Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Minnesota Wild sweater
← Wed, Feb 4 · the slate
Breakdown · MIN at NSH

Wild edge the Predators in overtime

Final / OTWed, Feb 4
MINMinnesota Wild6NSHNashville Predators5
The verdict · earned

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

MIN 6 · NSH 5
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 4:08 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

Nashville's superior finishing wasn't enough to overcome Minnesota's dominant chance generation. Nashville overperformed their expected goals by 1.50 to Minnesota's 1.31, meaning both teams scored more efficiently than their underlying chances warranted, yet the gap proved decisive: Minnesota controlled 57% of expected goals (4.69–3.50).

Both goalies underperformed their xG. F. Gustavsson faced 3.50 expected goals and allowed five; J. Saros faced 4.69 and allowed six. The Wild's advantage in high-quality chances was insurmountable.

Nashville clawed back with precise finishing in the high-danger zone—two goals on five chances, a 40% rate—and struck twice on 33 rush opportunities. Minnesota answered with four rush goals on 37 attempts and created eight rebound chances, converting none of them.

The deciding moment: Jared Spurgeon's wrist shot from the high slot, 4:14 into overtime.

Three Stars

  • M. Boldy (MIN) — 3G, 1A
  • S. Stamkos (NSH) — 1G, 2A
  • R. O'Reilly (NSH) — 3A
The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · OT · Feb 4
MIN
6
NSH
5

Wild edge the Predators in overtime

Chances 4.7 – 3.5Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Wild earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
MIN
4.69
NSH
3.50
57% of the chances43%

The board read MIN 6, NSH 5. The chances read MIN 4.7, NSH 3.5.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
MIN
+1.3
goals above expected
MIN4.69 expected · 6 scored
Expected
Scored
NSH3.50 expected · 5 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 01:49MINM. Boldy1–0
  2. P1 03:39MINM. BoldyPP2–0
  3. P1 09:26NSHF. ForsbergPP2–1
  4. P1 12:58MINM. Boldy3–1
  5. P1 16:45NSHS. StamkosPP3–2
  6. P1 18:21NSHE. Haula3–3
  7. P2 00:41NSHL. Evangelista3–4
+4 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
MIN
61 shots
6
Final
108 shots
NSH
47 shots
5
MIN attackNSH attack
MIN NSH Goal
61
shots · 6 in
47
shots · 5 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
MINNSH
2 / 6
1.27 xG
High danger
2 / 5
1.11 xG
3 / 22
2.56 xG
Medium
2 / 18
1.69 xG
1 / 50
0.86 xG
Low
1 / 39
0.70 xG

The Wild buried 2 of 6 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
D-
J. Saros
−1.3
NSH · 37/43
D-
F. Gustavsson
−1.5
MIN · 30/35
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Wild edge the Predators in overtime

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 15–12
  1. 01:49MINM. Boldy(Z. Bogosian, J. Eriksson Ek)1–0
  2. 03:39MINM. Boldypower play(Q. Hughes, M. Zuccarello)2–0
  3. 09:26NSHF. Forsbergpower play(R. Josi, J. Marchessault)2–1
  4. 12:58MINM. Boldy(Q. Hughes, B. Faber)3–1
  5. 16:45NSHS. Stamkospower play(F. Forsberg, R. O'Reilly)3–2
  6. 18:21NSHE. Haula(J. Marchessault, N. Perbix)3–3
2ndshots 7–15
  1. 00:41NSHL. Evangelista(S. Stamkos, R. O'Reilly)3–4
  2. 16:06MINY. Trenin4–4
3rdshots 19–7
  1. 15:14MINV. Tarasenko(J. Middleton, D. Yurov)5–4
  2. 15:48NSHR. Josi(R. O'Reilly, S. Stamkos)5–5
OTshots 2–1
  1. 04:14MINJ. Spurgeon(M. Boldy, K. Kaprizov)6–5

score reads MIN–NSH

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.69
MIN chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.3
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
0.996
MIN puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
55.7%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.69Expected goals3.50
MIN 57% of the chance quality
43Shots on goal35
6High-danger chances5
78All attempts (Corsi)62
Adjusted for score: MIN 55% · NSH 45%
Faceoffs · NSH won61%off55%neu61%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
MIN2 / 6 · 1.27 xG
NSH2 / 5 · 1.11 xG
Medium dangermid-range
MIN3 / 22 · 2.56 xG
NSH2 / 18 · 1.69 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
MIN1 / 50 · 0.86 xG
NSH1 / 39 · 0.70 xG

NSH went 2-for-5 from high danger on 1.11 expected goals — 0.9 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
MIN
6 G · 4.69 xG · +1.3
NSH
5 G · 3.50 xG · +1.5
01234567

MIN finished +1.3 against expected, NSH +1.5.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
MIN
WRIST3/41
TIP IN1/7
BACKHAND2/7
SLAP0/3
SNAP0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/17
NSH
WRIST4/36
TIP IN0/3
BACKHAND0/2
SLAP1/4
SNAP0/2
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/15
MIN
NSH
Off the rush
4 G on 37
3.18 xG
2 G on 33
2.71 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 8
1.04 xG
2 G on 4
0.47 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: MIN went 3-for-41, NSH 4-for-36. MIN scored 4 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
F. Gustavsson
MIN · 30/35 · .857
-1.5
saved above expected
D-
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/51.1-0.9
Medium2/181.7-0.3
Low1/390.7-0.3

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. Saros
NSH · 37/43 · .860
-1.3
saved above expected
D-
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/61.3-0.7
Medium3/222.6-0.4
Low1/500.9-0.1

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

108 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
MIN
61 shots
6
Final
108 shots
NSH
47 shots
5
MIN attackNSH attack
MIN NSH Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — MIN left, NSH 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
M. Boldy
#12 · L · MIN
3 G · 1 A · 6 SOG · 19:02 on ice
S. Stamkos
#91 · C · NSH
1 G · 2 A · 6 SOG · 20:00 on ice · -1
R. O'Reilly
#90 · C · NSH
0 G · 3 A · 1 SOG · 19:48 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Wed, Feb 4
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 3:58 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 has this dead even: a 2.6–2.6 projected score with the Wild at exactly 50% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

The Wild own the underlying play. Minnesota's 52.0% 5v5 expected goals share edges Nashville's 49.0%. But Nashville leads in possession—50.0% Corsi% versus Minnesota's 48.0%. PDO splits the difference: Minnesota's 1.007 versus Nashville's 0.992, a small but material gap in bounces.

Both starting goaltenders work back-to-backs. J. Annunen and F. Gustavsson are short on rest.

Minnesota's attack centers on Matt Boldy: 0.89 xG/60, 22 goals, 18 assists, 13.7% shooting. Robby Fabbri, at 0.88 xG/60 with 2 goals and 3 assists, is likely unavailable. Nashville counters with Zachary L'Heureux, who carries 0.85 xG/60 and 4 goals on a 16.0% shooting rate, and Filip Forsberg, combining 0.80 xG/60 with 23 goals and 17 assists at 13.6%.

Defensively, Matt Kiersted is Minnesota's weak spot; Jonathan Marchessault is Nashville's. Both teams register 0% on high-danger and rebound goal rates.

The analytics split cleanly: Minnesota generates superior shot quality, Nashville takes more chances. Over one game, either philosophy could dominate. At 50% apiece, this is a genuine toss-up.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

MIN 50%
50%
MIN
Model favorite
50%
50%
MIN50NSH

MIN by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score MIN 2.6–2.6 NSH; 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
MIN← edge
edge →NSH
52.0%49.0%
48.0%50.0%
2.552.48
2.402.58
2.041.84
1.932.21
1.0070.992

MIN holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.007 vs 0.992) says MIN has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
MIN
7-2-1
+8 GD · 1d rest
NSH
5-3-2
-3 GD · 1d rest
1.007
MIN PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.992
NSH PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Wild own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
Things to watch
  • The Wild own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
  • J. Annunen is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • F. Gustavsson is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
MIN
Expected in goal
F. Gustavsson
back-to-back.850 last start
Backup Filip Gustavsson · +1.4 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.

NSH
Expected in goal
J. Annunen
back-to-back1.000 last start
Backup Juuse Saros · -9.3 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
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
NSH
Zachary L'Heureux4G 0A
0.85 xG/60 · 1 HD · 16.0% sh
Filip Forsberg23G 17A
0.80 xG/60 · 4 HD · 13.6% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page