Motion-blurred skater in a Seattle Kraken sweater

Breakdown · VAN at SEA

J. Daccord stands tall as the Kraken edge the Canucks

FinalSat, Feb 28

VANVancouver Canucks1 SEASeattle Kraken5

The verdict · earned

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

VAN 1 · SEA 5

◆ 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

Vancouver out-shot Seattle 28-25 yet lost 5-1 — the scoreline betrays the shot totals. But the underlying numbers explain the gap: the Canucks generated just 3.62 expected goals to Seattle's 5.56. More shots, lower quality.

The game stayed open through 15 high-danger chances combined, with Seattle claiming nine. The Kraken's shot quality mattered most: 0.109 xG per shot against Vancouver's 0.063. Seattle converted danger; Vancouver wasted it.

That waste proved fatal. The Canucks went 0-for-6 on high-danger looks — a conversion drought that won't repeat. Even with more pucks in play, those are the chances that close a gap. Instead, Vancouver squandered them.

K. Lankinen played well, saving 1.56 goals above expected, but no goaltender can bail out a team that can't finish. Seattle struck on the rush, converting four of 28 attempts, and crashed for three rebound chances, converting one. The Kraken's transition game was too much.

J. Eberle's wrist shot from the top of the circles (P3, 17:00) turned the game, but Seattle's dominance in dangerous areas had been obvious from the start. The Kraken controlled the spaces that matter.

J. Daccord finished what his team had started. The Seattle netminder stopped 27 of 28 shots for a 0.964 save percentage and saved 2.62 goals above expected. Daccord's excellence sealed the blowout.

Seattle's 61% advantage in expected goals tells the real story: a decisive victory rooted in genuine dominance, not good fortune.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Feb 28

VAN

SEA

J. Daccord stands tall as the Kraken edge the Canucks

Chances 3.6 – 5.6Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Kraken earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

VAN

3.62

SEA

5.56

39% of the chances61%

The board read VAN 1, SEA 5. The chances read VAN 3.6, SEA 5.6.

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

Luck check

SEA

−0.6

goals above expected

SEA5.56 expected · 5 scored

Expected

Scored

VAN3.62 expected · 1 scored

Expected

Scored

The Canucks left 2.6 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 07:36SEAV. Dunn0–1
P1 10:20SEAC. Stephenson0–2
P2 08:28VANL. Ohgren1–2
P2 13:47SEAJ. Eberle1–3
P3 11:56SEAM. BeniersPP1–4
P3 17:00SEAJ. EberleEN1–5

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

Where the shots came from

VAN

46 shots

Final

88 shots

SEA

42 shots

VAN SEA GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 1 in

shots · 5 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

VANSEA

0 / 6

1.40 xG

High danger

3 / 9

3.25 xG

0 / 14

1.39 xG

Medium

1 / 16

1.82 xG

1 / 37

0.83 xG

Low

1 / 26

0.49 xG

The Canucks went 0 for 6 from the slot.

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

In the net

A+

J. Daccord

+2.6

SEA · 27/28

K. Lankinen

+1.6

VAN · 20/24

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

J. Daccord stands tall as the Kraken edge the Canucks

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 9–10

07:36SEAV. Dunn(C. Stephenson)0–1
10:20SEAC. Stephenson(A. Larsson, J. Schwartz)0–2

2ndshots 9–8

08:28VANL. Ohgren(C. Garland, P. Joseph)1–2
13:47SEAJ. Eberle1–3

3rdshots 10–7

11:56SEAM. Benierspower play(J. Eberle, C. Stephenson)1–4
17:00SEAJ. Eberleempty net(J. McCann, J. Oleksiak)1–5

score reads VAN–SEA

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

5.56

SEA chances

Goals their shots were worth

−0.6

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.081

SEA puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

47.2%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.62Expected goals5.56

SEA 61% of the chance quality

28Shots on goal25

6High-danger chances9

57All attempts (Corsi)51

Adjusted for score: VAN 59% · SEA 41%

Faceoffs · SEA won60%off71%neu79%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

VAN0 / 6 · 1.40 xG

SEA3 / 9 · 3.25 xG

Medium dangermid-range

VAN0 / 14 · 1.39 xG

SEA1 / 16 · 1.82 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

VAN1 / 37 · 0.83 xG

SEA1 / 26 · 0.49 xG

VAN went 0-for-6 from high danger on 1.40 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

VAN

1 G · 3.62 xG · -2.6

SEA

5 G · 5.56 xG · -0.6

0123456

VAN finished -2.6 against expected, SEA -0.6.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

VAN

WRIST0/26

SNAP0/4

TIP IN0/5

SLAP1/4

BACKHAND0/3

DEFLECTED0/2

BAT0/2

OTHER0/11

SEA

WRIST3/30

SNAP0/4

TIP IN0/2

SLAP0/3

BACKHAND1/2

DEFLECTED1/1

BAT0/0

OTHER0/9

VAN

SEA

Off the rush

1 G on 34

2.90 xG

4 G on 28

3.95 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 3

0.46 xG

1 G on 3

0.40 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: VAN went 0-for-26, SEA 3-for-30. SEA 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

K. Lankinen

VAN · 20/24 · .833

+1.6

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger3/93.3+0.3

Medium1/161.8+0.8

Low1/260.5-0.5

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

J. Daccord

SEA · 27/28 · .964

+2.6

saved above expected

A+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/61.4+1.4

Medium0/141.4+1.4

Low1/370.8-0.2

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

88 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

VAN

46 shots

Final

88 shots

SEA

42 shots

VAN SEA GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — VAN left, SEA 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. Eberle

#7 · R · SEA

2 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 15:59 on ice · +2

C. Stephenson

#9 · C · SEA

1 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 15:01 on ice · +2

A. Larsson

#6 · D · SEA

0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 23:25 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, 5:00 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 projects a 2.4–2.6 game with Seattle at 54% to win. Functionally, this is a pick'em.

Form tells different stories. The Kraken are 6–4–0 over their last ten games; Vancouver has dropped to minus-12 goal differential in the same stretch. The recent variance favors Seattle, but Vancouver's underlying metrics suggest a correction is overdue. Their PDO of 0.974 sits well below Seattle's 1.011—the Canucks are running cold on finishing and defense both. Expected-goals share (Vancouver 44.0% to Seattle's 46.0%) and Corsi (46.0% to 45.0%) show only narrow separations. A few bounces swing this close to even.

One operational question: P. Grubauer on the second of a back-to-back. Seattle could deploy its backup or a tired starter, either of which softens its edge.

Vancouver's offensive centerpiece, Filip Chytil, carried 1.03 expected goals per 60 with 3 goals at 15.0% shooting—lethal efficiency. He's sidelined for 26 days. Drew O'Connor inherits the role: 0.85 xG/60, 13 goals, 11.8% shooting rate. The volume is elite, but it doesn't replace an absent forward's full range.

Seattle's Shane Wright (0.77 xG/60, 8 goals, 10 assists, 4 high-danger goals) and Berkly Catton (0.68 xG/60, 6 goals, 8 assists, 5 high-danger goals) distribute the offensive burden. Catton's breakdown stands out: five of his six goals come from high-danger chances, a sign he's capitalizing on dangerous positions when the team creates them.

Defensively, both teams have clear weak points: Victor Mancini for Vancouver, Chandler Stephenson for Seattle. In a game this close, a single error from the back end decides the outcome.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

SEA 54%

54%

SEA

Model favorite

46%

54%

VAN50SEA

SEA by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score VAN 2.4–2.6 SEA; 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

VAN← edge

edge →SEA

44.0%46.0%

46.0%45.0%

2.222.13

2.812.51

1.601.87

2.561.95

0.9741.011

SEA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.974 vs 1.011) says SEA has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

VAN

2-6-2

-12 GD · 2d rest

SEA

6-4-0

+4 GD · 1d rest

0.974

VAN PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.011

SEA PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch

The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Things to watch

P. Grubauer is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Kraken are the hotter team by points pace (6-4-0 in their last 10).
The Canucks are underwater at -12 goal differential over their last 10.
The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

VAN

Expected in goal

N. Tolopilo

2 days rest.893 last start

Backup Kevin Lankinen · -19.3 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

SEA

Expected in goal

P. Grubauer

back-to-back.871 last start

Backup Joey Daccord · -6.2 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

VAN

Filip Chytil3G 0A

1.03 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh

Drew O'Connor13G 11A

0.85 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.8% sh

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

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page