Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Florida Panthers sweater
← Fri, Dec 19 · the slate
Breakdown · CAR at FLA

Panthers edge the Hurricanes in a shootout

Final / OTFri, Dec 19
CARCarolina Hurricanes3FLAFlorida Panthers4
The verdict · earned

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

CAR 3 · FLA 4
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 9:02 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 Panthers' 4-3 shootout win flatters the Hurricanes. Florida controlled the underlying play so decisively that the single-goal margin seems wrong—they held 57% of expected goals, commanded high-danger chances 10-4, and won shot attempts 41-29. Had typical conversion held, the gap would have been much wider.

B. Bussi was the Hurricanes' only argument. The goalie stopped 38 of 41 shots, overperforming his expected save percentage by 2.11 goals and saving 90% of 10 high-danger chances. Against that, S. Bobrovsky was sharp—26 saves on 29 shots—but overperformed by only 0.86 goals.

The Panthers' power play did real damage. They scored 2 goals on 16 power-play shots (0.98 expected goals) and generated 7 rebound chances, converting 1. Carolina created 4 rebounds and converted 2, a net win on the boards that didn't translate to the scoreboard.

Evan Rodrigues ended it in the shootout—a wrist shot from the high slot that summed up the night: Panthers efficiency when it mattered most.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · SO · Dec 19
CAR
3
FLA
4

Panthers edge the Hurricanes in a shootout

Chances 3.9 – 5.1Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Panthers earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
CAR
3.86
FLA
5.11
43% of the chances57%

The board read CAR 3, FLA 4. The chances read CAR 3.9, FLA 5.1.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
FLA
−1.1
goals above expected
FLA5.11 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
CAR3.86 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 11:53CARJ. Staal1–0
  2. P3 01:27CARS. Aho2–0
  3. P3 07:34CARS. AhoPP3–0
  4. P3 10:16FLAB. Marchand3–1
  5. P3 17:35FLAS. BennettPP3–2
  6. P3 19:18FLAS. ReinhartPP3–3
  7. SO 00:00FLAS. ReinhartPP3–3
+2 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
CAR
49 shots
4
Final
108 shots
FLA
59 shots
5
CAR attackFLA attack
CAR FLA Goal

Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

49
shots · 4 in
59
shots · 5 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
CARFLA
0 / 4
1.29 xG
High danger
1 / 10
1.99 xG
3 / 16
1.92 xG
Medium
2 / 26
2.63 xG
0 / 39
0.66 xG
Low
0 / 37
0.49 xG

The Hurricanes went 0 for 4 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
B. Bussi
+2.1
CAR · 38/41
B+
S. Bobrovsky
+0.9
FLA · 26/29
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Panthers edge the Hurricanes in a shootout

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 10–12
  1. 11:53CARJ. Staal(E. Robinson, S. Gostisbehere)1–0
2ndshots 11–11no goals
    3rdshots 6–15
    1. 01:27CARS. Aho(A. Svechnikov, S. Jarvis)2–0
    2. 07:34CARS. Ahopower play(A. Svechnikov, S. Jarvis)3–0
    3. 10:16FLAB. Marchand(S. Bennett, C. Verhaeghe)3–1
    4. 17:35FLAS. Bennettpower play(E. Rodrigues, S. Reinhart)3–2
    5. 19:18FLAS. Reinhartpower play(B. Marchand, E. Rodrigues)3–3
    OTshots 2–3no goals
      SO
      1. 00:00FLAS. Reinhartpower play3–3
      2. 00:00CARJ. Blakepower play3–3
      3. 00:00FLAE. Rodriguespower play3–3

      score reads CAR–FLA

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

      The numbers

      XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
      5.11
      FLA chances
      Goals their shots were worth
      −1.1
      Finishing
      Goals below what those chances were worth
      0.990
      FLA puck luck
      About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
      55.3%
      Shot attempts
      Over half — they had the puck more
      Split by club

      Who controlled the game

      3.86Expected goals5.11
      FLA 57% of the chance quality
      29Shots on goal41
      4High-danger chances10
      59All attempts (Corsi)73
      Adjusted for score: CAR 41% · FLA 59%
      Faceoffs · FLA won58%off62%neu55%def
      Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
      How the game was won

      The danger ladder

      shotsgoalsexpected
      High dangerslot & crease
      CAR0 / 4 · 1.29 xG
      FLA1 / 10 · 1.99 xG
      Medium dangermid-range
      CAR3 / 16 · 1.92 xG
      FLA2 / 26 · 2.63 xG
      Low dangerperimeter & point
      CAR0 / 39 · 0.66 xG
      FLA0 / 37 · 0.49 xG

      CAR went 0-for-4 from high danger on 1.29 expected goals — 1.3 left on the table.

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

      Finishing vs expected

      expectedactual
      CAR
      3 G · 3.86 xG · -0.9
      FLA
      4 G · 5.11 xG · -1.1
      0123456

      CAR finished -0.9 against expected, FLA -1.1.

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

      Shot diet

      goalsshots
      CAR
      WRIST1/20
      SNAP1/10
      TIP IN0/4
      BACKHAND1/4
      SLAP0/7
      DEFLECTED0/0
      BAT0/0
      OTHER0/14
      FLA
      WRIST2/35
      SNAP0/3
      TIP IN0/6
      BACKHAND0/6
      SLAP0/1
      DEFLECTED0/3
      BAT1/1
      OTHER0/18
      CAR
      FLA
      Off the rush
      1 G on 20
      2.08 xG
      1 G on 38
      3.48 xG
      Off rebounds
      2 G on 4
      0.52 xG
      1 G on 7
      1.06 xG

      Wrist shots carried the volume: CAR went 1-for-20, FLA 2-for-35.

      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
      B. Bussi
      CAR · 38/41 · .927
      +2.1
      saved above expected
      A
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger1/102.0+1.0
      Medium2/262.6+0.6
      Low0/370.5+0.5

      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

      S. Bobrovsky
      FLA · 26/29 · .897
      +0.9
      saved above expected
      B+
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger0/41.3+1.3
      Medium3/161.9-1.1
      Low0/390.7+0.7

      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

      108 shots · press play to watch the game back

      Where the shots came from

      NHL play-by-play coordinates
      CAR
      49 shots
      4
      Final
      108 shots
      FLA
      59 shots
      5
      CAR attackFLA attack
      CAR FLA Goal

      Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

      Each club shoots toward its own end — CAR left, FLA 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
      1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 23:46 on ice · +2
      S. Aho
      #20 · C · CAR
      2 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 23:40 on ice
      S. Bennett
      #9 · C · FLA
      1 G · 1 A · 10 SOG · 23:24 on ice · +1
      Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
      What the model said beforehand

      Before the game

      Written Fri, Dec 19
      Open the pre-game read
      Written from the numbers

      The read

      Edited for clarity
      ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 8:58 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 2.8-2.5 Carolina victory at 54% win probability — about as close to a pick'em as you'll find. This game splits almost perfectly even.

      Yet the split favors Carolina on ice. The Hurricanes dominate at 5v5: 56.0% expected goals while Florida sits at 49.0%, and the Corsi split is even wider, 60.0% to 52.0%. Carolina doesn't just maintain possession; it tilts the entire game. That underlying edge should matter.

      Carolina is underperforming it. A 0.984 PDO signals the Hurricanes are running cold—regression toward their true talent is coming.

      Goaltending introduces a variable. Both D. Tarasov and P. Kochetkov are on back-to-backs, which could mean backups or fatigued starters. Either team's goalie could falter under pressure.

      The scoring load sits on Jackson Blake and Seth Jarvis for Carolina. Blake runs 1.06 xG/60 with 14G 19A, 2 high-danger goals, and a 10.9% shooting rate—volume and conversion moving together. Jarvis trails slightly at 0.98 xG/60, 17G 12A, 1 high-danger goal, and 11.9% shooting. For Florida, Sam Bennett carries 0.97 xG/60, 18G 19A, and 6 high-danger goals with 13.1% shooting, while Brad Marchand posts 0.93 xG/60, 17G 9A, and 19.5% shooting.

      Defensively, Charles Alexis Legault struggles for Carolina, while Brad Marchand does the same for Florida. With both teams vulnerable and goaltending uncertain, this game will be decided by puck possession and flow. Carolina owns that edge. In a coin flip, that's enough.

      What the model said beforehand

      The model's lean

      CAR 54%
      54%
      CAR
      Model favorite
      54%
      46%
      CAR50FLA

      CAR by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score CAR 2.8–2.5 FLA; 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
      CAR← edge
      edge →FLA
      56.0%49.0%
      60.0%52.0%
      2.982.48
      2.312.56
      2.261.98
      1.952.21
      0.9840.989

      CAR holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.984 vs 0.989) says FLA has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

      Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
      Form · Last 10
      CAR
      8-2-0
      +10 GD · 1d rest
      FLA
      6-3-1
      +3 GD · 1d rest
      0.984
      CAR PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      0.989
      FLA PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      What decides it

      Keys to the game

      Where the edges live
      • The Hurricanes own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
      • The Hurricanes drive Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
      Regression watch
      • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
      Things to watch
      • The Hurricanes own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
      • The Hurricanes drive Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
      • D. Tarasov is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
      • P. Kochetkov is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
      • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
      Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

      Lineups

      NHL box score
      CAR
      Expected in goal
      P. Kochetkov
      back-to-back.962 last start
      Backup Brandon Bussi · +2.8 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.

      FLA
      Expected in goal
      D. Tarasov
      back-to-back.931 last start
      Backup Sergei Bobrovsky · -12.2 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
      CAR
      Jackson Blake14G 19A
      1.06 xG/60 · 2 HD · 10.9% sh
      Seth Jarvis17G 12A
      0.98 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.9% sh
      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
      Keep going

      Where to next

      Back to the front page