Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Detroit Red Wings sweater
← Sat, Dec 20 · the slate
Breakdown · DET at WSH

Red Wings run the Capitals off the ice on the underlying numbers

FinalSat, Dec 20
DETDetroit Red Wings5WSHWashington Capitals2
The verdict · earned

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

DET 5 · WSH 2
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 9:05 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 Red Wings rolled past the Capitals 5–2, but the scoreboard understates Detroit's dominance. The Red Wings controlled 69% of expected goals at 5v5 (6.04–2.72), outshot Washington 41–26 on goal attempts, and outmatched them 12–3 in high-danger chances.

The real story is how much worse this could have been. L. Thompson saved 2.04 goals above expected—a performance that kept Washington in the game despite being thoroughly outworked. J. Gibson posted a 0.923 save percentage, underperforming his xG model by 0.72 goals.

Detroit's superiority extended beyond volume. The Red Wings registered 0.086 expected goals per shot, elite finishing territory. Washington managed 0.044 per attempt. Both teams scored twice off the rush, Detroit on 31 chances and Washington on 24, but that parity masks the underlying rout. The Capitals' efficiency on the rush obscures a complete quality deficit elsewhere.

Dylan Larkin's snap shot from the wing in the third period (17:10) exemplified the evening: controlled execution in a game where Detroit imposed its will.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Dec 20
DET
5
WSH
2

Red Wings run the Capitals off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 6.0 – 2.7Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Red Wings earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
DET
6.04
WSH
2.72
69% of the chances31%

The board read DET 5, WSH 2. The chances read DET 6.0, WSH 2.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
DET
−1.0
goals above expected
DET6.04 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
WSH2.72 expected · 2 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 01:05DETJ. Leonard1–0
  2. P2 01:37DETJ. van Riemsdyk2–0
  3. P2 05:55DETE. Soderblom3–0
  4. P2 10:05DETM. Seider4–0
  5. P2 10:36WSHA. Protas4–1
  6. P3 08:30WSHM. Fehérváry4–2
  7. P3 17:10DETD. LarkinEN5–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
DET
52 shots
5
Final
94 shots
WSH
42 shots
2
DET attackWSH attack
DET WSH Goal
52
shots · 5 in
42
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
DETWSH
2 / 12
3.54 xG
High danger
0 / 3
0.74 xG
3 / 19
2.03 xG
Medium
1 / 15
1.33 xG
0 / 39
0.47 xG
Low
1 / 44
0.65 xG

The Capitals went 0 for 3 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
L. Thompson
+2.0
WSH · 36/40
B
J. Gibson
+0.7
DET · 24/26
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Red Wings run the Capitals off the ice on the underlying numbers

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 17–6
  1. 01:05DETJ. Leonard(S. Edvinsson, A. Copp)1–0
2ndshots 14–9
  1. 01:37DETJ. van Riemsdyk(M. Seider, A. Copp)2–0
  2. 05:55DETE. Soderblom(M. Kasper, A. Johansson)3–0
  3. 10:05DETM. Seider4–0
  4. 10:36WSHA. Protas(T. Wilson, R. Sandin)4–1
3rdshots 10–11
  1. 08:30WSHM. Fehérváry(D. Chisholm, D. Strome)4–2
  2. 17:10DETD. Larkinempty net(S. Edvinsson)5–2

score reads DET–WSH

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
6.04
DET chances
Goals their shots were worth
−1.0
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.039
DET puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
53.0%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

6.04Expected goals2.72
DET 69% of the chance quality
41Shots on goal26
12High-danger chances3
70All attempts (Corsi)62
Adjusted for score: DET 47% · WSH 53%
Faceoffs · WSH won50%off46%neu68%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
DET2 / 12 · 3.54 xG
WSH0 / 3 · 0.74 xG
Medium dangermid-range
DET3 / 19 · 2.03 xG
WSH1 / 15 · 1.33 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
DET0 / 39 · 0.47 xG
WSH1 / 44 · 0.65 xG

DET went 2-for-12 from high danger on 3.54 expected goals — 1.5 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
DET
5 G · 6.04 xG · -1.0
WSH
2 G · 2.72 xG · -0.7
01234567

DET finished -1.0 against expected, WSH -0.7.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
DET
SNAP4/28
SLAP0/5
WRIST0/9
TIP IN0/3
BACKHAND1/7
OTHER0/18
WSH
SNAP2/23
SLAP0/9
WRIST0/2
TIP IN0/7
BACKHAND0/1
OTHER0/20
DET
WSH
Off the rush
2 G on 31
3.39 xG
2 G on 24
1.86 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 8
1.62 xG
0 G on 3
0.21 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: DET went 4-for-28, WSH 2-for-23. DET 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
J. Gibson
DET · 24/26 · .923
+0.7
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/30.7+0.7
Medium1/151.3+0.3
Low1/440.7-0.3

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

L. Thompson
WSH · 36/40 · .900
+2.0
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/123.5+1.5
Medium3/192.0-1.0
Low0/390.5+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

94 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
DET
52 shots
5
Final
94 shots
WSH
42 shots
2
DET attackWSH attack
DET WSH Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — DET left, WSH 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. Seider
#53 · D · DET
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 23:31 on ice · +3
S. Edvinsson
#77 · D · DET
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 22:16 on ice · +3
A. Copp
#18 · C · DET
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 15:23 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Dec 20
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 9:03 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 2.5–2.7 goal game with Washington at 53% to win. This is as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

Detroit and Washington are virtually matched at 5v5. Both teams own Corsi% of 49.0%, and their expected-goal rates barely separate (Detroit 49.0%, Washington 50.0%). The meaningful difference sits in Washington's 1.018 PDO versus Detroit's 0.985: the Capitals are running hot, so expect some regression.

L. Thompson faces a back-to-back, so watch for either a backup or a tired starter.

Alex DeBrincat carries Detroit's offense. He generates 0.88 xG/60 with 17 goals and 28 assists, posting a 9.0% shooting rate and 2 high-danger goals. That mark has room to regress. Marco Kasper supplies secondary scoring at 0.81 xG/60 (7 goals, 8 assists, 1 HD goal) but shoots just 6.1%, suggesting further downside.

Washington counters with Alex Ovechkin, who leads at 0.97 xG/60 with 19 goals and 17 assists, posting 2 high-danger goals and an unsustainable 13.8% shooting rate. Anthony Beauvillier (0.89 xG/60, 14 goals, 9 assists, 2 HD goals) shoots at 10.4%, also above his probable mean.

Both teams face the same structural trap: 0% high-danger goal rate and 0% rebound goal rate. Without secondary scoring, each team depends entirely on its stars' finishing rates, a volatile condition. Axel Sandin-Pellikka is Detroit's defensive weak link; Declan Chisholm is Washington's. Neither side has built the depth to punish mistakes.

Washington's shooting-rate edge (Ovechkin at 13.8%, Beauvillier at 10.4% versus DeBrincat's 9.0% and Kasper's 6.1%) should favor the Capitals over time. But the model correctly captures the tightness: the Capitals' one-goal projected edge is real but razor-thin.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

WSH 53%
53%
WSH
Model favorite
47%
53%
DET50WSH

WSH by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score DET 2.5–2.7 WSH; 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
DET← edge
edge →WSH
49.0%50.0%
49.0%49.0%
2.382.62
2.502.62
1.732.18
2.071.79
0.9851.018

WSH holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.985 vs 1.018) says WSH has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
DET
6-2-2
+4 GD · 2d rest
WSH
6-2-2
+8 GD · 1d rest
0.985
DET PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.018
WSH PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch
  • The Capitals' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • L. Thompson is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Capitals' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
DET
Expected in goal
C. Talbot
2 days rest.857 last start
Backup John Gibson · +11.7 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

WSH
Expected in goal
L. Thompson
back-to-back1.000 last start
Backup Logan Thompson · +29.3 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
WSH
Alex Ovechkin19G 17A
0.97 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.8% sh
Anthony Beauvillier14G 9A
0.89 xG/60 · 2 HD · 10.4% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page