Backcheck
Recap · SEA at VAN

Kraken steal one from the Canucks against the run of play

The Kraken stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 2.70–4.63 and won anyway.

By the ModelJul 11, 10:50 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
SEA
Seattle Kraken
4
Home
VAN
Vancouver Canucks
3
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

2.70Expected goals4.63
63% share for the better side
28Shot attempts (SOG)24
4High-danger chances6
45Corsi (all attempts)78
Score-adjusted: 34% / 66%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Seattle's 4-3 shootout victory was theft. The Canucks controlled 63% of expected goals (4.63 to 2.70) and lost anyway.

The dominance was comprehensive. Vancouver held 46% of shot attempts, generated six high-danger chances to Seattle's four, yet quit the ice empty. The Canucks underperformed their xG by 1.63 goals; the Kraken overperformed by 1.30. That inversion is the evening's core.

J. Daccord was the margin. The Kraken goalie stopped 21 of 24 shots and saved 1.63 goals above expected—enough to transform what the play script should have mandated. T. Demko's 0.893 SV% on 25 saves for Vancouver was steady but insufficient against teammates who couldn't finish.

Seattle's edge came from specificity on the rush. The Kraken scored twice on 22 rush attempts. Vancouver created eight rebound opportunities and converted two; Seattle had four and none. The Canucks' power play (2 PPG on 12 shots, 1.73 xG) was dominant but insufficient.

Matty Beniers's wrist shot from the doorstep settled it in the shootout. One goal, in sudden death, erased an evening of Canuck control.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
SEA1 / 4 · 0.83 xG
VAN2 / 6 · 1.85 xG
Medium dangermid-range
SEA1 / 13 · 1.33 xG
VAN1 / 18 · 2.01 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
SEA1 / 28 · 0.54 xG
VAN0 / 54 · 0.77 xG

VAN went 1-for-18 from medium danger on 2.01 expected goals — 1.0 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
SEA
4 G · 2.70 xG · +1.3
VAN
3 G · 4.63 xG · -1.6
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
J. DaccordSEA
+1.6
T. DemkoVAN
-0.3

SEA finished +1.3 against expected, VAN -1.6 — J. Daccord (SEA) saved 1.6 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
SEA
SNAP1/10
WRIST0/17
SLAP1/7
TIP IN1/4
BACKHAND0/1
DEFLECTED0/0
BETWEEN LEGS0/0
OTHER0/6
VAN
SNAP1/24
WRIST0/7
SLAP0/6
TIP IN0/8
BACKHAND1/5
DEFLECTED1/3
BETWEEN LEGS0/1
OTHER0/24
SEA
VAN
Off the rush
2 G on 22 · 1.65 xG
1 G on 30 · 2.99 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 4 · 0.60 xG
2 G on 8 · 1.03 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: SEA went 1-for-10, VAN 1-for-24. SEA scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
J. DeBrusk
#74 · L · VAN
1 G · 2 A · 5 SOG · 18:12 TOI · +1
F. Hronek
#17 · D · VAN
0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 27:29 TOI · +1
B. Boeser
#6 · R · VAN
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 20:07 TOI · -2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • SEA stole this one. VAN owned 63% of the xG and lost.
  • SEA generated higher-quality looks than the shot total suggests.
  • J. Daccord (SEA) stopped 1.6 goals above expected.
  • SEA was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 22 rush chances.
  • VAN created 8 rebound opportunities (2 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • SEA created 4 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • VAN underperformed xG by 1.6 — wasted quality chances.
  • J. Daccord (SEA) saved 1.6 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • VAN power play was dominant — 2 PPG on 12 PP shots (1.73 xG).
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · SEA at VAN · 10:30 PM ET

Kraken at Canucks: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 10:48 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

50%
VAN
Model favorite
50%
50%
SEA50VAN

VAN by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score SEA 2.52.5 VAN; 19% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

SEA← edge
edge →VAN
46.0%5v5 xG%44.0%
45.0%Corsi%46.0%
2.13xGF / 602.22
2.51xGA / 602.81
1.87Goals for / gm1.60
1.95Goals against / gm2.56
1.011PDO — luck, not skill0.974

SEA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.011 vs 0.974) says SEA has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.5–2.5 game with Vancouver at 50% win probability. This is as close to a pick'em as you'll find. The Canucks arrive vulnerable: -5 goal differential over their last 10 games, plus a PDO of 0.974 that signals they're running cold and overdue for positive regression.

On the season's 5v5 metrics, Seattle holds a marginal edge in underlying quality. The Kraken post 46.0% xG% against Vancouver's 44.0%. The Canucks flip the volume advantage with 46.0% Corsi% to Seattle's 45.0%. Seattle's PDO of 1.011 suggests they've been luckier than their possession play alone warrants.

Players to Watch

Seattle

  • Shane Wright (0.77 xG/60, 8G 10A, 4 HD goals, 10.4% shooting)
  • Berkly Catton (0.68 xG/60, 6G 8A, 5 HD goals, 8.8% shooting)

Vancouver

  • Filip Chytil (1.03 xG/60, 3G 0A, 1 HD goals, 15.0% shooting)
  • Drew O'Connor (0.85 xG/60, 13G 11A, 3 HD goals, 11.8% shooting)

Wright and Catton carry Seattle's offense. Wright's 0.77 xG/60 and 10.4% shooting rate mask an overproduction of high-danger chances. Catton's 5 HD goals on 0.68 xG/60 suggests he's consistently finding the soft ice, and an 8.8% shooting rate implies the production is sustainable.

Filip Chytil presents the inverse profile. His 1.03 xG/60 leads this group, yet he has just 3 goals and a 15.0% shooting rate—underperformance that hints at variance correction. Drew O'Connor provides balance with 13 goals and an 11.8% shooting rate.

Defensively, Seattle flags Chandler Stephenson as a liability; Victor Mancini holds that distinction for Vancouver. Both teams' tactical signatures appear incomplete: neither registers meaningful high-danger or rebound-goal rates, likely a charting gap rather than a strategic pattern.

The Canucks' cold PDO is the real variable. If their 44.0% xG% control persists, positive regression could shift this matchup. But that 2.5–2.5 projection stands: this is a genuine coin flip.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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
VAN
Filip Chytil3G 0A
1.03 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh
Drew O'Connor13G 11A
0.85 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.8% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters