Breakdown · CHI at NSH

Blackhawks shut out the Predators, 3-0

FinalSat, Jan 10

CHIChicago Blackhawks3 NSHNashville Predators0

The verdict · stolen

The Blackhawks stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.19–4.62 and won anyway.

CHI 3 · NSH 0

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 12:12 AMxG: 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

Nashville dominated and lost 3-0. The Predators controlled 59% of expected goals, held 63% of shot attempts, and generated eight high-danger chances. D. Commesso, the Blackhawks goaltender, stopped all of it.

Commesso saved 4.62 goals above expectation and posted a 1.000 save percentage on 36 shots. This was a heist. The Predators converted zero of their eight high-danger chances. Chicago scored three goals from twenty-two rush attempts, a conversion rate built on timing rather than volume.

J. Saros performed solidly for Nashville, stopping 1.19 goals above expected. The Predators created eight rebound opportunities and crashed the net effectively, yet found Commesso perfect whenever it mattered most.

C. Bedard led Chicago with two assists in just over twenty minutes. T. Bertuzzi scored once and added an assist in under sixteen minutes. A. Levshunov contributed an assist from the blue line in twenty-three minutes.

The analytics favored Nashville. The scoreboard didn't. The Predators owned play and still lost because one team made their marginal chances count while the other couldn't beat a goaltender who didn't miss.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Jan 10

CHI

NSH

Blackhawks shut out the Predators, 3-0

Chances 3.2 – 4.6Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Predators deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

CHI

3.19

NSH

4.62

41% of the chances59%

The board read CHI 3, NSH 0. The chances read CHI 3.2, NSH 4.6.

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

Luck check

CHI

−0.2

goals above expected

CHI3.19 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

NSH4.62 expected · 0 scored

Expected

Scored

The Predators left 4.6 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season

Every goal, in order

P2 06:41CHIT. BertuzziPP1–0
P3 11:01CHIN. Lardis2–0
P3 18:32CHIR. GreeneEN3–0

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

Where the shots came from

CHI

31 shots

Final

83 shots

NSH

52 shots

CHI NSH GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 3 in

shots · 0 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

CHINSH

2 / 6

1.65 xG

High danger

0 / 8

1.70 xG

1 / 12

1.23 xG

Medium

0 / 20

2.30 xG

0 / 23

0.32 xG

Low

0 / 36

0.63 xG

The Predators went 0 for 8 from the slot.

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

In the net

A+

D. Commesso

+4.6

CHI · 36/36

B+

J. Saros

+1.2

NSH · 18/20

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Blackhawks shut out the Predators, 3-0

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 7–9no goals

2ndshots 9–12

06:41CHIT. Bertuzzipower play(C. Bedard, A. Levshunov)1–0

3rdshots 5–15

11:01CHIN. Lardis(C. Bedard, K. Korchinski)2–0
18:32CHIR. Greeneempty net(T. Bertuzzi)3–0

score reads CHI–NSH

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.19

CHI chances

Goals their shots were worth

−0.2

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.073

CHI puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

39.0%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.19Expected goals4.62

NSH 59% of the chance quality

21Shots on goal36

6High-danger chances8

41All attempts (Corsi)64

Adjusted for score: CHI 36% · NSH 64%

Faceoffs · NSH won75%off47%neu38%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

CHI2 / 6 · 1.65 xG

NSH0 / 8 · 1.70 xG

Medium dangermid-range

CHI1 / 12 · 1.23 xG

NSH0 / 20 · 2.30 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

CHI0 / 23 · 0.32 xG

NSH0 / 36 · 0.63 xG

NSH went 0-for-20 from medium danger on 2.30 expected goals — 2.3 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

CHI

3 G · 3.19 xG · -0.2

NSH

0 G · 4.62 xG · -4.6

012345

CHI finished -0.2 against expected, NSH -4.6.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

CHI

WRIST2/15

SNAP0/7

SLAP0/5

TIP IN0/2

BACKHAND1/2

WRAP AROUND0/0

BETWEEN LEGS0/0

OTHER0/10

NSH

WRIST0/28

SNAP0/8

SLAP0/5

TIP IN0/7

BACKHAND0/2

WRAP AROUND0/1

BETWEEN LEGS0/1

OTHER0/12

CHI

NSH

Off the rush

3 G on 22

2.65 xG

0 G on 31

2.77 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 3

0.37 xG

0 G on 8

1.42 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: CHI went 2-for-15, NSH 0-for-28. CHI scored 3 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

D. Commesso

CHI · 36/36 · 1.000

+4.6

saved above expected

A+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/81.7+1.7

Medium0/202.3+2.3

Low0/360.6+0.6

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. Saros

NSH · 18/20 · .900

+1.2

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/61.6-0.3

Medium1/121.2+0.2

Low0/230.3+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

83 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

CHI

31 shots

Final

83 shots

NSH

52 shots

CHI NSH GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

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

C. Bedard

#98 · C · CHI

0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 20:54 on ice · +2

T. Bertuzzi

#59 · L · CHI

1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 15:50 on ice · +1

A. Levshunov

#55 · D · CHI

0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 23:32 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Jan 10

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 12:11 AMEdited 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

Nashville holds the structural advantage. The model projects a 2.4-2.9 Chicago game with the Predators at 58% win probability. That gap stems from superior underlying play: Nashville's 49.0% 5v5 xG to Chicago's 42.0%, plus a 50.0% Corsi rate that forecasts territorial dominance throughout the night.

Goaltending uncertainty complicates the forecast. J. Saros faces a back-to-back, raising the possibility of a backup start or a fatigued starter managing a thin margin.

Chicago's offensive load falls on Tyler Bertuzzi and Connor Bedard. Bertuzzi carries 20 goals on a 0.85 xG/60 pace with an 18.0% shooting rate; his seven high-danger markers validate that he's converting premium chances. Bedard (17G, 0.82 xG/60, 11.8% shooting) has added 27 assists, marking him as a playmaker first and finisher second—his below-trend shooting rate suggests latent upside.

Nashville's offense centers on Filip Forsberg (23G, 0.80 xG/60, 13.6% shooting) and Zachary L'Heureux (0.85 xG/60, 16.0% shooting). Forsberg's 23 goals set the Predators' offensive benchmark. L'Heureux generates chances at an elite 0.85 xG/60 pace but has managed only four goals, suggesting his opportunity rate hasn't yet crystallized into offensive volume.

The PDO differential is negligible—Chicago at 0.996, Nashville at 0.992—so the Predators' edge isn't variance or lucky bounces. It's shot share and net positioning. That's the model's lean.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

NSH 58%

58%

NSH

Model favorite

42%

58%

CHI50NSH

NSH by 16 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score CHI 2.4–2.9 NSH; 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

CHI← edge

edge →NSH

42.0%49.0%

46.0%50.0%

2.172.48

2.942.58

1.841.84

2.412.21

0.9960.992

NSH holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.996 vs 0.992) says CHI has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

CHI

5-4-1

-4 GD · 2d rest

NSH

7-3-0

+1 GD · 1d rest

0.996

CHI PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.992

NSH PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Predators own the underlying play — 49.0% 5v5 xG vs 42.0%.
The Predators drive Corsi at 50.0% — expect territorial tilt.

Things to watch

The Predators own the underlying play — 49.0% 5v5 xG vs 42.0%.
The Predators drive Corsi at 50.0% — expect territorial tilt.
J. Saros is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

CHI

Expected in goal

S. Knight

2 days rest.900 last start

Backup Spencer Knight · +10.9 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

NSH

Expected in goal

J. Saros

back-to-back.968 last start

Backup Juuse Saros · -9.3 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

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

NSH

Zachary L'Heureux4G 0A

0.85 xG/60 · 1 HD · 16.0% sh

Filip Forsberg23G 17A

0.80 xG/60 · 4 HD · 13.6% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page