Motion-blurred skater in a Carolina Hurricanes sweater
Breakdown · DAL at CAR

Hurricanes pull away from the Stars

The verdict · earned

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

DAL 3 · CAR 6
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 11:36 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 Hurricanes' 6-3 victory masks a goaltending disaster in Dallas. J. Oettinger surrendered 3 goals beyond what his workload warranted—a -3.04 expected-goal margin that better captures the game's severity than the scoreline itself. C. DeSmith's stellar return (17/18 saves, +1.36 xG) could not rescue the night.

Carolina controlled play with authority. They held 58% of shot attempts (33–24) and 57% of expected goals (4.32–3.30), standard dominance. But they scored 6 from just 4.32 xG—a 1.68-goal overperformance suggesting either elite finishing or variance. They scored twice from low-danger spots, the kind opposing goalies steal.

The Hurricanes' transition game was decisive. They converted 4 goals off 38 rush chances, a rate that overwhelmed Dallas's defense. A. Svechnikov orchestrated the attack with 4 assists in 18:53, while K. Miller added 2 goals and an assist. J. Robertson led Dallas with 1 goal and 2 assists.

Both power plays delivered identical results—2 goals on 9 shots each—but Carolina's rush conversion was the story. When a team executes that sharply in transition, expected goals become academic. B. Bussi (21/23 saves, +1.30 xG) was unflappable; the game turned on Dallas's collapse between the pipes.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Jan 6
DAL
3
CAR
6

Hurricanes pull away from the Stars

Chances 3.3 – 4.3Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Hurricanes earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
DAL
3.30
CAR
4.32
43% of the chances57%

The board read DAL 3, CAR 6. The chances read DAL 3.3, CAR 4.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
CAR
+1.7
goals above expected
CAR4.32 expected · 6 scored
Expected
Scored
DAL3.30 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored

The Hurricanes scored 1.7 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 07:19CARK. Miller0–1
  2. P1 11:53DALJ. RobertsonPP1–1
  3. P1 13:32CARS. GostisbeherePP1–2
  4. P1 18:56CARL. Stankoven1–3
  5. P2 05:17CARK. Miller1–4
  6. P2 06:59CARS. JarvisPP1–5
  7. P3 00:36DALM. Rantanen2–5
+2 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
DAL
39 shots
3
Final
93 shots
CAR
54 shots
6
DAL attackCAR attack
DAL CAR Goal
39
shots · 3 in
54
shots · 6 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
DALCAR
1 / 6
1.22 xG
High danger
2 / 7
1.73 xG
2 / 14
1.57 xG
Medium
2 / 18
1.83 xG
0 / 31
0.51 xG
Low
2 / 41
0.76 xG

The Hurricanes buried 2 of 7 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
C. DeSmith
+3.3
DAL · 17/18
B+
B. Bussi
+1.3
CAR · 21/23
+1 more on the full breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Hurricanes pull away from the Stars

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 9–9
  1. 07:19CARK. Miller(A. Svechnikov, S. Aho)0–1
  2. 11:53DALJ. Robertsonpower play1–1
  3. 13:32CARS. Gostisbeherepower play(S. Jarvis, A. Svechnikov)1–2
  4. 18:56CARL. Stankoven(K. Miller, J. Chatfield)1–3
2ndshots 5–10
  1. 05:17CARK. Miller(A. Svechnikov, N. Ehlers)1–4
  2. 06:59CARS. Jarvispower play(A. Svechnikov, N. Ehlers)1–5
3rdshots 10–14
  1. 00:36DALM. Rantanen(J. Robertson)2–5
  2. 08:18CARW. Carrier(N. Ehlers)2–6
  3. 18:11DALW. Johnstonpower play(M. Rantanen, J. Robertson)3–6

score reads DAL–CAR

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.32
CAR chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.7
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.032
CAR puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
56.4%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.30Expected goals4.32
CAR 57% of the chance quality
24Shots on goal33
6High-danger chances7
51All attempts (Corsi)66
Adjusted for score: DAL 50% · CAR 51%
Faceoffs · CAR won70%off35%neu69%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
DAL1 / 6 · 1.22 xG
CAR2 / 7 · 1.73 xG
Medium dangermid-range
DAL2 / 14 · 1.57 xG
CAR2 / 18 · 1.83 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
DAL0 / 31 · 0.51 xG
CAR2 / 41 · 0.76 xG

CAR went 2-for-41 from low danger on 0.76 expected goals — 1.2 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
DAL
3 G · 3.30 xG · -0.3
CAR
6 G · 4.32 xG · +1.7
01234567

DAL finished -0.3 against expected, CAR +1.7.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
DAL
SNAP0/14
WRIST0/12
SLAP0/1
BACKHAND1/6
TIP IN0/4
BAT1/1
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER1/13
CAR
SNAP4/34
WRIST0/4
SLAP2/10
BACKHAND0/3
TIP IN0/2
BAT0/0
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/12
DAL
CAR
Off the rush
1 G on 24
2.62 xG
4 G on 38
3.44 xG
Off rebounds
2 G on 3
0.45 xG
1 G on 3
0.50 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: DAL went 0-for-14, CAR 4-for-34. CAR scored 4 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
C. DeSmith
DAL · 17/18 · .944
+3.3
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/71.7-0.3
Medium2/181.8-0.2
Low2/410.8-1.2

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 · 10/15 · .667
-0.7
saved above expected
D
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/71.7-0.3
Medium2/181.8-0.2
Low2/410.8-1.2

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

B. Bussi
CAR · 21/23 · .913
+1.3
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/61.2+0.2
Medium2/141.6-0.4
Low0/310.5+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

93 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
DAL
39 shots
3
Final
93 shots
CAR
54 shots
6
DAL attackCAR attack
DAL CAR Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — DAL left, CAR 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
A. Svechnikov
#37 · R · CAR
0 G · 4 A · 2 SOG · 18:53 on ice · +1
K. Miller
#19 · D · CAR
2 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 20:20 on ice · +3
J. Robertson
#21 · L · DAL
1 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 19:42 on ice
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Jan 6
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 11:34 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 DAL 2.3 - 2.8 CAR finish with the Hurricanes at 57% win probability. That edge stems from structural play and luck deficit, not injury or depth.

Carolina's 56.0% xG against Dallas's 51.0% means the Hurricanes generate higher-quality looks. Carolina's 60.0% Corsi dominates Dallas's 47.0%, reflecting territorial disadvantage for Dallas. That imbalance typically compounds across 60 minutes into a shot volume advantage.

Where the model finds its edge is PDO regression. Carolina sits at 0.984—a luck discount that corrects upward. Dallas sits at 1.024—a luck premium that corrects downward. The Hurricanes' -5 goal differential over the last ten games reflects this discord. Excellent underlying play paired with unlucky results creates the scenario where regression bites.

Dallas has a material goaltending concern: B. Bussi faces a back-to-back, raising odds of either a backup start or a fatigued main option. Carolina's Blake and Jarvis exploit that vulnerability.

Players to Watch

Dallas

  • Jason Robertson: 0.96 xG/60, 25G 21A, 2 HD goals, 12.4% shooting
  • Michael Bunting: 0.83 xG/60, 8G 14A, 7.6% shooting

Carolina

  • Jackson Blake: 1.06 xG/60, 14G 19A, 2 HD goals, 10.9% shooting
  • Seth Jarvis: 0.98 xG/60, 17G 12A, 1 HD goals, 11.9% shooting

Tyler Myers is Dallas's defensive liability; Charles Alexis Legault occupies the same role for Carolina. Robertson projects toward regression from early scoring. Bunting and Jarvis operate in warm shooting territory. Blake's tier-one xG creation sits above elite threshold. The interplay between goaltending wear and elite forward pressure determines this game's margin.

The model sees a closer game than raw metrics suggest. Carolina's underlying edge and PDO deficit converge toward 57%, signaling a tilt toward superior play rather than a blowout. Dallas's hot PDO buys a temporary stay, but PDO regression is the surest force in hockey.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

CAR 57%
57%
CAR
Model favorite
43%
57%
DAL50CAR

CAR by 14 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score DAL 2.3–2.8 CAR; 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
DAL← edge
edge →CAR
51.0%56.0%
47.0%60.0%
2.362.98
2.292.31
2.072.26
1.681.95
1.0240.984

CAR holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.024 vs 0.984) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
DAL
4-3-3
+3 GD · 2d rest
CAR
4-5-1
-5 GD · 1d rest
1.024
DAL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.984
CAR 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 51.0%.
  • The Hurricanes drive Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
  • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Hurricanes own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 51.0%.
  • The Hurricanes drive Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • B. Bussi is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Hurricanes are underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
DAL
Expected in goal
J. Oettinger
2 days rest.857 last start
Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

CAR
Expected in goal
B. Bussi
back-to-back.966 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.

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
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
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
Keep going

Where to next