Motion-blurred skater in a green sweater
Breakdown · DAL at WPG

Stars hold off the Jets

The verdict · stolen

The Stars stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.54–3.98 and won anyway.

DAL 4 · WPG 3
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 7:42 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 won the scoreboard war 4–3, but the underlying numbers tell a different story: Winnipeg controlled the game, out-attempting Dallas 33–19 and generating 3.98 expected goals to Dallas's 3.54. The Jets squandered that advantage, undershooting their xG by 0.98 goals.

The imbalance wasn't in volume; it was in quality. Dallas created seven high-danger chances and converted zero, while E. Comrie's save percentage plummeted to 0.789 against C. DeSmith's 0.909. But Dallas capitalized ruthlessly off the rush, converting three of 21 chances to Winnipeg's two on 32 attempts. That's the margin.

Logan Stanley's slot goal midway through the third—the turning point—didn't end the game, but Dallas's power play did the damage: two goals on eight shots (0.78 xG) proved decisive. Dallas created five rebound opportunities and converted zero. Winnipeg created four and converted one. Crashing the net cut both ways.

M. Rantanen orchestrated Dallas's attack with three assists across 19:07. M. Scheifele responded with two goals in 25:47 for Winnipeg, and K. Connor chipped in two assists in 25:31. Those numbers masked the underlying story: Winnipeg played the better game and lost anyway.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Dec 9
DAL
4
WPG
3

Stars hold off the Jets

Chances 3.5 – 4.0Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Jets deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
DAL
3.54
WPG
3.98
47% of the chances53%

The board read DAL 4, WPG 3. The chances read DAL 3.5, WPG 4.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
DAL
+0.5
goals above expected
DAL3.54 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
WPG3.98 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
  1. P1 00:44DALE. Lindell1–0
  2. P2 01:16DALR. HintzPP2–0
  3. P2 02:31DALA. Petrovic3–0
  4. P2 11:04WPGM. Scheifele3–1
  5. P2 18:52WPGM. Scheifele3–2
  6. P3 04:46DALJ. RobertsonPP4–2
  7. P3 05:54WPGL. Stanley4–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
DAL
32 shots
4
Final
78 shots
WPG
46 shots
3
DAL attackWPG attack
DAL WPG Goal
32
shots · 4 in
46
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
DALWPG
0 / 7
1.86 xG
High danger
1 / 6
1.57 xG
2 / 12
1.40 xG
Medium
2 / 17
1.79 xG
2 / 26
0.27 xG
Low
0 / 41
0.63 xG

High-danger looks: DAL 0 of 7, WPG 1 of 6.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
C. DeSmith
+1.0
DAL · 30/33
D
E. Comrie
−0.5
WPG · 15/19
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Stars hold off the Jets

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 6–11
  1. 00:44DALE. Lindell(W. Johnston, M. Rantanen)1–0
2ndshots 8–14
  1. 01:16DALR. Hintzpower play(M. Rantanen, W. Johnston)2–0
  2. 02:31DALA. Petrovic(M. Bourque)3–0
  3. 11:04WPGM. Scheifele(K. Connor)3–1
  4. 18:52WPGM. Scheifele(J. Morrissey, K. Connor)3–2
3rdshots 5–8
  1. 04:46DALJ. Robertsonpower play(M. Heiskanen, M. Rantanen)4–2
  2. 05:54WPGL. Stanley(C. Perfetti, G. Vilardi)4–3

score reads DAL–WPG

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.54
DAL chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.5
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.042
DAL puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
41.3%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.54Expected goals3.98
WPG 53% of the chance quality
19Shots on goal33
7High-danger chances6
45All attempts (Corsi)64
Adjusted for score: DAL 36% · WPG 64%
Faceoffs · WPG won55%off33%neu20%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
DAL0 / 7 · 1.86 xG
WPG1 / 6 · 1.57 xG
Medium dangermid-range
DAL2 / 12 · 1.40 xG
WPG2 / 17 · 1.79 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
DAL2 / 26 · 0.27 xG
WPG0 / 41 · 0.63 xG

DAL went 0-for-7 from high danger on 1.86 expected goals — 1.9 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
DAL
4 G · 3.54 xG · +0.5
WPG
3 G · 3.98 xG · -1.0
012345

DAL finished +0.5 against expected, WPG -1.0.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
DAL
WRIST2/19
SLAP2/5
BACKHAND0/3
TIP IN0/3
SNAP0/0
DEFLECTED0/0
WRAP AROUND0/1
POKE0/1
OTHER0/13
WPG
WRIST1/22
SLAP1/9
BACKHAND0/4
TIP IN0/4
SNAP1/4
DEFLECTED0/3
WRAP AROUND0/0
POKE0/0
OTHER0/18
DAL
WPG
Off the rush
3 G on 21
2.14 xG
2 G on 32
3.22 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 5
1.08 xG
1 G on 4
0.52 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: DAL went 2-for-19, WPG 1-for-22. DAL 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
C. DeSmith
DAL · 30/33 · .909
+1.0
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/61.6+0.6
Medium2/171.8-0.2
Low0/410.6+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

E. Comrie
WPG · 15/19 · .789
-0.5
saved above expected
D
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/71.9+1.9
Medium2/121.4-0.6
Low2/260.3-1.7

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
DAL
32 shots
4
Final
78 shots
WPG
46 shots
3
DAL attackWPG attack
DAL WPG Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — DAL left, WPG 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
M. Rantanen
#96 · R · DAL
0 G · 3 A · 0 SOG · 19:07 on ice
M. Scheifele
#55 · C · WPG
2 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 25:47 on ice · +1
K. Connor
#81 · L · WPG
0 G · 2 A · 7 SOG · 25:31 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Dec 9
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 7:41 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 favored by the thinnest of margins. The model projects a 2.5-2.4 Stars win with both teams at 50% win probability—a mathematical coin flip.

The gap opens elsewhere. Dallas is 8-0-2 over their last 10 games, while Winnipeg sits at -9 goal differential in the same span. The Stars have momentum; the Jets are foundering.

Beneath the surface, Dallas owns the underlying play. The Stars' 51.0% 5v5 expected goals share against Winnipeg's 48.0% suggests a genuine advantage in shot quality and volume. Winnipeg's 49.0% Corsi—their shot attempt rate—edges Dallas's 47.0%, but shots aren't goals. Dallas's 1.024 PDO indicates the Stars are running hot; Winnipeg's 0.998 is dragging them down. Some regression for Dallas is baked into the model's 50-50 outcome.

Dallas's edge rests on Jason Robertson and Michael Bunting. Robertson generates 0.96 expected goals per 60 minutes on 25 goals and 21 assists, supplemented by 2 high-danger chances and a 12.4% shooting rate. Bunting's 0.83 xG/60 pairs with 8 goals, 14 assists, and a 7.6% shooting rate.

Winnipeg counters with Nino Niederreiter and Kyle Connor. Niederreiter sits at 0.87 xG/60 with 6 goals, 6 assists, and 3 high-danger chances at 8.6% shooting. Connor has matched Robertson's 25 goals while adding 30 assists, generating 0.83 xG/60 at a brisk 13.0% shooting rate. Tyler Myers is Dallas's defensive liability; Colin Miller shoulders that role for Winnipeg. Neither team is generating production from high-danger chances or rebounds, a statistical void suggesting either conservative play or systematic data collection issues.

This is genuinely too close to call. The model says coin flip; the form says Dallas. Take whichever side feels right.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DAL 51%
51%
DAL
Model favorite
51%
49%
DAL50WPG

DAL by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score DAL 2.5–2.4 WPG; 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 →WPG
51.0%48.0%
47.0%49.0%
2.362.34
2.292.55
2.071.90
1.682.10
1.0240.998

DAL holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.024 vs 0.998) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
DAL
8-0-2
+19 GD · 2d rest
WPG
3-6-1
-9 GD · 2d rest
1.024
DAL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.998
WPG 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 48.0%.
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 48.0%.
  • The Stars are the hotter team by points pace (8-0-2 in their last 10).
  • The Jets are underwater at -9 goal differential over their last 10.
  • 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
J. Oettinger
2 days rest.931 last start
Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

WPG
Expected in goal
T. Milic
2 days rest.818 last start
Backup Connor Hellebuyck · +5.5 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
WPG
Nino Niederreiter6G 6A
0.87 xG/60 · 3 HD · 8.6% sh
Kyle Connor25G 30A
0.83 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.0% sh
Keep going

Where to next