Motion-blurred skater in a Washington Capitals sweater

Breakdown · PHI at WSH

Capitals hold off the Flyers

FinalWed, Feb 25

PHIPhiladelphia Flyers1 WSHWashington Capitals3

The verdict · earned

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

PHI 1 · WSH 3

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 4:24 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 Flyers underperformed their expected goals by 2.31—enough to explain the 3–1 final despite xG of nearly even (3.91–3.31). Philadelphia's shooting shortfall explains what otherwise would have been a closer result.

The Capitals held 55% of shot attempts (29–24 on goal) and 54% of expected goals. High-danger chances split 7–6. By underlying metrics, this was even.

Philadelphia was not. Zero for 6 on high-danger chances—a finishing drought that rendered quality look generation useless. Washington converted on transition: 2 goals on 24 rush attempts, a rate that turned possession parity into command.

Both goalies beat expected-save models. L. Thompson (WSH) posted 0.958 SV% (23/24), plus-2.31 vs expected. D. Vladar (PHI) was strong at 0.929 (26/28), +1.91 vs expected. Vladar couldn't overcome a 2.31-goal deficit.

The Capitals held because Philadelphia didn't finish. Possession and shot quality cannot compensate for that kind of waste.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Feb 25

PHI

WSH

Capitals hold off the Flyers

Chances 3.3 – 3.9Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Capitals earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

PHI

3.31

WSH

3.91

46% of the chances54%

The board read PHI 1, WSH 3. The chances read PHI 3.3, WSH 3.9.

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

Luck check

WSH

−0.9

goals above expected

WSH3.91 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

PHI3.31 expected · 1 scored

Expected

Scored

The Flyers left 2.3 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season

Every goal, in order

P2 13:52WSHR. Sandin0–1
P3 00:29PHIN. Cates1–1
P3 14:08WSHT. van Riemsdyk1–2
P3 19:34WSHA. ProtasEN1–3

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

Where the shots came from

PHI

34 shots

Final

79 shots

WSH

45 shots

PHI WSH GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 1 in

shots · 3 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

PHIWSH

0 / 6

1.79 xG

High danger

1 / 7

1.81 xG

1 / 13

1.18 xG

Medium

2 / 16

1.65 xG

0 / 30

0.35 xG

Low

0 / 42

0.46 xG

The Flyers went 0 for 6 from the slot.

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

In the net

L. Thompson

+2.3

WSH · 23/24

D. Vladar

+1.9

PHI · 26/28

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Capitals hold off the Flyers

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 9–7no goals

2ndshots 9–13

13:52WSHR. Sandin(H. Lapierre, J. Chychrun)0–1

3rdshots 6–9

00:29PHIN. Cates(T. Sanheim, B. Brink)1–1
14:08WSHT. van Riemsdyk(D. Chisholm, A. Protas)1–2
19:34WSHA. Protasempty net1–3

score reads PHI–WSH

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.91

WSH chances

Goals their shots were worth

−0.9

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.026

WSH puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

57.0%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.31Expected goals3.91

WSH 54% of the chance quality

24Shots on goal29

6High-danger chances7

49All attempts (Corsi)65

Adjusted for score: PHI 44% · WSH 56%

Faceoffs · WSH won64%off40%neu50%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

PHI0 / 6 · 1.79 xG

WSH1 / 7 · 1.81 xG

Medium dangermid-range

PHI1 / 13 · 1.18 xG

WSH2 / 16 · 1.65 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

PHI0 / 30 · 0.35 xG

WSH0 / 42 · 0.46 xG

PHI went 0-for-6 from high danger on 1.79 expected goals — 1.8 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

PHI

1 G · 3.31 xG · -2.3

WSH

3 G · 3.91 xG · -0.9

012345

PHI finished -2.3 against expected, WSH -0.9.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

PHI

SNAP0/15

SLAP0/5

WRIST0/5

TIP IN1/5

BACKHAND0/3

DEFLECTED0/0

WRAP AROUND0/1

OTHER0/15

WSH

SNAP3/22

SLAP0/8

WRIST0/6

TIP IN0/3

BACKHAND0/4

DEFLECTED0/2

WRAP AROUND0/0

OTHER0/20

PHI

WSH

Off the rush

1 G on 23

2.35 xG

2 G on 24

1.87 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 2

0.73 xG

0 G on 4

0.46 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: PHI went 0-for-15, WSH 3-for-22. WSH 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

D. Vladar

PHI · 26/28 · .929

+1.9

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/71.8+0.8

Medium2/161.6-0.3

Low0/420.5+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

L. Thompson

WSH · 23/24 · .958

+2.3

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/61.8+1.8

Medium1/131.2+0.2

Low0/300.3+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

79 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

PHI

34 shots

Final

79 shots

WSH

45 shots

PHI WSH GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — PHI 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

A. Protas

#21 · L · WSH

1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 15:44 on ice · +1

J. Chychrun

#6 · D · WSH

0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 24:14 on ice · +1

T. Sanheim

#6 · D · PHI

0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 21:59 on ice · -1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Wed, Feb 25

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 4:23 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 Washington at 52% win probability in a game it projects at roughly 2.4-2.5 goals per side—about as close to even as you get in hockey.

Philadelphia enters with a -8 goal differential over the last 10 games, so form is working against them. But the underlying numbers paint a more competitive picture. The Flyers control 51.0% of expected goals at 5v5 while the Capitals sit at 50.0%, a gap too small to move confidence. Possession favors Washington at 49.0% Corsi to Philadelphia's 48.0%, yet again—marginal.

The real story is Washington's luck. The Capitals are running at a 1.018 PDO. That's variance, and it regresses. Philadelphia's 1.008 PDO is closer to neutral, which means what you see is what you get.

Owen Tippett is the engine for Philly, posting 19 goals and 18 assists with 0.88 xG/60 and 2 high-danger goals, shooting at 12.1%. Christian Dvorak mirrors him one tier down: 12 goals, 21 assists, 3 high-danger goals, 0.81 xG/60, and 11.2% conversion. On the defensive end, however, he surfaces as a weak link.

Washington's counter is Alex Ovechkin generating 0.97 xG/60, the highest rate on ice. He has 19 goals, 17 assists, 2 high-danger goals, and shoots at 13.8%. Anthony Beauvillier contributes 14 goals, 9 assists, 0.89 xG/60, 2 high-danger goals, and 10.4% conversion.

Philadelphia has produced zero high-danger goals and zero rebound goals at measurable rates. Washington registers the same across both categories. That's either discipline or chance; five games should clarify which.

Declan Chisholm is Washington's defensive weak link—the seam Philly can target if secondary scoring awakens.

The model is right: this is a coin flip with a slight Washington tilt.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

WSH 52%

52%

WSH

Model favorite

48%

52%

PHI50WSH

WSH by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score PHI 2.4–2.5 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

PHI← edge

edge →WSH

51.0%50.0%

48.0%49.0%

2.262.62

2.202.62

1.962.18

1.821.79

1.0081.018

WSH holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.008 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

PHI

3-4-3

-8 GD · 19d rest

WSH

5-4-1

-2 GD · 19d rest

1.008

PHI 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

The Flyers are underwater at -8 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

PHI

Expected in goal

D. Vladar

19 days rest.926 last start

Backup Dan Vladar · +13.8 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

WSH

Expected in goal

L. Thompson

19 days rest.931 last start

Backup Logan Thompson · +29.3 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

PHI

Owen Tippett19G 18A

0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.1% sh

Christian Dvorak12G 21A

0.81 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.2% 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

Back to the front page