Motion-blurred skater in a green sweater
Breakdown · DAL at LAK

Stars run the Kings off the ice on the underlying numbers

The verdict · earned

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

DAL 3 · LAK 1
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 12:33 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 Stars beat the Kings 3–1, and the underlying numbers backed it up — they controlled 61% of 5v5 expected goals (2.99–1.94).

But here's what really separated them: the Kings held 58% of shot attempts (25–18 on goal), yet finished with only 39% of expected goals. Dallas turned high-volume inefficiency into a runaway. Their shot efficiency told the story — 0.068 xG per attempt versus Los Angeles' 0.040.

The Kings created fewer dangerous looks. They managed just one high-danger chance to Dallas' five. Worse, they underperformed even their modest xG by 0.94 goals — they got the looks they deserved and still fell short.

Dallas executed on the chances that mattered. Two goals came from low-danger spots, the kind a goalie must stop but sometimes doesn't. More importantly, they were lethal on the rush: two goals on 17 rush chances. The Kings crashed the net effectively, manufacturing four rebound opportunities, but converted zero.

J. Oettinger (Dallas) made 24 saves on 25 shots for a 0.960 save percentage, running 0.94 goals better than expected. D. Kuemper (Los Angeles) stopped 15 of 17 for 0.882, also outplaying his xG by 0.99 — a rare oasis in a blowout where the losing goalie actually performed.

The turning point came on Matt Duchene's wrist shot from the point with 19:42 remaining in the third period.

Three Stars

  • #23 E. Lindell (DAL) — 2A in 26:36
  • #18 S. Steel (DAL) — 2A in 18:20
  • #92 B. Clarke (LAK) — 1A in 21:23
The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Jan 12
DAL
3
LAK
1

Stars run the Kings off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 3.0 – 1.9Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Stars earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
DAL
2.99
LAK
1.94
61% of the chances39%

The board read DAL 3, LAK 1. The chances read DAL 3.0, LAK 1.9.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
DAL
+0.0
goals above expected
DAL2.99 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
LAK1.94 expected · 1 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
  1. P1 03:44DALW. Johnston1–0
  2. P3 08:42LAKQ. ByfieldPP1–1
  3. P3 16:14DALJ. Robertson2–1
  4. P3 19:42DALM. DucheneEN3–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
DAL
29 shots
3
Final
63 shots
LAK
34 shots
1
DAL attackLAK attack
DAL LAK Goal
29
shots · 3 in
34
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
DALLAK
1 / 5
1.97 xG
High danger
0 / 1
0.27 xG
0 / 6
0.58 xG
Medium
1 / 11
1.21 xG
2 / 33
0.43 xG
Low
0 / 36
0.46 xG

High-danger looks: DAL 1 of 5, LAK 0 of 1.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
D. Kuemper
+1.0
LAK · 15/17
B+
J. Oettinger
+0.9
DAL · 24/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Stars run the Kings off the ice on the underlying numbers

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 3–5
  1. 03:44DALW. Johnston(S. Steel, E. Lindell)1–0
2ndshots 6–13no goals
    3rdshots 9–7
    1. 08:42LAKQ. Byfieldpower play(C. Perry, B. Clarke)1–1
    2. 16:14DALJ. Robertson(R. Hintz, E. Lindell)2–1
    3. 19:42DALM. Ducheneempty net(M. Rantanen, S. Steel)3–1

    score reads DAL–LAK

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    2.99
    DAL chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    +0.0
    Finishing
    Goals above what those chances were worth
    1.047
    DAL puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    47.8%
    Shot attempts
    Under half — they were outshot
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    2.99Expected goals1.94
    DAL 61% of the chance quality
    18Shots on goal25
    5High-danger chances1
    44All attempts (Corsi)48
    Adjusted for score: DAL 45% · LAK 55%
    Faceoffs · LAK won42%off54%neu36%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    DAL1 / 5 · 1.97 xG
    LAK0 / 1 · 0.27 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    DAL0 / 6 · 0.58 xG
    LAK1 / 11 · 1.21 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    DAL2 / 33 · 0.43 xG
    LAK0 / 36 · 0.46 xG

    DAL went 2-for-33 from low danger on 0.43 expected goals — 1.6 above expected.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    DAL
    3 G · 2.99 xG · +0.0
    LAK
    1 G · 1.94 xG · -0.9
    01234

    DAL finished +0.0 against expected, LAK -0.9.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    DAL
    WRIST1/12
    BACKHAND1/6
    TIP IN0/3
    SNAP1/4
    SLAP0/3
    WRAP AROUND0/1
    OTHER0/15
    LAK
    WRIST1/27
    BACKHAND0/1
    TIP IN0/3
    SNAP0/1
    SLAP0/2
    WRAP AROUND0/0
    OTHER0/14
    DAL
    LAK
    Off the rush
    2 G on 17
    1.26 xG
    1 G on 16
    0.94 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 2
    0.29 xG
    0 G on 4
    0.57 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: DAL went 1-for-12, LAK 1-for-27. DAL 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
    J. Oettinger
    DAL · 24/25 · .960
    +0.9
    saved above expected
    B+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/10.3+0.3
    Medium1/111.2+0.2
    Low0/360.5+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

    D. Kuemper
    LAK · 15/17 · .882
    +1.0
    saved above expected
    B+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/52.0+1.0
    Medium0/60.6+0.6
    Low2/330.4-1.6

    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

    63 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    DAL
    29 shots
    3
    Final
    63 shots
    LAK
    34 shots
    1
    DAL attackLAK attack
    DAL LAK Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — DAL left, LAK 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
    E. Lindell
    #23 · D · DAL
    0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 26:36 on ice · +2
    S. Steel
    #18 · C · DAL
    0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 18:20 on ice · +2
    B. Clarke
    #92 · D · LAK
    0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 21:23 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, 12:32 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

    The model projects a 2.3–2.5 game with the Kings at 53% win probability—as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

    Los Angeles dominates possession. The Kings drive Corsi at 52.0%, sustaining territorial advantage. Dallas counters with a modest shot quality edge (xG% 51.0% versus 52.0%), but that's within noise.

    Dallas's PDO sits at 1.024—the Stars are running hot and regression is likely. The Kings' 1.002 plays closer to sustainable, a marginal edge in luck.

    A. Forsberg faces a back-to-back assignment, a variable worth monitoring for either a backup start or a tired starter.

    Jason Robertson leads Dallas's offense at 25 goals and 21 assists with a 0.96 xG/60 rate and 12.4% shooting. He's scored 2 hard-chance goals. Michael Bunting supports at 8 goals and 14 assists with 0.83 xG/60 and 7.6% shooting.

    Alex Laferriere anchors LA's attack at 16 goals and 18 assists with 0.87 xG/60 and 9.9% shooting. He's also scored 2 hard-chance goals. Jared Wright provides depth at 4 assists and 0.83 xG/60.

    Dallas generates 0% of its goals from hard chances and 0% from rebounds, a stark limitation given the team's talent. Los Angeles shows the same pattern. Tyler Myers represents Dallas's defensive weak link; Adrian Kempe does the same for the Kings.

    The teams cancel out: territorial possession versus talent, regression versus baseline sustainability. This is truly a coin flip.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    LAK 53%
    53%
    LAK
    Model favorite
    47%
    53%
    DAL50LAK

    LAK by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score DAL 2.3–2.5 LAK; 19% 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 →LAK
    51.0%52.0%
    47.0%52.0%
    2.362.42
    2.292.20
    2.071.85
    1.681.71
    1.0241.002

    LAK holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.024 vs 1.002) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    DAL
    3-3-4
    +1 GD · 2d rest
    LAK
    4-5-1
    -4 GD · 1d rest
    1.024
    DAL PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    1.002
    LAK PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Where the edges live
    • The Kings drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    Regression watch
    • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Things to watch
    • The Kings drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    • A. Forsberg is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    DAL
    Expected in goal
    C. DeSmith
    2 days rest.839 last start
    Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 GSAx this season

    No completed game on file for this club yet.

    LAK
    Expected in goal
    A. Forsberg
    back-to-back.885 last start
    Backup Darcy Kuemper · -5.8 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
    LAK
    Alex Laferriere16G 18A
    0.87 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.9% sh
    Jared Wright0G 4A
    0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next