Motion-blurred skater in a green sweater

Breakdown · DAL at VAN

Stars run the Canucks off the ice on the underlying numbers

FinalMon, Mar 2

The verdict · earned

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

DAL 6 · VAN 1

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 5:14 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

Dallas controlled 77% of 5-on-5 expected goals, 5.33 to 1.56—an overwhelming edge the 6-1 scoreline barely overstated. The Canucks were outmatched at every level.

Volume favored Dallas, who took 37 shots to Vancouver's 14. Quality was worse for the Canucks: Dallas averaged 0.077 expected goals per shot versus Vancouver's 0.052. High-danger chances went 9-to-1 in Dallas's favor. The rush was even more lopsided—Dallas scored 6 goals on 32 rush attempts.

Goaltending mattered at the margins. J. Oettinger stopped 13 of 14 shots at 0.929 SV%, outperforming his expected mark by 0.56 points. N. Tolopilo faced 37 shots and saved 31 at 0.838 SV%, underperforming by 0.67 points.

Dallas's aggressive net-crashing created 7 rebound opportunities, though none resulted in goals. L. Bichsel's snap shot from the high slot at 15:41 set the tone—a moment Dallas never relinquished.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Mar 2

DAL

VAN

Stars run the Canucks off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 5.3 – 1.6Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Stars earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

DAL

5.33

VAN

1.56

77% of the chances23%

The board read DAL 6, VAN 1. The chances read DAL 5.3, VAN 1.6.

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

Luck check

DAL

+0.7

goals above expected

DAL5.33 expected · 6 scored

Expected

Scored

VAN1.56 expected · 1 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

P1 07:57VANE. Kane0–1
P1 17:40DALA. Erne1–1
P2 08:31DALL. Bichsel2–1
P2 09:41DALJ. RobertsonPP3–1
P3 01:33DALM. Duchene4–1
P3 05:40DALC. Blackwell5–1
P3 15:41DALL. Bichsel6–1

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

Where the shots came from

DAL

53 shots

Final

74 shots

VAN

21 shots

DAL VAN GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 6 in

shots · 1 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

DALVAN

1 / 9

2.33 xG

High danger

1 / 1

0.52 xG

5 / 22

2.41 xG

Medium

0 / 8

0.76 xG

0 / 38

0.59 xG

Low

0 / 21

0.27 xG

High-danger looks: DAL 1 of 9, VAN 1 of 1.

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

In the net

J. Oettinger

+0.6

DAL · 13/14

N. Tolopilo

−0.7

VAN · 31/37

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Stars run the Canucks 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 6–7

07:57VANE. Kane(J. DeBrusk, M. Pettersson)0–1
17:40DALA. Erne(C. Blackwell)1–1

2ndshots 16–4

08:31DALL. Bichsel(I. Lyubushkin, S. Steel)2–1
09:41DALJ. Robertsonpower play(M. Duchene, M. Heiskanen)3–1

3rdshots 15–3

01:33DALM. Duchene(S. Steel, M. Heiskanen)4–1
05:40DALC. Blackwell5–1
15:41DALL. Bichsel(M. Bourque, J. Robertson)6–1

score reads DAL–VAN

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

5.33

DAL chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.7

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.054

DAL puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

69.7%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

5.33Expected goals1.56

DAL 77% of the chance quality

37Shots on goal14

9High-danger chances1

69All attempts (Corsi)30

Adjusted for score: DAL 67% · VAN 34%

Faceoffs · VAN won33%off47%neu71%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

DAL1 / 9 · 2.33 xG

VAN1 / 1 · 0.52 xG

Medium dangermid-range

DAL5 / 22 · 2.41 xG

VAN0 / 8 · 0.76 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

DAL0 / 38 · 0.59 xG

VAN0 / 21 · 0.27 xG

DAL went 5-for-22 from medium danger on 2.41 expected goals — 2.6 above expected.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

DAL

6 G · 5.33 xG · +0.7

VAN

1 G · 1.56 xG · -0.6

01234567

DAL finished +0.7 against expected, VAN -0.6.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

DAL

WRIST0/26

SNAP5/7

SLAP1/8

TIP IN0/3

BACKHAND0/4

POKE0/3

DEFLECTED0/1

BAT0/1

OTHER0/16

VAN

WRIST0/13

SNAP0/2

SLAP0/1

TIP IN0/4

BACKHAND0/0

POKE0/0

DEFLECTED1/1

BAT0/0

OTHER0/9

DAL

VAN

Off the rush

6 G on 32

3.56 xG

0 G on 14

0.96 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 7

1.15 xG

1 G on 1

0.52 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: DAL went 0-for-26, VAN 0-for-13. DAL scored 6 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. Oettinger

DAL · 13/14 · .929

+0.6

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/10.5-0.5

Medium0/80.8+0.8

Low0/210.3+0.3

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

N. Tolopilo

VAN · 31/37 · .838

-0.7

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/92.3+1.3

Medium5/222.4-2.6

Low0/380.6+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

74 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

DAL

53 shots

Final

74 shots

VAN

21 shots

DAL VAN GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — DAL left, VAN 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

M. Heiskanen

#4 · D · DAL

0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 20:17 on ice · +2

J. Robertson

#21 · L · DAL

1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 19:00 on ice

L. Bichsel

#6 · D · DAL

2 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 16:49 on ice · +2

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Mar 2

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 5:10 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

Dallas projects to a 2.6–2.4 win, with the Stars at 54% win probability. This is about as even as playoff hockey gets.

The Stars bring superior form, having won nine of their last ten. Vancouver sits at a minus-15 goal differential over the same stretch—a team treading water while its opponent builds momentum.

Dallas dominates the underlying play. The Stars' 51.0% xG at 5-on-5 dwarfs Vancouver's 44.0%; Corsi shows a similar story at 47.0% to 46.0%. These aren't blowout margins, but they're consistent. Dallas controls possession and shot quality in ways that should compound over three periods.

This is where regression enters the picture. Vancouver's PDO of 0.974 is running cold—the team is underperforming relative to its expected output and is due for a bounce. Dallas, conversely, sits at 1.024, a hot indicator that suggests some correction downward. If the Canucks finish more accurately while the Stars regress, this coin flip tips toward Vancouver.

Jason Robertson anchors Dallas's threat at 0.96 xG per 60, backed by 25 goals and 21 assists. His 12.4% shooting rate tells you he's converting at a steady clip. Vancouver counters with Filip Chytil, who leads at 1.03 xG per 60 but has only three goals and zero assists—he's generating chances without finishing them. Michael Bunting (8 goals, 7.6% shooting) and Drew O'Connor (13 goals, 11.8% shooting) add secondary scoring depth.

Both goaltenders arrive on back-to-backs. Backup deployments or tired starters are possible.

Dallas's defensive weak link is Tyler Myers; Victor Mancini occupies the same liability for Vancouver. Both are exploitable if their team's offense maintains tempo.

The model likes Dallas by a hair. Form backs Dallas. The underlying numbers back Dallas. But Vancouver's cold shooting and PDO leave an escape route. Expect a tight game decided by which team finds its actual performance level first.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DAL 54%

54%

DAL

Model favorite

54%

46%

DAL50VAN

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

DAL← edge

edge →VAN

51.0%44.0%

47.0%46.0%

2.362.22

2.292.81

2.071.60

1.682.56

1.0240.974

DAL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.024 vs 0.974) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

DAL

9-1-0

+13 GD · 1d rest

VAN

2-6-2

-15 GD · 1d rest

1.024

DAL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.974

VAN PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Stars own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 44.0%.

Regression watch

The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.
The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.

Things to watch

The Stars own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 44.0%.
K. Lankinen is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
J. Oettinger is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Stars are the hotter team by points pace (9-1-0 in their last 10).
The Canucks are underwater at -15 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

DAL

Expected in goal

J. Oettinger

back-to-back.926 last start

Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 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.

VAN

Expected in goal

K. Lankinen

back-to-back.833 last start

Backup Kevin Lankinen · -19.3 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.

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

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

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

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page