Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Detroit Red Wings sweater
← Fri, Jan 16 · the slate
Breakdown · SJS at DET

Red Wings run the Sharks off the ice on the underlying numbers

FinalFri, Jan 16
SJSSan Jose Sharks2DETDetroit Red Wings4
The verdict · earned

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

SJS 2 · DET 4
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:02 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 Red Wings controlled 68% of 5v5 expected goals (5.58–2.60) and 53% of shot attempts—the kind of dominance that typically produces a blowout. They won only 4-2 because Y. Askarov saved 2.58 goals above expected and Detroit underperformed its xG by 1.58. Without those offsets, this would've been a rout.

Detroit's advantage in shot quality was stark. They generated 8 high-danger chances to San Jose's 4, and their per-shot efficiency tells the story: 0.085 xG per attempt versus 0.055. The Red Wings exploited their superiority off the rush, converting 2 goals on 34 chances, and created 5 rebound opportunities, though they left all five on the table.

The outlier was Y. Askarov. With a 0.875 SV%, he saved 21 of 24 shots and beat his expected performance by 2.58 goals—a save rate that kept San Jose within striking distance. J. Gibson (DET) was solid with a 0.909 SV%, overperforming by 0.60, but Askarov's night was the difference between a comfortable result and a decisive one.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Jan 16
SJS
2
DET
4

Red Wings run the Sharks off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 2.6 – 5.6Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Red Wings earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
SJS
2.60
DET
5.58
32% of the chances68%

The board read SJS 2, DET 4. The chances read SJS 2.6, DET 5.6.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
DET
−1.6
goals above expected
DET5.58 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
SJS2.60 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
  1. P1 06:18DETA. DeBrincatPP0–1
  2. P1 09:54SJSW. Smith1–1
  3. P2 01:58SJSC. Graf2–1
  4. P2 06:55DETJ. Compher2–2
  5. P3 04:41DETD. Larkin2–3
  6. P3 18:28DETM. KasperEN2–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
SJS
28 shots
2
Final
77 shots
DET
49 shots
4
SJS attackDET attack
SJS DET Goal
28
shots · 2 in
49
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
SJSDET
1 / 4
1.13 xG
High danger
3 / 8
2.71 xG
1 / 9
0.98 xG
Medium
1 / 19
2.23 xG
0 / 34
0.48 xG
Low
0 / 39
0.63 xG

The Red Wings buried 3 of 8 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
Y. Askarov
+2.6
SJS · 21/24
B
J. Gibson
+0.6
DET · 20/22
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Red Wings run the Sharks 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 7–9
  1. 06:18DETA. DeBrincatpower play(L. Raymond, J. van Riemsdyk)0–1
  2. 09:54SJSW. Smith(M. Celebrini, J. Klingberg)1–1
2ndshots 4–9
  1. 01:58SJSC. Graf(N. Leddy, S. Dickinson)2–1
  2. 06:55DETJ. Compher(M. Kasper)2–2
3rdshots 11–7
  1. 04:41DETD. Larkin(L. Raymond, J. van Riemsdyk)2–3
  2. 18:28DETM. Kasperempty net(L. Raymond)2–4

score reads SJS–DET

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
5.58
DET chances
Goals their shots were worth
−1.6
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.018
DET puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
58.4%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.60Expected goals5.58
DET 68% of the chance quality
22Shots on goal25
4High-danger chances8
47All attempts (Corsi)66
Adjusted for score: SJS 43% · DET 57%
Faceoffs · DET won69%off56%neu39%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
SJS1 / 4 · 1.13 xG
DET3 / 8 · 2.71 xG
Medium dangermid-range
SJS1 / 9 · 0.98 xG
DET1 / 19 · 2.23 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
SJS0 / 34 · 0.48 xG
DET0 / 39 · 0.63 xG

DET went 1-for-19 from medium danger on 2.23 expected goals — 1.2 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
SJS
2 G · 2.60 xG · -0.6
DET
4 G · 5.58 xG · -1.6
0123456

SJS finished -0.6 against expected, DET -1.6.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
SJS
SNAP0/10
WRIST0/8
BACKHAND1/4
SLAP0/2
TIP IN1/3
DEFLECTED0/1
BAT0/0
OTHER0/19
DET
SNAP2/17
WRIST1/15
BACKHAND1/5
SLAP0/7
TIP IN0/4
DEFLECTED0/0
BAT0/1
OTHER0/17
SJS
DET
Off the rush
1 G on 23
2.09 xG
2 G on 34
3.13 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 0
0.00 xG
0 G on 5
0.87 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: SJS went 0-for-10, DET 2-for-17. DET 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
Y. Askarov
SJS · 21/24 · .875
+2.6
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger3/82.7-0.3
Medium1/192.2+1.2
Low0/390.6+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. Gibson
DET · 20/22 · .909
+0.6
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/41.1+0.1
Medium1/91.0-0.0
Low0/340.5+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

77 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
SJS
28 shots
2
Final
77 shots
DET
49 shots
4
SJS attackDET attack
SJS DET Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — SJS left, DET 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
L. Raymond
#23 · L · DET
0 G · 3 A · 2 SOG · 16:53 on ice · +2
M. Kasper
#92 · C · DET
1 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 14:33 on ice · +2
J. van Riemsdyk
#21 · L · DET
0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 13:49 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Fri, Jan 16
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:00 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 gives Detroit a 53% win probability in a projected 2.4–2.6 goal game. This is a toss-up with a marginal edge.

Detroit has the rest advantage—two days versus San Jose's four. But the Sharks' real problem is their minus-6 goal differential over the last 10 games. That deficit won't vanish with an extra practice day.

The even-strength numbers show parity. San Jose is at 48.0% expected goals with 47.0% Corsi; Detroit counters at 49.0% xG and 49.0% Corsi. PDO is 0.998 for San Jose and 0.985 for Detroit—close enough that neither side is fluking results.

Production is where division emerges. Alex DeBrincat carries 0.88 xG per 60 with 17 goals. Marco Kasper provides 0.81 xG/60 with 7 goals. San Jose's Pavol Regenda (1.10 xG/60, 5 goals, 16.1% shooting) and Igor Chernyshov (0.91 xG/60, 6 goals, 15.0% shooting) show heavier offensive volume on a tighter sample.

Defensively, Chernyshov is San Jose's liability. DeBrincat attacking that space is Detroit's clearest scoring avenue. Axel Sandin-Pellikka is Detroit's soft target; San Jose can exploit him in transition.

Both teams are stuck at 0% high-danger and 0% rebound goals. Second chances haven't materialized. The outcome hinges on clean finishes, not multiple looks.

Detroit's edge is depth: Kasper provides secondary scoring alongside DeBrincat, while San Jose concentrates production through Regenda and Chernyshov. For one game, that structural advantage justifies the 53%. Take the pick'em.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DET 53%
53%
DET
Model favorite
47%
53%
SJS50DET

DET by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score SJS 2.4–2.6 DET; 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
SJS← edge
edge →DET
48.0%49.0%
47.0%49.0%
2.332.38
2.562.50
1.991.73
2.322.07
0.9980.985

DET holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.998 vs 0.985) says SJS has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
SJS
6-4-0
-6 GD · 4d rest
DET
6-3-1
+3 GD · 2d rest
0.998
SJS PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.985
DET PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Things to watch
  • The Sharks are underwater at -6 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Sharks have 2 more days of rest.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
SJS
Expected in goal
Y. Askarov
4 days rest.806 last start
Backup Yaroslav Askarov · -18.9 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

DET
Expected in goal
C. Talbot
2 days rest.950 last start
Backup John Gibson · +11.7 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
SJS
Pavol Regenda5G 1A
1.10 xG/60 · 2 HD · 16.1% sh
Igor Chernyshov6G 8A
0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh
DET
Alex DeBrincat17G 28A
0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.0% sh
Marco Kasper7G 8A
0.81 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.1% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page