Breakdown · VGK at CHI

Blackhawks edge the Golden Knights in overtime

Final / OTSun, Jan 4

VGKVegas Golden Knights2 CHIChicago Blackhawks3

The verdict · earned

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

VGK 2 · CHI 3

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 11:15 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

Chicago's dominance was thorough enough that the 3–2 overtime result felt predetermined — the Blackhawks controlled 56% of expected goals (3.61–2.88) and generated 57% of shot attempts, 20–15 on goal. They clobbered Vegas on high-danger chances, 9–7.

The Blackhawks converted efficiently off the rush: two goals from 24 chances. Vegas matched that conversion (2 goals on 19 rush attempts) but couldn't overcome the volume deficit. Rebounds decided secondary battles. Chicago created six and converted one; Vegas generated four and capitalized on zero, evidence of a night spent chasing rather than dictating.

Vegas underperformed their expected goals by 0.88. A. Schmid made 17 saves on 20 shots (0.850 SV%, +0.61 vs. expected)—a very solid performance—but his team lacked the volume to overcome Chicago's superiority. A. Soderblom answered with excellence: 13 saves on 15 shots (0.867 SV%, +0.88), denying Vegas any path to victory.

The end arrived at 01:18 of overtime when Tyler Bertuzzi fired a snap shot from the doorstep, ending a game Chicago controlled from start to finish.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · OT · Jan 4

VGK

CHI

Blackhawks edge the Golden Knights in overtime

Chances 2.9 – 3.6Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Blackhawks earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

VGK

2.88

CHI

3.61

44% of the chances56%

The board read VGK 2, CHI 3. The chances read VGK 2.9, CHI 3.6.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations

Luck check

CHI

−0.6

goals above expected

CHI3.61 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

VGK2.88 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

P1 10:40VGKB. Saad1–0
P1 12:38CHIT. Bertuzzi1–1
P2 00:43VGKM. Stone2–1
P3 11:36CHIT. Bertuzzi2–2
OT 01:18CHIT. Bertuzzi2–3

NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model

Where the shots came from

VGK

31 shots

Final

68 shots

CHI

37 shots

VGK CHI GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 2 in

shots · 3 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

VGKCHI

1 / 7

1.64 xG

High danger

2 / 9

1.98 xG

1 / 8

0.77 xG

Medium

0 / 11

1.27 xG

0 / 26

0.46 xG

Low

1 / 38

0.35 xG

The Blackhawks buried 2 of 9 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance

In the net

B+

A. Soderblom

+0.9

CHI · 13/15

A. Schmid

+0.6

VGK · 17/20

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Blackhawks edge the Golden Knights in overtime

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 8–4

10:40VGKB. Saad(B. Howden, A. Holtz)1–0
12:38CHIT. Bertuzzi(A. Vlasic, A. Burakovsky)1–1

2ndshots 5–8

00:43VGKM. Stone(J. Eichel, N. Hanifin)2–1

3rdshots 2–7

11:36CHIT. Bertuzzi(R. Greene, A. Burakovsky)2–2

OTshots 0–1

01:18CHIT. Bertuzzi(I. Mikheyev, A. Levshunov)2–3

score reads VGK–CHI

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.61

CHI chances

Goals their shots were worth

−0.6

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.003

CHI puck luck

About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces

58.6%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.88Expected goals3.61

CHI 56% of the chance quality

15Shots on goal20

7High-danger chances9

41All attempts (Corsi)58

Adjusted for score: VGK 39% · CHI 61%

Faceoffs · CHI won52%off60%neu28%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

VGK1 / 7 · 1.64 xG

CHI2 / 9 · 1.98 xG

Medium dangermid-range

VGK1 / 8 · 0.77 xG

CHI0 / 11 · 1.27 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

VGK0 / 26 · 0.46 xG

CHI1 / 38 · 0.35 xG

CHI went 0-for-11 from medium danger on 1.27 expected goals — 1.3 left on the table.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

VGK

2 G · 2.88 xG · -0.9

CHI

3 G · 3.61 xG · -0.6

01234

VGK finished -0.9 against expected, CHI -0.6.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

VGK

WRIST2/21

SNAP0/2

BACKHAND0/3

SLAP0/3

TIP IN0/2

BAT0/0

POKE0/0

DEFLECTED0/0

OTHER0/10

CHI

WRIST2/27

SNAP1/3

BACKHAND0/1

SLAP0/1

TIP IN0/1

BAT0/2

POKE0/1

DEFLECTED0/1

OTHER0/21

VGK

CHI

Off the rush

2 G on 19

2.05 xG

2 G on 24

2.19 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 4

0.66 xG

1 G on 6

1.13 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: VGK went 2-for-21, CHI 2-for-27. VGK 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

A. Schmid

VGK · 17/20 · .850

+0.6

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/92.0-0.0

Medium0/111.3+1.3

Low1/380.3-0.7

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

A. Soderblom

CHI · 13/15 · .867

+0.9

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/71.6+0.6

Medium1/80.8-0.2

Low0/260.5+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

68 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

VGK

31 shots

Final

68 shots

CHI

37 shots

VGK CHI GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — VGK left, CHI 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

T. Bertuzzi

#59 · L · CHI

3 G · 0 A · 5 SOG · 19:01 on ice · +3

A. Burakovsky

#28 · L · CHI

0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 18:27 on ice · +2

A. Levshunov

#55 · D · CHI

0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 23:39 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sun, Jan 4

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 11:14 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 projects Vegas at 58% win probability, with a 2.7 - 2.2 goal expectation — a comfortable edge rooted in fundamental dominance rather than variance. This is the kind of gap that doesn't close without a collapse in underlying play.

Vegas owns the underlying advantage decisively. Their 54.0% expected goal share at 5v5 reflects territorial control; Chicago's 42.0% xG% means they're being outworked consistently. The Corsi gap reinforces it — Vegas at 52.0% to Chicago's 46.0% — so expect Vegas to dictate pace and shot volume.

Chicago enters wounded. They're -16 on goal differential over their last 10, which suggests they're not just underperforming but actively getting pushed around. Vegas is -5 in that same window, a meaningful difference but still bleeding on the scoreboard despite the superior underlying numbers.

That gap between process and results points to where the edge lives. Vegas's PDO sits at 0.983 — cold, factually. Chicago's is 0.996, running at close to expected value. If Vegas's underlying play is real (and the xG and Corsi say it is), positive PDO regression is coming. Chicago, meanwhile, has minimal room to outrun their luck further. That's asymmetry the model is pricing in.

The teams' special-teams profiles don't move the needle — both stand at 0% on high-danger goal rates and rebound goals, so 5v5 play is the theater. Vegas's weak point defensively is Rasmus Andersson, though Chicago's Anton Frondell presents an equivalent liability on the other side.

Players to Watch:

Vegas: Brandon Saad carries 0.91 xG/60 with 3 goals and 6 assists, though he's marked likely out. If active, he's a primary threat. Tomas Hertl, generating 0.88 xG/60 with 5 goals and 17 assists on a 4.3% shooting rate, is the cleaner bet to influence the game.

Chicago: Tyler Bertuzzi is the dangerous one — 20 goals on 0.85 xG/60 and an 18.0% shooting rate signal both volume and clinical finishing. Connor Bedard (0.82 xG/60, 17 goals, 27 assists) is the creator; his 11.8% shooting rate shows he's converting opportunities at an elite clip.

Vegas should win this. The model's conviction reflects a team that's been the better side and is due for variance to normalize in their favor.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

VGK 58%

58%

VGK

Model favorite

58%

42%

VGK50CHI

VGK by 16 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score VGK 2.7–2.3 CHI; 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

VGK← edge

edge →CHI

54.0%42.0%

52.0%46.0%

2.522.17

2.112.94

2.121.84

2.102.41

0.9830.996

VGK holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.983 vs 0.996) says CHI has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

VGK

3-5-2

-5 GD · 2d rest

CHI

2-7-1

-16 GD · 2d rest

0.983

VGK PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.996

CHI PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Golden Knights own the underlying play — 54.0% 5v5 xG vs 42.0%.
The Golden Knights drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.

Regression watch

The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Things to watch

The Golden Knights own the underlying play — 54.0% 5v5 xG vs 42.0%.
The Golden Knights drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
The Blackhawks are underwater at -16 goal differential over their last 10.
The Golden Knights are underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10.
The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

VGK

Expected in goal

C. Hart

2 days rest.789 last start

Backup Akira Schmid · -1.0 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

CHI

Expected in goal

S. Knight

2 days rest.880 last start

Backup Spencer Knight · +10.9 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

VGK

Brandon Saad3G 6A

0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.1% sh

Tomas Hertl5G 17A

0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.3% sh

CHI

Tyler Bertuzzi20G 15A

0.85 xG/60 · 7 HD · 18.0% sh

Connor Bedard17G 27A

0.82 xG/60 · 5 HD · 11.8% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page