

DET3.52 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

SEA3.11 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 07:06DETE. FinniePP1–0
P1 16:16SEAB. Montour1–1
P2 05:10DETA. Copp2–1
P2 06:44SEAA. Larsson2–2
P2 12:44SEAC. Stephenson2–3
P2 19:32DETJ. van Riemsdyk3–3
P3 17:31DETP. Kane4–3

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

Where the shots came from

DET

41 shots

Final

90 shots

SEA

49 shots

DET SEA GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 4 in

shots · 3 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

DETSEA

0 / 5

1.16 xG

High danger

0 / 3

0.60 xG

4 / 17

1.74 xG

Medium

1 / 15

1.55 xG

0 / 39

0.62 xG

Low

2 / 59

0.95 xG

The Kraken went 0 for 3 from the slot.

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

In the net

J. Gibson

+0.1

DET · 24/27

J. Daccord

−0.5

SEA · 21/25

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Red Wings 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 6–8

07:06DETE. Finniepower play(N. Danielson, A. Sandin-Pellikka)1–0
16:16SEAB. Montour(J. Eberle, M. Beniers)1–1

2ndshots 12–14

05:10DETA. Copp(S. Edvinsson, M. Seider)2–1
06:44SEAA. Larsson(V. Dunn, T. Kartye)2–2
12:44SEAC. Stephenson(A. Larsson, E. Tolvanen)2–3
19:32DETJ. van Riemsdyk(J. Compher, S. Edvinsson)3–3

3rdshots 7–5

17:31DETP. Kane(A. DeBrincat)4–3

score reads DET–SEA

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.52

DET chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.5

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.027

DET puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

44.2%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.52Expected goals3.11

DET 53% of the chance quality

25Shots on goal27

5High-danger chances3

61All attempts (Corsi)77

Adjusted for score: DET 44% · SEA 56%

Faceoffs · SEA won59%off32%neu44%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

DET0 / 5 · 1.16 xG

SEA0 / 3 · 0.60 xG

Medium dangermid-range

DET4 / 17 · 1.74 xG

SEA1 / 15 · 1.55 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

DET0 / 39 · 0.62 xG

SEA2 / 59 · 0.95 xG

DET went 4-for-17 from medium danger on 1.74 expected goals — 2.3 above expected.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

DET

4 G · 3.52 xG · +0.5

SEA

3 G · 3.11 xG · -0.1

012345

DET finished +0.5 against expected, SEA -0.1.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

DET

WRIST2/26

SLAP0/1

TIP IN0/6

SNAP1/4

BACKHAND0/1

POKE1/2

BAT0/1

OTHER0/20

SEA

WRIST2/31

SLAP0/11

TIP IN1/3

SNAP0/2

BACKHAND0/2

POKE0/0

BAT0/0

OTHER0/28

DET

SEA

Off the rush

3 G on 29

2.55 xG

1 G on 34

2.02 xG

Off rebounds

1 G on 6

0.71 xG

0 G on 4

0.49 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: DET went 2-for-26, SEA 2-for-31. DET 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. Gibson

DET · 24/27 · .889

+0.1

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/30.6+0.6

Medium1/151.6+0.6

Low2/590.9-1.1

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

-0.5

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/51.2+1.2

Medium4/171.7-2.3

Low0/390.6+0.6

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

90 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

DET

41 shots

Final

90 shots

SEA

49 shots

DET SEA GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — DET 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

S. Edvinsson

#77 · D · DET

0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 24:48 on ice · +3

A. Larsson

#6 · D · SEA

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 21:52 on ice

V. Dunn

#29 · D · SEA

0 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 24:27 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Dec 6

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 7:18 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 2.4–2.4 game with the Red Wings at 50% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

Both teams are underwater over their last 10. Seattle sits at -7 goal differential; Detroit at -9. The larger deficit masks a territorial advantage that makes the numbers confusing at first. Over the season at 5v5, Detroit controls play decisively—49.0% xG rate, 49.0% Corsi rate—yet trails Seattle in actual results. That's where PDO enters. Detroit's is 0.985, suggesting regression incoming. Seattle's is 1.011, a sign they've converted their chances at an unsustainable clip.

Detroit generates better looks. Alex DeBrincat (17 goals, 28 assists) is the primary weapon at 0.88 xG per 60 minutes, converting at 9.0%. Marco Kasper follows at 0.81 xG/60 with 7 goals and 8 assists, yet his 6.1% shooting rate suggests he's underperforming. For Seattle, Shane Wright (8 goals, 10 assists) operates at 0.77 xG/60, while Berkly Catton (6 goals, 8 assists) ranks at 0.68 xG/60 with 5 high-danger goals—an exceptional finish rate on limited looks.

The goaltending situation is a wash. P. Grubauer (Seattle) and C. Talbot (Detroit) are both on back-to-backs, inviting tired starts or backup deployments. Neither team has an edge here.

Detroit's defensive liability is Axel Sandin-Pellikka; Seattle's is Chandler Stephenson. Watch for each team to attack these pairings—a mismatch on the ice becomes a shortcut to dangerous scoring chances.

The tension is clean: Detroit drives play but hasn't finished. Seattle finishes better than their chances warrant. One team regresses to expected shooting rates and pulls ahead; the other sustains luck and steals it. That's your coin flip.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DET 50%

50%

DET

Model favorite

50%

DET50SEA

DET by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score DET 2.4–2.4 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

DET← edge

edge →SEA

49.0%46.0%

49.0%45.0%

2.382.13

2.502.51

1.731.87

2.071.95

0.9851.011

DET holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.985 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

DET

4-4-2

-9 GD · 1d rest

SEA

4-4-2

-7 GD · 1d rest

0.985

DET 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 Red Wings drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.

Things to watch

The Red Wings drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.
P. Grubauer is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
C. Talbot is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Kraken are underwater at -7 goal differential over their last 10.
The Red Wings are underwater at -9 goal differential over their last 10.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

DET

Expected in goal

C. Talbot

back-to-back.844 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.

SEA

Expected in goal

P. Grubauer

back-to-back.778 last start

Backup Joey Daccord · -6.2 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

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

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