Motion-blurred skater in a green sweater

Breakdown · STL at DAL

Stars hold off the Blues

FinalFri, Jan 23

The verdict · coin flip

The Stars won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

STL 2 · DAL 3

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 2:17 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

Dallas won 3–2 despite St. Louis controlling play — the Blues took 22 shot attempts to the Stars' 19. When the team that out-shoots you wins, it's usually execution: better goaltending, better scoring efficiency, or both.

Dallas had both. J. Oettinger stopped 20 of 22 (0.909 save percentage); J. Binnington stopped 16 of 19 (0.842). That gap in save percentage, applied to Dallas's shot total, was worth roughly one goal.

The Stars were clinical in the high-danger zone. They converted 2 of their 4 high-danger chances (50 percent) while the Blues managed just 2 high-danger looks total. Jason Robertson's snap shot from the slot (Period 3, 19:00) was the turning point, the moment Dallas's efficiency finally showed on the scoreboard.

Both teams scored twice off the rush — the Blues on 18 chances, the Stars on 16. But Dallas won elsewhere: a dominant power play (2 goals on 8 shots, 0.91 expected goals) and sharp finishing in high-danger opportunities. Possession doesn't win games. Execution does.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Jan 23

STL

DAL

Stars hold off the Blues

Chances 2.4 – 2.5Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Stars took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value

STL

2.42

DAL

2.53

49% of the chances51%

The board read STL 2, DAL 3. The chances read STL 2.4, DAL 2.5.

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

Luck check

DAL

+0.5

goals above expected

DAL2.53 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

STL2.42 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

P1 05:41DALW. JohnstonPP0–1
P1 11:30STLD. DvorskyPP1–1
P2 04:04STLP. Buchnevich2–1
P2 07:44DALM. DuchenePP2–2
P3 19:00DALJ. Robertson2–3

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

Where the shots came from

STL

29 shots

Final

60 shots

DAL

31 shots

STL DAL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 2 in

shots · 3 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

STLDAL

0 / 2

0.66 xG

High danger

2 / 4

1.39 xG

1 / 13

1.38 xG

Medium

1 / 9

0.73 xG

1 / 30

0.38 xG

Low

0 / 30

0.41 xG

The Stars buried 2 of 4 high-danger looks.

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

In the net

J. Oettinger

+0.4

DAL · 20/22

J. Binnington

−0.5

STL · 16/19

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Stars hold off the Blues

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 3–10

05:41DALW. Johnstonpower play(M. Heiskanen, R. Hintz)0–1
11:30STLD. Dvorskypower play(P. Buchnevich, J. Kyrou)1–1

2ndshots 9–5

04:04STLP. Buchnevich(J. Neighbours, C. Fowler)2–1
07:44DALM. Duchenepower play(W. Johnston, J. Robertson)2–2

3rdshots 10–4

19:00DALJ. Robertson(R. Hintz)2–3

score reads STL–DAL

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

2.53

DAL chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.5

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.025

DAL puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

48.9%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.42Expected goals2.53

DAL 51% of the chance quality

22Shots on goal19

2High-danger chances4

45All attempts (Corsi)43

Adjusted for score: STL 51% · DAL 49%

Faceoffs · DAL won43%off71%neu68%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

STL0 / 2 · 0.66 xG

DAL2 / 4 · 1.39 xG

Medium dangermid-range

STL1 / 13 · 1.38 xG

DAL1 / 9 · 0.73 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

STL1 / 30 · 0.38 xG

DAL0 / 30 · 0.41 xG

STL went 0-for-2 from high danger on 0.66 expected goals — 0.7 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

STL

2 G · 2.42 xG · -0.4

DAL

3 G · 2.53 xG · +0.5

01234

STL finished -0.4 against expected, DAL +0.5.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

STL

SNAP0/16

WRIST0/6

SLAP2/5

TIP IN0/1

BACKHAND0/1

OTHER0/16

DAL

SNAP3/15

WRIST0/9

SLAP0/3

TIP IN0/2

BACKHAND0/2

OTHER0/12

STL

DAL

Off the rush

2 G on 18

1.82 xG

2 G on 16

1.34 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 3

0.37 xG

1 G on 1

0.21 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: STL went 0-for-16, DAL 3-for-15. STL 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. Binnington

STL · 16/19 · .842

-0.5

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/41.4-0.6

Medium1/90.7-0.3

Low0/300.4+0.4

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 · 20/22 · .909

+0.4

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/20.7+0.7

Medium1/131.4+0.4

Low1/300.4-0.6

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

60 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

STL

29 shots

Final

60 shots

DAL

31 shots

STL DAL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — STL left, DAL 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

J. Robertson

#21 · L · DAL

1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 22:54 on ice · +1

R. Hintz

#24 · C · DAL

0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 20:12 on ice · +1

P. Buchnevich

#89 · L · STL

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 19:42 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Fri, Jan 23

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 2:15 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 models split the difference. Dallas projects at 53% win probability in a game expected to land between 2.3 and 2.5 goals for the home team. That margin is close to a pick'em—execution over sixty minutes matters more than the roster gap.

St. Louis is playing catch-up. The Blues are minus-13 in goal differential over their last ten games, a skid extending their season-long structural problem: 49.0% expected goals trails Dallas's 51.0%, meaning the gap is real, not noise. Their 48.0% Corsi—a metric tracking shot volume for and against—lags Dallas's 47.0%. A 1.000 PDO has kept the Blues competitive; Dallas's 1.024 means the Stars are converting at rates above their underlying shot quality, a position that historically can't sustain.

St. Louis's offensive structure depends on two players sustaining above-model production. Jimmy Snuggerud generates 0.86 expected goals per 60 minutes with 15 goals and 22 assists on 11.9% shooting and two high-danger goals. That output exceeds what his volume alone predicts, a sign either of elite finishing or temporary variance. Dylan Holloway runs parallel at 0.82 xG/60 with 13 goals and 24 assists at 10.8% shooting. When top players consistently outpace their expected goals, either they're genuinely elite finishers or they're riding a wave.

Dallas answers with concentrated scoring. Jason Robertson generates 0.96 xG/60 with 25 goals, 21 assists, two high-danger goals, and 12.4% shooting—production that marks a first-tier scorer. Michael Bunting, at 0.83 xG/60 with 8 goals and 14 assists on 7.6% shooting, provides secondary pressure but isn't a load-carrier.

Both teams are producing high-danger chances at historically low rates, a constraint on offensive ceiling. Dallas's 1.024 PDO is the structural vulnerability: the Stars are cashing in above expectation, and reversion to mean is the default.

St. Louis's path requires Dallas to regress while the Blues steal efficiency. The possession metrics favor the home team, but not by the margin needed to guarantee outcome. At 53%, the model isn't hedging. It's saying the home team is favored by roughly a coin flip.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DAL 53%

53%

DAL

Model favorite

47%

53%

STL50DAL

DAL by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score STL 2.3–2.5 DAL; 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

STL← edge

edge →DAL

49.0%51.0%

48.0%47.0%

2.342.36

2.402.29

2.002.07

2.121.68

1.0001.024

DAL holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.000 vs 1.024) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

STL

4-6-0

-13 GD · 2d rest

DAL

3-5-2

-3 GD · 2d rest

1.000

STL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.024

DAL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch

The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.

Things to watch

The Blues are underwater at -13 goal differential over their last 10.
The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

STL

Expected in goal

J. Hofer

2 days rest.867 last start

Backup Joel Hofer · +11.7 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

DAL

Expected in goal

J. Oettinger

2 days rest.889 last start

Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 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

STL

Jimmy Snuggerud15G 22A

0.86 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.9% sh

Dylan Holloway13G 24A

0.82 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.8% sh

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

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page