Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a green sweater
← Sat, Feb 28 · the slate
Breakdown · NSH at DAL

Stars run the Predators off the ice on the underlying numbers

Final / OTSat, Feb 28
NSHNashville Predators2DALDallas Stars3
The verdict · earned

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

NSH 2 · DAL 3
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 5:02 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 out-shot Dallas 27–25 but had no business winning—the Stars dominated 5v5 expected goals 3.60–2.32, a 61–39 split reflecting a quality gap no volume advantage erases. High-danger chances made it lopsided: 9–2 favoring Dallas.

J. Saros kept Nashville competitive. He stopped 22 of 25 shots for a 0.880 save percentage, performing 0.60 points better than expected, but volume alone couldn't overcome efficiency.

Dallas executed when it mattered. J. Oettinger recorded 25 saves on 27 shots (0.926 SV%). Jason Robertson ended it at 01:47 of overtime with a snap shot from the doorstep.

Nashville generated higher-quality looks than the shot total suggests, fueled by rush offense. They converted 2 goals on 20 rush chances, a lethal finishing rate that should have been dangerous. They created 4 rebound opportunities and converted zero, crashing the net without payoff.

W. Johnston contributed 1 goal and 1 assist in 21:44. L. Evangelista recorded 2 assists in 17:20. Robertson finished with 1 goal and 1 assist in 23:05.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · OT · Feb 28
NSH
2
DAL
3

Stars run the Predators off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 2.3 – 3.6Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Stars earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
NSH
2.32
DAL
3.60
39% of the chances61%

The board read NSH 2, DAL 3. The chances read NSH 2.3, DAL 3.6.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
DAL
−0.6
goals above expected
DAL3.60 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
NSH2.32 expected · 2 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 14:26NSHM. BuntingPP1–0
  2. P1 15:35NSHS. Stamkos2–0
  3. P2 16:18DALW. JohnstonPP2–1
  4. P3 05:31DALN. Bastian2–2
  5. OT 01:47DALJ. Robertson2–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NSH
35 shots
2
Final
75 shots
DAL
40 shots
3
NSH attackDAL attack
NSH DAL Goal
35
shots · 2 in
40
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NSHDAL
0 / 2
0.66 xG
High danger
2 / 9
2.18 xG
2 / 12
1.14 xG
Medium
1 / 8
0.83 xG
0 / 34
0.52 xG
Low
0 / 41
0.60 xG

The Stars buried 2 of 9 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B
J. Saros
+0.6
NSH · 22/25
B
J. Oettinger
+0.3
DAL · 25/27
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Stars run the Predators off the ice on the underlying numbers

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 11–6
  1. 14:26NSHM. Buntingpower play(M. Wood, L. Evangelista)1–0
  2. 15:35NSHS. Stamkos(L. Evangelista)2–0
2ndshots 4–8
  1. 16:18DALW. Johnstonpower play(J. Benn, J. Robertson)2–1
3rdshots 11–10
  1. 05:31DALN. Bastian(T. Harley)2–2
OTshots 1–1
  1. 01:47DALJ. Robertson(M. Heiskanen, W. Johnston)2–3

score reads NSH–DAL

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.60
DAL chances
Goals their shots were worth
−0.6
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.010
DAL puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
54.7%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.32Expected goals3.60
DAL 61% of the chance quality
27Shots on goal25
2High-danger chances9
48All attempts (Corsi)58
Adjusted for score: NSH 43% · DAL 57%
Faceoffs · DAL won68%off30%neu27%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NSH0 / 2 · 0.66 xG
DAL2 / 9 · 2.18 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NSH2 / 12 · 1.14 xG
DAL1 / 8 · 0.83 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NSH0 / 34 · 0.52 xG
DAL0 / 41 · 0.60 xG

NSH went 2-for-12 from medium danger on 1.14 expected goals — 0.9 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NSH
2 G · 2.32 xG · -0.3
DAL
3 G · 3.60 xG · -0.6
01234

NSH finished -0.3 against expected, DAL -0.6.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NSH
SNAP2/24
SLAP0/5
WRIST0/1
BACKHAND0/2
TIP IN0/0
POKE0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/13
DAL
SNAP2/27
SLAP0/2
WRIST1/5
BACKHAND0/2
TIP IN0/4
POKE0/0
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/18
NSH
DAL
Off the rush
2 G on 20
1.34 xG
1 G on 27
2.60 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 4
0.78 xG
1 G on 2
0.39 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: NSH went 2-for-24, DAL 2-for-27. NSH 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
J. Saros
NSH · 22/25 · .880
+0.6
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/92.2+0.2
Medium1/80.8-0.2
Low0/410.6+0.6

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. Oettinger
DAL · 25/27 · .926
+0.3
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/20.7+0.7
Medium2/121.1-0.9
Low0/340.5+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

75 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
NSH
35 shots
2
Final
75 shots
DAL
40 shots
3
NSH attackDAL attack
NSH DAL Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — NSH 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
J. Robertson
#21 · L · DAL
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 23:05 on ice · +1
W. Johnston
#53 · C · DAL
1 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 21:44 on ice · +1
L. Evangelista
#77 · R · NSH
0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 17:20 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Feb 28
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 5:26 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

Models project a 2.4-2.6 final with Dallas at 54% win probability—effectively a pick'em. The Stars enter as the hotter team, posting 8-2-0 over their last 10 games, but the underlying metrics tell a different story.

Nashville dominates possession at 50.0% Corsi% yet trails 49.0% to 51.0% in expected goals—Dallas generates cleaner shot quality. The Stars run hot at 1.024 PDO while Nashville sits 0.992. This is Dallas getting lucky; expect regression.

J. Annunen takes the back-to-back; watch whether Nashville goes fresh in net or leans on a tired starter. That goaltending decision could tilt the entire game.

The matchup hinges on possession versus efficiency. If Nashville pins Dallas deep, the Predators generate chances. If Dallas converts higher-quality looks even on neutral ice, the Stars win.

Players to Watch

Nashville: Zachary L'Heureux has posted 4 goals at 0.85 xG/60 and a 16.0% shooting clip. Filip Forsberg adds 23 goals, 17 assists, 0.80 xG/60, and 13.6% shooting.

Dallas: Jason Robertson leads with 25 goals, 21 assists, 0.96 xG/60, and 12.4% shooting. Michael Bunting contributes 8 goals, 14 assists, 0.83 xG/60, and 7.6% shooting.

Dallas must contain L'Heureux's output despite modest assist totals. Nashville must neutralize Robertson, whose shot volume and accuracy define Dallas's ceiling. Neither team generates material scoring from high-danger chances or rebounds, which simplifies the calculus—the team winning the underlying battle likely wins.

Jonathan Marchessault represents Nashville's defensive weak link; Tyler Myers does the same for Dallas. This is close enough that any shift in goaltending, injury, or lineup move becomes pivotal. Dallas's hot streak and superior expected goals share give them an edge, but Nashville's territorial control is real enough to steal this one.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DAL 54%
54%
DAL
Model favorite
46%
54%
NSH50DAL

DAL by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NSH 2.4–2.6 DAL; 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 →DAL
49.0%51.0%
50.0%47.0%
2.482.36
2.582.29
1.842.07
2.211.68
0.9921.024

DAL holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.992 vs 1.024) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
NSH
4-3-3
-4 GD · 1d rest
DAL
8-2-0
+9 GD · 2d rest
0.992
NSH PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.024
DAL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Predators drive Corsi at 50.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Predators drive Corsi at 50.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • J. Annunen is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Stars are the hotter team by points pace (8-2-0 in their last 10).
  • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
NSH
Expected in goal
J. Annunen
back-to-back.913 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.

DAL
Expected in goal
C. DeSmith
2 days rest.947 last start
Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 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
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
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