Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a New Jersey Devils sweater
← Mon, Jan 12 · the slate
Breakdown · NJD at MIN

Devils pull away from the Wild

FinalMon, Jan 12
NJDNew Jersey Devils5MINMinnesota Wild2
The verdict · stolen

The Devils stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 2.83–3.11 and won anyway.

NJD 5 · MIN 2
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 12:49 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

The Devils beat the Wild 5–2, but expected goals split 3.11–2.83—a near-even game buried under goaltending variance and rush execution.

The scoreline masks the underlying competition. The Wild held 44% of shot attempts (23–29 on goal) and generated meaningful opportunities. Yet they left 1.11 goals on the table in expected performance, while the Devils overperformed theirs by 2.17. Across both teams, that's the entire difference between a one-goal contest and a three-goal blowout.

Goaltending was the axis. J. Markstrom stopped 1.11 goals above expected; J. Wallstedt gave up 2.17 more than his workload deserved. When one team gets that split, a close underlying game becomes a lopsided scoreline.

New Jersey was lethal off the rush—5 goals on 27 chances—a conversion rate that punishes lapses. Marcus Foligno's wrist shot from the doorstep at 19:41 of the third period was the turning point, the moment the game tipped from competitive to runaway.

The Wild crashed the crease aggressively: 5 rebound opportunities, 1 converted. Effective positioning, but insufficient finish. New Jersey generated only 3 rebound chances and converted none—their dominance came from higher-quality initial looks, not second-chance efficiency.

The shot share went to Minnesota. The puck luck went to New Jersey. When those vectors split with elite goaltending backing the play, a team wins decisively even if xG suggested a close game.

Three Stars

  • #7 D. Hamilton (NJD) — 2A in 19:08
  • #13 N. Hischier (NJD) — 2A in 18:13
  • #91 D. Mercer (NJD) — 1G, 1A in 16:36
The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Jan 12
NJD
5
MIN
2

Devils pull away from the Wild

Chances 2.8 – 3.1Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Devils took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value
NJD
2.83
MIN
3.11
48% of the chances52%

The board read NJD 5, MIN 2. The chances read NJD 2.8, MIN 3.1.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NJD
+2.2
goals above expected
NJD2.83 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
MIN3.11 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

The Devils scored 2.2 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 10:07NJDD. Mercer1–0
  2. P2 13:41MINR. Hartman1–1
  3. P2 19:52NJDO. Palat2–1
  4. P3 07:28NJDJ. Bratt3–1
  5. P3 07:49NJDJ. Bratt4–1
  6. P3 09:39NJDO. Palat5–1
  7. P3 19:41MINM. FolignoPP5–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NJD
42 shots
5
Final
85 shots
MIN
43 shots
2
NJD attackMIN attack
NJD MIN Goal
42
shots · 5 in
43
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NJDMIN
1 / 2
0.43 xG
High danger
1 / 4
1.01 xG
4 / 15
1.72 xG
Medium
1 / 14
1.44 xG
0 / 40
0.67 xG
Low
0 / 44
0.66 xG

High-danger looks: NJD 1 of 2, MIN 1 of 4.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
J. Markstrom
+1.1
NJD · 21/23
F
J. Wallstedt
−2.2
MIN · 24/29
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Devils pull away from the Wild

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 9–6
  1. 10:07NJDD. Mercer(N. Hischier)1–0
2ndshots 10–9
  1. 13:41MINR. Hartman(B. Faber, M. Johansson)1–1
  2. 19:52NJDO. Palat(N. Hischier, J. Siegenthaler)2–1
3rdshots 10–8
  1. 07:28NJDJ. Bratt(D. Hamilton, J. Hughes)3–1
  2. 07:49NJDJ. Bratt(D. Hamilton, B. Dillon)4–1
  3. 09:39NJDO. Palat(D. Mercer)5–1
  4. 19:41MINM. Folignopower play(J. Brodin, V. Hinostroza)5–2

score reads NJD–MIN

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
2.83
NJD chances
Goals their shots were worth
+2.2
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.056
NJD puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
47.9%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.83Expected goals3.11
MIN 52% of the chance quality
29Shots on goal23
2High-danger chances4
57All attempts (Corsi)62
Adjusted for score: NJD 44% · MIN 56%
Faceoffs · MIN won53%off50%neu27%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NJD1 / 2 · 0.43 xG
MIN1 / 4 · 1.01 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NJD4 / 15 · 1.72 xG
MIN1 / 14 · 1.44 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NJD0 / 40 · 0.67 xG
MIN0 / 44 · 0.66 xG

NJD went 4-for-15 from medium danger on 1.72 expected goals — 2.3 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NJD
5 G · 2.83 xG · +2.2
MIN
2 G · 3.11 xG · -1.1
0123456

NJD finished +2.2 against expected, MIN -1.1.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NJD
WRIST3/24
SLAP0/9
SNAP1/2
TIP IN1/3
BACKHAND0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
BAT0/1
OTHER0/15
MIN
WRIST1/28
SLAP0/3
SNAP0/6
TIP IN0/3
BACKHAND0/1
DEFLECTED1/2
BAT0/0
OTHER0/19
NJD
MIN
Off the rush
5 G on 27
2.11 xG
1 G on 18
1.45 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3
0.21 xG
1 G on 5
0.78 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: NJD went 3-for-24, MIN 1-for-28. NJD scored 5 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. Markstrom
NJD · 21/23 · .913
+1.1
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/41.0+0.0
Medium1/141.4+0.4
Low0/440.7+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

J. Wallstedt
MIN · 24/29 · .828
-2.2
saved above expected
F
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/20.4-0.6
Medium4/151.7-2.3
Low0/400.7+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

85 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
NJD
42 shots
5
Final
85 shots
MIN
43 shots
2
NJD attackMIN attack
NJD MIN Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — NJD left, MIN 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
D. Hamilton
#7 · D · NJD
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 19:08 on ice · +3
N. Hischier
#13 · C · NJD
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 18:13 on ice · +3
D. Mercer
#91 · C · NJD
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 16:36 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Jan 12
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 12:27 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

Minnesota is the model's slight favorite at 54% win probability, but this game sits on a knife's edge. The projection spreads only 2.4 to 2.6 goals—about as close to a pick'em as exists.

New Jersey's advantage lives at 5v5 territorial control. The Devils drive Corsi at 51.0% to Minnesota's 48.0%, which means they're pushing play toward the opposing net with consistent pressure. That advantage evaporates when you examine raw chance quality. Minnesota generates 52.0% expected goals against Jersey's 50.0%, suggesting the Wild are more efficient when they do attack.

Jersey's luck pendulum tilts downward. Their PDO of 0.971 means they're running cold on both scoring and goaltending combined. That figure rarely sustains; regression favors the Devils later in the game.

Minnesota's PDO of 1.007 suggests the inverse. They're riding a sliver of fortune, which can vanish on a single shift.

The Forwards

Timo Meier is New Jersey's engine at 1.08 expected goals per 60 minutes. His 13 goals and 15 assists anchor the Devils' offense, though his 6.7% shooting rate suggests some regression risk. More telling: only three of his goals came from high-danger chances, meaning he converts scrappier opportunities than his underlying xG rate implies.

Jack Hughes operates at 0.88 xG/60—lower volume than Meier, but steadier. His 11.5% shooting rate is the outlier. When he shoots, he scores, which makes Minnesota's goaltending a factor.

Matt Boldy is Minnesota's counterweight. At 22 goals on 0.89 xG/60, Boldy is finishing at 13.7%—elite territory. Five of his goals came from high-danger spots, meaning his scoring is built on substance, not luck.

Robby Fabbri rounds out the watch list. At 0.88 xG/60 but only 2 goals, he's chasing finishing angles. One goal from a high-danger spot and a 6.9% shooting rate suggest improvement is coming.

The Setup

New Jersey will press for territorial position and let regression work in their favor. Minnesota's path runs through sustained chance generation and Boldy's finishing while Jersey's shooting luck remains cold.

The Devils' control metrics give them structural advantage. Minnesota's scoring talent gives them a second-half cushion. This one genuinely could go either way.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

MIN 54%
54%
MIN
Model favorite
46%
54%
NJD50MIN

MIN by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NJD 2.4–2.6 MIN; 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
NJD← edge
edge →MIN
50.0%52.0%
51.0%48.0%
2.452.55
2.502.40
1.662.04
2.231.93
0.9711.007

MIN holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.971 vs 1.007) says MIN has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · No games yet
NJD
0-0-0
+0 GD · 0d rest
MIN
0-0-0
+0 GD · 0d rest
0.971
NJD PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.007
MIN PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Devils drive Corsi at 51.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Devils' PDO is 0.971 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Things to watch
  • The Devils drive Corsi at 51.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • The Devils' PDO is 0.971 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG
NJD
Timo Meier13G 15A
1.08 xG/60 · 3 HD · 6.7% sh
Jack Hughes18G 17A
0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.5% sh
MIN
Matt Boldy22G 18A
0.89 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh
Robby Fabbri2G 3A
0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.9% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page