Motion-blurred skater in a St. Louis Blues sweater

Breakdown · STL at MIN

Blues hold off the Wild

FinalSun, Mar 1

The verdict · earned

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

STL 3 · MIN 1

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 5:04 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

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

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Mar 1

STL

MIN

Blues hold off the Wild

Chances 3.7 – 3.0Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Blues earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

STL

3.68

MIN

3.02

55% of the chances45%

The board read STL 3, MIN 1. The chances read STL 3.7, MIN 3.0.

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

Luck check

STL

−0.7

goals above expected

STL3.68 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

MIN3.02 expected · 1 scored

Expected

Scored

The Wild left 2.0 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 16:09MINK. KaprizovPP0–1
P2 18:05STLL. Mailloux1–1
P3 16:21STLP. Buchnevich2–1
P3 19:35STLR. ThomasEN3–1

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

Where the shots came from

STL

39 shots

Final

80 shots

MIN

41 shots

STL MIN GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 3 in

shots · 1 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

STLMIN

1 / 5

2.15 xG

High danger

0 / 4

1.02 xG

1 / 10

0.97 xG

Medium

1 / 13

1.41 xG

1 / 36

0.57 xG

Low

0 / 33

0.59 xG

The Wild went 0 for 4 from the slot.

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

In the net

J. Hofer

+2.0

STL · 22/23

F. Gustavsson

+1.7

MIN · 21/23

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Blues hold off the Wild

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 7–8no goals

2ndshots 7–11

16:09MINK. Kaprizovpower play(M. Boldy, Q. Hughes)0–1
18:05STLL. Mailloux(R. Thomas, B. Schenn)1–1

3rdshots 10–4

16:21STLP. Buchnevich(J. Snuggerud)2–1
19:35STLR. Thomasempty net(P. Buchnevich)3–1

score reads STL–MIN

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.68

STL chances

Goals their shots were worth

−0.7

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.039

STL puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

50.5%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.68Expected goals3.02

STL 55% of the chance quality

24Shots on goal23

5High-danger chances4

51All attempts (Corsi)50

Adjusted for score: STL 51% · MIN 50%

Faceoffs · MIN won55%off47%neu50%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

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

STL finished -0.7 against expected, MIN -2.0.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

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

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. Hofer

STL · 22/23 · .957

+2.0

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/41.0+1.0

Medium1/131.4+0.4

Low0/330.6+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

F. Gustavsson

MIN · 21/23 · .913

+1.7

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/52.1+1.1

Medium1/101.0-0.0

Low1/360.6-0.4

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

80 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

STL

39 shots

Final

80 shots

MIN

41 shots

STL MIN GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — STL left, MIN 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

R. Thomas

#18 · C · STL

1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 17:08 on ice · +3

P. Buchnevich

#89 · L · STL

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 17:07 on ice · +2

Q. Hughes

#43 · D · MIN

0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 27:57 on ice · -2

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sun, Mar 1

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 5:03 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 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.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

MIN 54%

54%

MIN

Model favorite

46%

54%

STL50MIN

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

STL← edge

edge →MIN

49.0%52.0%

48.0%48.0%

2.342.55

2.402.40

2.002.04

2.121.93

1.0001.007

MIN holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.000 vs 1.007) says MIN has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

STL

2-7-1

-6 GD · 1d rest

MIN

7-2-1

+9 GD · 1d rest

1.000

STL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.007

MIN PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Wild own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.

Things to watch

The Wild own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
J. Wallstedt is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
J. Binnington is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Wild are the hotter team by points pace (7-2-1 in their last 10).
The Blues are underwater at -6 goal differential over their last 10.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

STL

Expected in goal

J. Binnington

back-to-back.938 last start

Backup Joel Hofer · +11.7 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.

MIN

Expected in goal

J. Wallstedt

back-to-back.865 last start

Backup Filip Gustavsson · +1.4 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

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

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page