Backcheck
Recap · STL at MIN

Blues hold off the Wild

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

By the ModelJul 12, 5:04 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
STL
St. Louis Blues
3
Home
MIN
Minnesota Wild
1
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.68Expected goals3.02
55% share for the better side
24Shot attempts (SOG)23
5High-danger chances4
51Corsi (all attempts)50
Score-adjusted: 51% / 50%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Possession metrics and expected goals said this would be closer than the 3-1 final. Minnesota held 49% of shot attempts and expected goals split 3.02–3.68, a slight edge to St. Louis. Yet the Blues won by two goals — a margin that owed entirely to J. Hofer's exceptional goaltending.

Hofer posted a 0.957 save percentage, stopping 2.02 goals above expected. The Wild's 3.02 xG became a two-goal underperformance, with only one goal converted. F. Gustavsson (0.913 SV%, +1.68 vs expected) was adequate but couldn't match Hofer's precision.

The Blues closed the game with ruthlessness. They scored twice on 22 rush attempts — a conversion rate that eliminated any comeback possibility. Robert Thomas's point shot at 19:35 of the third made the margin insurmountable.

Three Stars

  • #18 R. Thomas (STL) — 1G, 1A in 17:08
  • #89 P. Buchnevich (STL) — 1G, 1A in 17:07
  • #43 Q. Hughes (MIN) — 1A in 27:57
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
STL1 / 5 · 2.15 xG
MIN0 / 4 · 1.02 xG
Medium dangermid-range
STL1 / 10 · 0.97 xG
MIN1 / 13 · 1.41 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
STL1 / 36 · 0.57 xG
MIN0 / 33 · 0.59 xG

STL went 1-for-5 from high danger on 2.15 expected goals — 1.1 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
STL
3 G · 3.68 xG · -0.7
MIN
1 G · 3.02 xG · -2.0
01234
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
J. HoferSTL
+2.0
F. GustavssonMIN
+1.7

STL finished -0.7 against expected, MIN -2.0 — J. Hofer (STL) saved 2.0 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
STL
WRIST2/29
SLAP0/4
SNAP1/4
TIP IN0/0
WRAP AROUND0/1
BACKHAND0/1
OTHER0/12
MIN
WRIST0/28
SLAP0/4
SNAP0/4
TIP IN1/5
WRAP AROUND0/0
BACKHAND0/0
OTHER0/9
STL
MIN
Off the rush
2 G on 22 · 1.61 xG
1 G on 25 · 2.44 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 2 · 0.10 xG
0 G on 0 · 0.00 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: STL went 2-for-29, MIN 0-for-28. STL scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
R. Thomas
#18 · C · STL
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 17:08 TOI · +3
P. Buchnevich
#89 · L · STL
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 17:07 TOI · +2
Q. Hughes
#43 · D · MIN
0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 27:57 TOI · -2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • J. Hofer (STL) stopped 2.0 goals above expected.
  • STL was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 22 rush chances.
  • MIN underperformed xG by 2.0 — wasted quality chances.
  • J. Hofer (STL) saved 2.0 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • F. Gustavsson (MIN) saved 1.7 goals above expected — stole the show.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · STL at MIN · 5:00 PM ET

Blues at Wild: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 12, 5:03 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

54%
MIN
Model favorite
46%
54%
STL50MIN

MIN by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score STL 2.42.6 MIN; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

STL← edge
edge →MIN
49.0%5v5 xG%52.0%
48.0%Corsi%48.0%
2.34xGF / 602.55
2.40xGA / 602.40
2.00Goals for / gm2.04
2.12Goals against / gm1.93
1.000PDO — luck, not skill1.007

MIN holds 6 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.000 vs 1.007) says MIN has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.4-2.6 goal game with Minnesota at 54% win probability—a pick'em dressed in the thinnest margin of preference.

Recent form cuts both ways. Minnesota's 7-2-1 record in their last ten games signals momentum, while St. Louis sits at minus-6 in goal differential over the same stretch. Yet the underlying numbers complicate that narrative. Minnesota holds the territorial edge at 5v5, outshooting St. Louis 52.0% to 49.0% in expected goals. Shot attempts? Dead even at 48.0% Corsi both ways. Neither team has been buoyed by fortune—PDO sits at 1.000 for the Blues and 1.007 for the Wild, close enough to neutral to suggest what you see is what you get.

The goaltending matchup lands awkwardly. J. Wallstedt plays on a back-to-back, as does J. Binnington. Watch for the possibility of a backup start or a fatigued starter—either way, one or both teams may not get their full complement.

Players to Watch

St. Louis: Jimmy Snuggerud sits at 0.86 xG/60 with 15 goals and 22 assists. His 11.9% shooting rate and two high-danger goals suggest some variance working in his favor. Dylan Holloway checks in at 0.82 xG/60 with 13 goals, 24 assists, and a 10.8% shooting clip—a near-mirror profile of shot quality but less finish.

Minnesota: Matt Boldy leads at 0.89 xG/60 with 22 goals and 18 assists. He's converted five high-danger chances, running an elite 13.7% shooting rate. Robby Fabbri sits at 0.88 xG/60 but has managed only two goals and three assists with a 6.9% shooting rate—a rare drought in high-danger opportunities.

The structural weak points: St. Louis creates almost no rebound or scramble goals, and Jimmy Snuggerud doubles as a defensive liability. Minnesota faces similar offensive constraints but lists Matt Kiersted as its defensive weak link. Neither team has solved the second-chance problem, which means possession and conversion efficiency become everything. The margin is that tight.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

STL
Jimmy Snuggerud15G 22A
0.86 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.9% sh
Dylan Holloway13G 24A
0.82 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.8% sh
MIN
Matt Boldy22G 18A
0.89 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh
Robby Fabbri2G 3A
0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.9% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters