Motion-blurred skater in a green sweater

Breakdown · SEA at DAL

C. DeSmith stands tall as the Stars edge the Kraken

FinalWed, Feb 25

The verdict · earned

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

SEA 1 · DAL 4

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 4:23 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's 4-1 victory masks a closer underlying picture. Expected goals split 4.35–3.66 in the Stars' favor, a 54–46 margin that barely reflects the scoreboard's lopsided finish.

The gap came down to goaltending. C. DeSmith stopped 18 of 19 shots and finished +2.66 above expected — he saved two-and-a-half goals the metrics say he shouldn't have. J. Daccord faced tougher volume (32 shots on goal) but couldn't overcome that deficit. Seattle underperformed its xG by 2.7 goals, a sign that quality chances don't convert without finishing precision.

The Stars held 63% of shot attempts (32–19) but struggled to generate Grade-A looks. Both teams finished 0–8 on high-danger chances — a rarity that usually evens out over time. Dallas created the edge in secondary scoring: rebound opportunities gave them the advantage. T. Harley picked up two assists in 22:38. W. Johnston scored twice in 19:50. M. Duchene added a goal and an assist in 17:57.

For Seattle, the story was wasted opportunity. Eight high-danger attempts should have yielded more than one goal, but precision abandoned them when it mattered. That's not randomness — it's the kind of game a playoff team replays when margins narrow.

DeSmith's performance was the fulcrum. He stopped every high-danger look and made the difficult routine. Against a team that generated as many dangerous chances as Seattle did, that's the difference between a competitive game and a rout. The Stars' goaltender didn't dominate in volume; he dominated in the one stat that counts.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Feb 25

SEA

DAL

C. DeSmith stands tall as the Stars edge the Kraken

Chances 3.7 – 4.3Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Stars earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

SEA

3.66

DAL

4.35

46% of the chances54%

The board read SEA 1, DAL 4. The chances read SEA 3.7, DAL 4.3.

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

Luck check

DAL

−0.3

goals above expected

DAL4.35 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

SEA3.66 expected · 1 scored

Expected

Scored

The Kraken left 2.7 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

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

Every goal, in order

P1 18:41DALW. Johnston0–1
P2 01:43DALM. Duchene0–2
P2 05:35DALS. Steel0–3
P2 06:14DALW. JohnstonPP0–4
P3 06:46SEAR. Evans1–4

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

Where the shots came from

SEA

35 shots

Final

86 shots

DAL

51 shots

SEA DAL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 1 in

shots · 4 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

SEADAL

0 / 8

2.03 xG

High danger

0 / 8

1.81 xG

1 / 11

1.15 xG

Medium

4 / 16

1.82 xG

0 / 27

0.48 xG

Low

0 / 39

0.72 xG

The Kraken went 0 for 8 from the slot.

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

In the net

A+

C. DeSmith

+2.7

DAL · 18/19

J. Daccord

+0.3

SEA · 28/32

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

C. DeSmith stands tall as the Stars edge the Kraken

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

18:41DALW. Johnston(E. Lindell, T. Harley)0–1

2ndshots 6–16

01:43DALM. Duchene(T. Harley)0–2
05:35DALS. Steel(M. Bourque, J. Hryckowian)0–3
06:14DALW. Johnstonpower play(M. Heiskanen, M. Duchene)0–4

3rdshots 10–6

06:46SEAR. Evans1–4

score reads SEA–DAL

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

4.35

DAL chances

Goals their shots were worth

−0.3

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.042

DAL puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

57.8%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.66Expected goals4.35

DAL 54% of the chance quality

19Shots on goal32

8High-danger chances8

46All attempts (Corsi)63

Adjusted for score: SEA 48% · DAL 52%

Faceoffs · DAL won56%off67%neu50%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

SEA0 / 8 · 2.03 xG

DAL0 / 8 · 1.81 xG

Medium dangermid-range

SEA1 / 11 · 1.15 xG

DAL4 / 16 · 1.82 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

SEA0 / 27 · 0.48 xG

DAL0 / 39 · 0.72 xG

DAL went 4-for-16 from medium danger on 1.82 expected goals — 2.2 above expected.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

SEA

1 G · 3.66 xG · -2.7

DAL

4 G · 4.35 xG · -0.3

012345

SEA finished -2.7 against expected, DAL -0.3.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

SEA

SNAP0/16

TIP IN0/5

SLAP1/6

BACKHAND0/5

WRIST0/2

DEFLECTED0/1

POKE0/0

OTHER0/11

DAL

SNAP0/32

TIP IN1/5

SLAP0/3

BACKHAND0/4

WRIST1/5

DEFLECTED1/1

POKE1/1

OTHER0/12

SEA

DAL

Off the rush

0 G on 23

2.60 xG

1 G on 31

2.81 xG

Off rebounds

1 G on 5

0.65 xG

2 G on 6

1.08 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: SEA went 0-for-16, DAL 0-for-32.

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. Daccord

SEA · 28/32 · .875

+0.3

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/81.8+1.8

Medium4/161.8-2.2

Low0/390.7+0.7

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

C. DeSmith

DAL · 18/19 · .947

+2.7

saved above expected

A+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/82.0+2.0

Medium1/111.1+0.1

Low0/270.5+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

86 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

SEA

35 shots

Final

86 shots

DAL

51 shots

SEA DAL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — SEA 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

T. Harley

#55 · D · DAL

0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 22:38 on ice · +3

W. Johnston

#53 · C · DAL

2 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 19:50 on ice

M. Duchene

#95 · C · DAL

1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 17:57 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 ModelSep 21, 10:37 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

Dallas projects to win this game at 58%, with a modeled score between 2.8 and 3.4 goals. That edge rests on a clean underlying advantage: the Stars own 52.1% of expected goals at 5v5, compared to Seattle's 45.7%, and hold a similar edge in Corsi at 47.1% to 46.0%. But Dallas is running hot — a PDO of 1.024 versus Seattle's 1.011 — so some regression is baked into the read.

Seattle's shutdown assignment is Jason Robertson, who leads Dallas with 25 goals and 0.96 xG/60, though his two high-danger goals suggest his 12.4% shooting is propped up more by volume than finish. Dallas will focus its defense on Shane Wright, a 0.77 xG/60 generator who has scored 8 goals on just 4 high-danger chances, a sign his 10.4% shooting is running well ahead of his actual play. Berkly Catton represents Seattle's secondary threat at 0.68 xG/60 with 6 goals, 5 of them from high-danger areas — a sign of elite-level efficiency.

Michael Bunting merits watching for Dallas: 0.83 xG/60 and a 7.6% shooting rate that reflects strong efficiency. On defense, Chandler Stephenson represents Seattle's exploitable weak link, logged at 3.05 xGA/60 with 52 high-danger shots against this season; Dallas should hunt his minutes. Tyler Myers plays a similar role for Dallas, though he's less exposed in the depth data here.

Both teams show markedly different scoring distributions: Dallas has concentrated high-end talent with Robertson far ahead of the pack, while Seattle spreads opportunity more evenly between Wright and Catton. The model's lean is Dallas, but Seattle's underlying defense isn't broken — just outmatched if the Stars' shooting regresses closer to expectation.

Season rates in this preview are from 2025-26 — this season's sample isn't live yet.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DAL 58%

58%

DAL

Model favorite

42%

58%

SEA50DAL

DAL by 16 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score SEA 2.8–3.4 DAL; 16% 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

SEA← edge

edge →DAL

45.7%52.1%

46.0%47.1%

2.783.10

3.292.86

2.733.33

3.132.71

1.0111.024

DAL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.011 vs 1.024) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · No games yet

SEA

0-0-0

+0 GD · 0d rest

DAL

0-0-0

+0 GD · 0d rest

1.011

SEA PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.024

DAL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

TACTICALDAL

Shutdown Assignment: Stars

Key matchup: Neutralize Shane Wright (8G, 0.77 xG/60, 4 HD goals)

TACTICALSEA

Shutdown Assignment: Kraken

Key matchup: Neutralize Jason Robertson (25G, 0.96 xG/60, 2 HD goals)

WARNINGSEA

Exploitable minutes: Chandler Stephenson

Chandler Stephenson is on ice for 3.05 xGA/60 and 52 high-danger shots against this season.

Hunt matchups against Chandler Stephenson's shifts with the top line.

WARNINGDAL

Exploitable minutes: Tyler Myers

Tyler Myers is on ice for 2.79 xGA/60 and 53 high-danger shots against this season.

Hunt matchups against Tyler Myers's shifts with the top line.

Where the edges live

The Stars own the underlying play — 52.1% 5v5 xG vs 45.7%.

Regression watch

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

Things to watch

The Stars own the underlying play — 52.1% 5v5 xG vs 45.7%.
The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG

SEA

Shane Wright8G 10A

0.77 xG/60 · 4 HD · 10.4% sh

Berkly Catton6G 8A

0.68 xG/60 · 5 HD · 8.8% 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