Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Florida Panthers sweater
← Sat, Dec 13 · the slate
Breakdown · FLA at DAL

Panthers shut out the Stars, 4-0

FinalSat, Dec 13
FLAFlorida Panthers4DALDallas Stars0
The verdict · earned

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

FLA 4 · DAL 0
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 8:16 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

The expected-goals metrics painted this as a toss-up — 3.59 to 3.12, barely an edge for Florida. The scoreboard told a different story: Panthers 4, Stars 0. Sergei Bobrovsky and stellar execution bridged the gap.

Dallas held 40% of shot attempts and created 10 high-danger chances, the kind of performance that usually doesn't end in shutout. Yet the Stars finished 0-for-10 on their best chances and underperformed their expected goals by 3.12. That gulf — talent squandered — is why Dallas went home empty.

Bobrovsky was immovable. He stopped 3.1 goals above expected, denying Dallas every opportunity that mattered. Florida, meanwhile, finished its chances ruthlessly: two goals off the rush, a team that crashed the net and converted whenever the moment arrived. The Panthers created six rebound opportunities and capitalized on one, each possession a clinic in offensive discipline.

Brad Marchand opened the floodgates with a snap shot from the point (17:12, third period). Aleksander Lundell and Sam Reinhart orchestrated the offense — Lundell with one goal and one assist, Reinhart with two assists. Marchand, though, carried the load with two goals and an assist in 16:44 of play.

Dallas outshot Florida 23-15. None of it mattered.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Dec 13
FLA
4
DAL
0

Panthers shut out the Stars, 4-0

Chances 3.6 – 3.1Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Panthers earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
FLA
3.59
DAL
3.12
53% of the chances47%

The board read FLA 4, DAL 0. The chances read FLA 3.6, DAL 3.1.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
FLA
+0.4
goals above expected
FLA3.59 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
DAL3.12 expected · 0 scored
Expected
Scored

The Stars left 3.1 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. P2 00:19FLAA. Lundell1–0
  2. P2 05:45FLAS. Bennett2–0
  3. P2 19:45FLAB. MarchandPP3–0
  4. P3 17:12FLAB. MarchandEN4–0
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
FLA
35 shots
4
Final
62 shots
DAL
27 shots
0
FLA attackDAL attack
FLA DAL Goal
35
shots · 4 in
27
shots · 0 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
FLADAL
1 / 8
2.30 xG
High danger
0 / 10
2.46 xG
2 / 7
0.72 xG
Medium
0 / 3
0.34 xG
1 / 38
0.57 xG
Low
0 / 30
0.32 xG

The Stars went 0 for 10 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
S. Bobrovsky
+3.1
FLA · 15/15
B
J. Oettinger
+0.6
DAL · 19/22
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Panthers shut out the Stars, 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 2–2no goals
    2ndshots 13–7
    1. 00:19FLAA. Lundell(E. Luostarinen, S. Reinhart)1–0
    2. 05:45FLAS. Bennett(C. Verhaeghe, B. Marchand)2–0
    3. 19:45FLAB. Marchandpower play(S. Reinhart, S. Jones)3–0
    3rdshots 8–6
    1. 17:12FLAB. Marchandempty net(A. Lundell)4–0

    score reads FLA–DAL

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    3.59
    FLA chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    +0.4
    Finishing
    Goals above what those chances were worth
    1.075
    FLA puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    55.2%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    3.59Expected goals3.12
    FLA 53% of the chance quality
    23Shots on goal15
    8High-danger chances10
    53All attempts (Corsi)43
    Adjusted for score: FLA 50% · DAL 50%
    Faceoffs · DAL won55%off53%neu31%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    FLA1 / 8 · 2.30 xG
    DAL0 / 10 · 2.46 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    FLA2 / 7 · 0.72 xG
    DAL0 / 3 · 0.34 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    FLA1 / 38 · 0.57 xG
    DAL0 / 30 · 0.32 xG

    DAL went 0-for-10 from high danger on 2.46 expected goals — 2.5 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    FLA
    4 G · 3.59 xG · +0.4
    DAL
    0 G · 3.12 xG · -3.1
    012345

    FLA finished +0.4 against expected, DAL -3.1.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    FLA
    SNAP3/20
    SLAP0/6
    BACKHAND0/4
    WRIST0/2
    TIP IN0/2
    DEFLECTED1/1
    POKE0/0
    WRAP AROUND0/0
    OTHER0/18
    DAL
    SNAP0/19
    SLAP0/0
    BACKHAND0/2
    WRIST0/2
    TIP IN0/1
    DEFLECTED0/1
    POKE0/1
    WRAP AROUND0/1
    OTHER0/16
    FLA
    DAL
    Off the rush
    2 G on 21
    2.30 xG
    0 G on 16
    2.36 xG
    Off rebounds
    1 G on 6
    0.60 xG
    0 G on 2
    0.46 xG

    Snap shots carried the volume: FLA went 3-for-20, DAL 0-for-19. FLA scored 2 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. Bobrovsky
    FLA · 15/15 · 1.000
    +3.1
    saved above expected
    A+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/102.5+2.5
    Medium0/30.3+0.3
    Low0/300.3+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

    J. Oettinger
    DAL · 19/22 · .864
    +0.6
    saved above expected
    B
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/82.3+1.3
    Medium2/70.7-1.3
    Low1/380.6-0.4

    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

    62 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    FLA
    35 shots
    4
    Final
    62 shots
    DAL
    27 shots
    0
    FLA attackDAL attack
    FLA DAL Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — FLA left, DAL 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
    B. Marchand
    #63 · L · FLA
    2 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 16:44 on ice · +2
    A. Lundell
    #15 · C · FLA
    1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 19:22 on ice · +2
    S. Reinhart
    #13 · C · FLA
    0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 18:56 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Sat, Dec 13
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 8:14 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 calls this a pick'em. FLA projects to 2.4–2.6 goals against DAL, leaving the Stars at 54% win probability—barely edging Florida. In five-on-five hockey, that gap is the statistical equivalent of a coin toss.

    The Panthers control Corsi at 52.0%, spending more time in the offensive zone. But territory doesn't guarantee goals. Dallas shoots 51.0% in expected goals despite being out-cornered, meaning they punish their chances more efficiently. The Stars' PDO of 1.024 reveals the risk: they're running hot on shooting and goaltending luck, which normalizes downward under pressure. FLA's 0.989 PDO suggests tighter margins, where a single bounce shifts the outcome.

    Sam Bennett drives Florida's offense at 0.97 expected goals per 60 minutes, posting 18 goals and 19 assists with six high-danger chances. His 13.1% shooting rate means he's converting at a sustainable clip, not riding unsustainable variance. Brad Marchand offers secondary depth at 0.93 xG/60, with 17 goals and 9 assists, though his 19.5% shooting—well above league average—represents an outlier worth monitoring.

    Jason Robertson remains Dallas's most dangerous weapon: 25 goals and 21 assists at 0.96 xG/60. The efficiency is elite. He generates only two high-danger chances but converts them at 12.4%, the kind of signature threat that changes games in the playoffs. Michael Bunting (8 goals, 0.83 xG/60, 7.6% shooting, 14 assists) profiles as complementary depth rather than a difference-maker.

    The matchup hinges on execution and containment. FLA must neutralize Robertson's lethal efficiency; Dallas must weather Bennett's consistent pressure without yielding high-danger looks. Marchand's shooting is the variable. If it regresses toward league average—it will, eventually—Dallas gains a real edge. If it holds, the pressure stays on Dallas's goaltending.

    The Stars own the slighter advantage because their luck trends upward while Florida's trends downward. Hot PDOs regress, cold ones climb. But in a game this tight, the margin between success and failure is a single well-placed pass, a missed check, or an open ice turnover. The model's near-even split reflects the truth: flip a coin, and you'll be right as often as wrong.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    DAL 54%
    53%
    DAL
    Model favorite
    47%
    53%
    FLA50DAL

    DAL by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score FLA 2.4–2.6 DAL; 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
    FLA← edge
    edge →DAL
    49.0%51.0%
    52.0%47.0%
    2.482.36
    2.562.29
    1.982.07
    2.211.68
    0.9891.024

    DAL holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.989 vs 1.024) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · No games yet
    FLA
    0-0-0
    +0 GD · 0d rest
    DAL
    0-0-0
    +0 GD · 0d rest
    0.989
    FLA PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    1.024
    DAL PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Where the edges live
    • The Panthers drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    Regression watch
    • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Things to watch
    • The Panthers drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Computed danger · scouting

    Players to watch

    NHL stats API · our xG
    FLA
    Sam Bennett18G 19A
    0.97 xG/60 · 6 HD · 13.1% sh
    Brad Marchand17G 9A
    0.93 xG/60 · 3 HD · 19.5% sh
    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
    Keep going

    Where to next

    Back to the front page