Motion-blurred skater in a Washington Capitals sweater
Breakdown · NSH at WSH

L. Thompson stands tall as the Capitals edge the Predators

The verdict · stolen

The Capitals stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.84–2.97 and won anyway.

NSH 2 · WSH 4
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 4:19 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 Capitals stole a game that should have belonged to Nashville. Despite trailing 4.84–2.97 in expected goals—a 62–38 split heavily favoring the Predators—Washington won 4-2. The offense found dangerous chances when it mattered; the defense leaned on a goaltender who was simply magnificent.

L. Thompson finished with 27 saves on 29 shots (0.931 SV%), exceeding his expected save percentage by 2.84 goals. More specifically: he stopped 91% of high-danger chances, keeping Nashville's 11 dangerous opportunities from becoming a rout. The Predators couldn't capitalize on their workload; J. Annunen, meanwhile, faced 26 shots and conceded four, underperforming his xG mark by 1.03.

Washington's offense was efficient in the spots that mattered most. The Capitals generated only 3 high-danger chances to Nashville's 11, but converted at the moments it counted. On the rush, they were lethal—4 goals from 20 chances. The power play, too, was clinical: 2 goals on 8 shots with just 0.39 xG, suggesting precision rather than volume.

The turning point came early. Jakob Chychrun's snap shot from the high slot at 13:11 of the third period set the tone for a game that, by every underlying metric, the Predators should have won. Instead, Nashville's dominance in chance creation evaporated against a Capitals goaltender who was the difference.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Feb 5
NSH
2
WSH
4

L. Thompson stands tall as the Capitals edge the Predators

Chances 4.8 – 3.0Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Predators deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
NSH
4.84
WSH
2.97
62% of the chances38%

The board read NSH 2, WSH 4. The chances read NSH 4.8, WSH 3.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
WSH
+1.0
goals above expected
WSH2.97 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
NSH4.84 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

The Predators left 2.8 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 04:15WSHT. Wilson0–1
  2. P1 12:48WSHP. DuboisPP0–2
  3. P2 08:42WSHJ. Chychrun0–3
  4. P2 17:40NSHJ. Marchessault1–3
  5. P3 01:17NSHM. McCarron2–3
  6. P3 13:11WSHJ. ChychrunPP2–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NSH
43 shots
2
Final
84 shots
WSH
41 shots
4
NSH attackWSH attack
NSH WSH Goal
43
shots · 2 in
41
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NSHWSH
1 / 11
2.79 xG
High danger
0 / 3
0.79 xG
1 / 15
1.58 xG
Medium
2 / 12
1.42 xG
0 / 37
0.46 xG
Low
2 / 34
0.77 xG

High-danger looks: NSH 1 of 11, WSH 0 of 3.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
L. Thompson
+2.8
WSH · 27/29
D-
J. Annunen
−1.0
NSH · 26/30
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

L. Thompson stands tall as the Capitals edge the Predators

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 11–12
  1. 04:15WSHT. Wilson(P. Dubois, J. Chychrun)0–1
  2. 12:48WSHP. Duboispower play(D. Strome, J. Carlson)0–2
2ndshots 10–12
  1. 08:42WSHJ. Chychrun0–3
  2. 17:40NSHJ. Marchessault(E. Haula, A. Wilsby)1–3
3rdshots 8–6
  1. 01:17NSHM. McCarron(C. Smith, A. Wilsby)2–3
  2. 13:11WSHJ. Chychrunpower play(D. Strome, A. Ovechkin)2–4

score reads NSH–WSH

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
2.97
WSH chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.0
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.050
WSH puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
43.8%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.84Expected goals2.97
NSH 62% of the chance quality
29Shots on goal30
11High-danger chances3
63All attempts (Corsi)49
Adjusted for score: NSH 62% · WSH 38%
Faceoffs · WSH won61%off63%neu25%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NSH1 / 11 · 2.79 xG
WSH0 / 3 · 0.79 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NSH1 / 15 · 1.58 xG
WSH2 / 12 · 1.42 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NSH0 / 37 · 0.46 xG
WSH2 / 34 · 0.77 xG

NSH went 1-for-11 from high danger on 2.79 expected goals — 1.8 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NSH
2 G · 4.84 xG · -2.8
WSH
4 G · 2.97 xG · +1.0
0123456

NSH finished -2.8 against expected, WSH +1.0.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NSH
SNAP0/20
BACKHAND0/7
SLAP0/5
TIP IN0/5
WRIST1/4
DEFLECTED1/2
OTHER0/20
WSH
SNAP4/24
BACKHAND0/5
SLAP0/6
TIP IN0/3
WRIST0/3
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/8
NSH
WSH
Off the rush
1 G on 29
3.11 xG
4 G on 20
1.97 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 4
0.91 xG
0 G on 4
0.54 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: NSH went 0-for-20, WSH 4-for-24. WSH 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
J. Annunen
NSH · 26/30 · .867
-1.0
saved above expected
D-
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/30.8+0.8
Medium2/121.4-0.6
Low2/340.8-1.2

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

L. Thompson
WSH · 27/29 · .931
+2.8
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/112.8+1.8
Medium1/151.6+0.6
Low0/370.5+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

84 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
NSH
43 shots
2
Final
84 shots
WSH
41 shots
4
NSH attackWSH attack
NSH WSH Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — NSH left, WSH 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. Chychrun
#6 · D · WSH
2 G · 1 A · 7 SOG · 29:21 on ice · +1
P. Dubois
#80 · C · WSH
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 17:35 on ice · +1
A. Wilsby
#83 · D · NSH
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 16:38 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Thu, Feb 5
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 4:18 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 no preference: Nashville projects to 2.5–2.7 goals, Washington 53% win probability. Functionally, this is a pick'em.

Washington's recent record belies what's actually happening. The Capitals are minus-7 in goal differential over their last ten games—they're winning despite not dominating play. Their PDO of 1.018 is the culprit: they're running hot on shooting and save luck. Nashville, by contrast, sits at 0.992, a hair cold. The full-season expected-goals rates tell the real story: Washington 50.0%, Nashville 49.0%. That sliver of difference explains the entire record.

Possession mirrors the underlying play. Washington's 50.0% Corsi% barely edges Nashville's 49.0%—tight enough that one game flips the outcome.

The wrinkle is goaltending. C. Stevenson works a back-to-back, raising the possibility of a backup start or a fatigued starter. Nashville's attack is built on volume and execution. Zachary L'Heureux carries 0.85 xG/60 and 4 goals on a 16.0% shooting rate—he's running hot. Filip Forsberg works the other direction: 0.80 xG/60 and 23 goals but only 13.6% shooting, suggesting the puck is due to find the net more often.

Washington leans on Alex Ovechkin, who owns the sharpest shot quality in this matchup at 0.97 xG/60. His 19 goals pair with a 13.8% shooting rate—solid but not unsustainable. Anthony Beauvillier (0.89 xG/60, 14 goals, 10.4% shooting) provides secondary punch.

Neither team is generating true high-danger chances at an outsize rate. The margin comes down to volume and execution, plus the backup-goalie question. Jonathan Marchessault is a defensive weak link for Nashville, Declan Chisholm for Washington—in a game this even, those vulnerabilities matter.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

WSH 53%
53%
WSH
Model favorite
47%
53%
NSH50WSH

WSH by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NSH 2.5–2.7 WSH; 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
NSH← edge
edge →WSH
49.0%50.0%
50.0%49.0%
2.482.62
2.582.62
1.842.18
2.211.79
0.9921.018

WSH holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.992 vs 1.018) says WSH has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
NSH
5-3-2
-3 GD · 2d rest
WSH
4-5-1
-7 GD · 1d rest
0.992
NSH PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.018
WSH PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch
  • The Capitals' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • C. Stevenson is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Capitals are underwater at -7 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Capitals' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
NSH
Expected in goal
J. Annunen
2 days rest1.000 last start
Backup Juuse Saros · -9.3 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

WSH
Expected in goal
C. Stevenson
back-to-back.857 last start
Backup Logan Thompson · +29.3 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
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
WSH
Alex Ovechkin19G 17A
0.97 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.8% sh
Anthony Beauvillier14G 9A
0.89 xG/60 · 2 HD · 10.4% sh
Keep going

Where to next