Motion-blurred skater in a New Jersey Devils sweater
Breakdown · NJD at VAN

Devils hold off the Canucks

The verdict · coin flip

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

NJD 5 · VAN 4
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 2:20 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

New Jersey's 5-4 victory over Vancouver masks a curious inversion: the underlying metrics suggested this should have been a tie or a Canucks win. Tied at 3.67 expected goals apiece, Vancouver held 51% of shot attempts and earned more high-danger chances (10–5). But the Devils converted when it mattered.

K. Lankinen gave up 1.33 more goals than expected, tilting Vancouver's otherwise competitive effort into a loss. J. Markstrom's 0.840 save percentage (21/25) proved sufficient behind New Jersey's superior efficiency.

Devils' precision told the story. Off the rush, they scored 5 goals on 28 chances—a conversion rate that transforms possession disadvantages into wins. The power play was sharp: 2 goals on 6 shots (0.64 xG), a margin that flipped close moments into comfortable leads.

Vancouver had the tools. They finished 4 of 10 from high-danger areas (40%) and crashed the net for 5 rebound opportunities, converting 3. The Canucks looked clinical in the crease. The execution just ran into better execution elsewhere.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Jan 23
NJD
5
VAN
4

Devils hold off the Canucks

Chances 3.7 – 3.7Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Devils took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value
NJD
3.67
VAN
3.67
50% of the chances50%

The board read NJD 5, VAN 4. The chances read NJD 3.7, VAN 3.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NJD
+1.3
goals above expected
NJD3.67 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
VAN3.67 expected · 4 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 01:41NJDL. Hameenaho1–0
  2. P2 02:34NJDN. HischierPP2–0
  3. P2 03:14NJDC. Glass3–0
  4. P2 09:47VANL. Karlsson3–1
  5. P2 11:59VANT. BluegerSH3–2
  6. P2 15:12NJDC. BrownPP4–2
  7. P2 18:12VANZ. Buium4–3
+2 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NJD
38 shots
5
Final
76 shots
VAN
38 shots
4
NJD attackVAN attack
NJD VAN Goal
38
shots · 5 in
38
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NJDVAN
1 / 5
1.71 xG
High danger
4 / 10
2.38 xG
4 / 15
1.52 xG
Medium
0 / 7
0.74 xG
0 / 35
0.44 xG
Low
0 / 36
0.54 xG

High-danger looks: NJD 1 of 5, VAN 4 of 10.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
D
J. Markstrom
−0.3
NJD · 21/25
D-
K. Lankinen
−1.3
VAN · 19/24
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Devils hold off the Canucks

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 8–7
  1. 01:41NJDL. Hameenaho(S. Nemec, C. Glass)1–0
2ndshots 13–10
  1. 02:34NJDN. Hischierpower play(J. Hughes, D. Hamilton)2–0
  2. 03:14NJDC. Glass(L. Hameenaho, J. Siegenthaler)3–0
  3. 09:47VANL. Karlsson(N. Hoglander, M. Pettersson)3–1
  4. 11:59VANT. Bluegershorthanded(D. O'Connor)3–2
  5. 15:12NJDC. Brownpower play(A. Gritsyuk, N. Hischier)4–2
  6. 18:12VANZ. Buium(E. Pettersson)4–3
3rdshots 3–8
  1. 11:03NJDC. Glass(T. Meier, J. Kovacevic)5–3
  2. 18:48VANB. Boeserpower play(L. Karlsson, T. Willander)5–4

score reads NJD–VAN

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.67
NJD chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.3
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.015
NJD puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
50.9%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.67Expected goals3.67
VAN 50% of the chance quality
24Shots on goal25
5High-danger chances10
55All attempts (Corsi)53
Adjusted for score: NJD 46% · VAN 54%
Faceoffs · VAN won44%off53%neu47%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NJD1 / 5 · 1.71 xG
VAN4 / 10 · 2.38 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NJD4 / 15 · 1.52 xG
VAN0 / 7 · 0.74 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NJD0 / 35 · 0.44 xG
VAN0 / 36 · 0.54 xG

NJD went 4-for-15 from medium danger on 1.52 expected goals — 2.5 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NJD
5 G · 3.67 xG · +1.3
VAN
4 G · 3.67 xG · +0.3
0123456

NJD finished +1.3 against expected, VAN +0.3.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NJD
WRIST1/12
SNAP1/14
TIP IN1/6
SLAP1/3
DEFLECTED0/1
BACKHAND1/2
OTHER0/17
VAN
WRIST3/16
SNAP1/11
TIP IN0/4
SLAP0/6
DEFLECTED0/1
BACKHAND0/0
OTHER0/15
NJD
VAN
Off the rush
5 G on 28
3.45 xG
1 G on 23
2.46 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 0
0.00 xG
3 G on 5
1.05 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: NJD went 1-for-12, VAN 3-for-16. 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 · 21/25 · .840
-0.3
saved above expected
D
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger4/102.4-1.6
Medium0/70.7+0.7
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

K. Lankinen
VAN · 19/24 · .792
-1.3
saved above expected
D-
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/51.7+0.7
Medium4/151.5-2.5
Low0/350.4+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

76 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
NJD
38 shots
5
Final
76 shots
VAN
38 shots
4
NJD attackVAN attack
NJD VAN Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — NJD left, VAN 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. Glass
#12 · C · NJD
2 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 12:28 on ice · +1
N. Hischier
#13 · C · NJD
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 19:57 on ice · -1
L. Karlsson
#94 · C · VAN
1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 14:38 on ice · +2
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, 2:19 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 New Jersey-favored matchup at 2.6–2.5, but barely: the Devils own 53% win probability, which is essentially a toss-up.

New Jersey has form on its side. The Devils are 5–5–0 over their last 10 games—genuine proof that they're the hotter team by points pace. But context matters: New Jersey is still -9 in goal differential over that stretch, a sign that unsustainable finishing has buoyed the record. Vancouver's problems run deeper, with -25 in goal differential over the same 10 games; the Canucks are in free fall.

The underlying play tells a different story. Jersey dominates at 5-on-5, where the Devils hold 50.0% expected goals and 51.0% Corsi. That's territorial control that usually translates to wins. Vancouver counters at 44.0% xG and 46.0% Corsi, a significant disadvantage that no coaching adjustment reverses overnight.

Both teams are running cold on PDO—the Devils at 0.971, the Canucks at 0.974—which means both should regress upward. That edge probably matters more than form: cold finishing kills streaks faster than anything else, and regression to league average would tighten this game further.

The goaltending matchup carries uncertainty. K. Lankinen is on a back-to-back, a fact worth monitoring; New Jersey could see fresher legs if the backup gets the start, or else a starter running on fumes.

For New Jersey, Timo Meier is the offensive engine. He carries 1.08 expected goals per 60 minutes—elite volume—backed by 13 goals and 15 assists on the season with a modest 6.7% shooting percentage and 3 high-danger chances. Jack Hughes runs a cooler pace at 0.88 xG/60 but has converted at 11.5%, suggesting real finish over 18 goals and 17 assists.

Vancouver's attack hinges on Filip Chytil, who generates 1.03 expected goals per 60 minutes and converts at 15.0% but has only 3 goals. That gap hints at upside if his role expands. Drew O'Connor offers secondary punch at 13 goals and 11 assists with 11.8% shooting and 3 high-danger chances to his name.

Defensively, New Jersey leaks through Johnathan Kovacevic, while Vancouver's Victor Mancini carries similar exposure. Neither team is clean in transition.

The verdict holds: this is the closest thing to a pick'em on the board.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

NJD 53%
53%
NJD
Model favorite
53%
47%
NJD50VAN

NJD by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NJD 2.6–2.5 VAN; 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 →VAN
50.0%44.0%
51.0%46.0%
2.452.22
2.502.81
1.661.60
2.232.56
0.9710.974

NJD holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.971 vs 0.974) says VAN has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
NJD
5-5-0
-9 GD · 2d rest
VAN
1-8-1
-25 GD · 1d rest
0.971
NJD PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.974
VAN PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Devils own the underlying play — 50.0% 5v5 xG vs 44.0%.
  • The Devils drive Corsi at 51.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.
  • The Devils' PDO is 0.971 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Things to watch
  • The Devils own the underlying play — 50.0% 5v5 xG vs 44.0%.
  • The Devils drive Corsi at 51.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • K. Lankinen is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Devils are the hotter team by points pace (5-5-0 in their last 10).
  • The Canucks are underwater at -25 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
NJD
Expected in goal
J. Allen
2 days rest.957 last start
Backup Jacob Markstrom · -11.9 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

VAN
Expected in goal
K. Lankinen
back-to-back.906 last start
Backup Kevin Lankinen · -19.3 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
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
VAN
Filip Chytil3G 0A
1.03 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh
Drew O'Connor13G 11A
0.85 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.8% sh
Keep going

Where to next