The Red Wings won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.
The Red Wings won 4-2, but expected goals rated the game nearly even at 4.40 to 4.23 in Nashville's favor. The Predators' two-goal loss masks a dramatic disparity in goaltending.
Nashville created quality chances. They held 49% of shot attempts and matched Detroit's high-danger count at eight to nine. But they scored two goals on 4.40 expected—an underperformance of 2.40 that explains the gap between a close underlying game and a decisive scoreline.
Detroit's goaltending made the difference. J. Gibson (10 saves) was exceptional, while C. Talbot (18 saves) stopped 1.78 goals above expected. J. Saros (27 saves) played well but couldn't overcome the volume gap—Detroit generated 0.080 expected goals per shot versus Nashville's 0.061, a sign of higher-quality looks.
The Red Wings were clinical when it mattered. They converted four of nine high-danger chances (44%)—a rare zone where efficiency matters most. Nashville, despite crashing the net to create four rebound chances, converted none of them.
Detroit's rush attack was lethal: three goals on 25 chances. Nashville answered with two on 27, a split that reflects both teams' eagerness but Detroit's slightly better execution.
Alex DeBrincat's backhander from the doorstep in the third period proved the difference.
