Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Seattle Kraken sweater
← Mon, Mar 2 · the slate
Breakdown · CAR at SEA

Kraken steal one from the Hurricanes against the run of play

FinalMon, Mar 2
CARCarolina Hurricanes1SEASeattle Kraken2
The verdict · stolen

The Kraken stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.46–1.56 and won anyway.

CAR 1 · SEA 2
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 5:29 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

Seattle defied a 69–31 expected-goal disadvantage to beat Carolina 2–1. The Hurricanes generated 3.46 xG to the Kraken's 1.56, dominating at 5v5, yet left empty-handed. This wasn't luck—it was goaltending outpacing possession.

J. Daccord's performance was the difference. He stopped 35 of 36 shots for a 0.972 save percentage, clearing 2.46 goals above expected. Carolina's F. Andersen, meanwhile, saved just 13 of 15, posting a 0.867 percentage. In a game Carolina should have buried, Daccord turned the tables.

Seattle's path to victory ran through the rush. The Kraken converted two goals on 17 rush attempts—lethal efficiency when the game is played on their terms. They held Carolina to just 29% of shot attempts (15–36 on goal), forcing the Hurricanes into perimeter play and neutralizing their territorial edge.

The turning point came from N. Ehlers, whose wrist shot from the high slot in the second period (18:30) swung momentum. Carolina's problem was not chances generated but chances finished. The Hurricanes underperformed their xG by 2.46 goals—wasted quality on a night when volume should have overwhelmed Seattle's defensive structure.

A. Larsson led Seattle with two assists across 21:42, dictating play when it mattered. S. Walker registered one assist for Carolina in 20:41, present but unable to capitalize on the Hurricanes' possession advantage. N. Ehlers's marker, tallied in 17:02, was the game's crucial goal.

This is what a stolen game looks like: possession without purpose, metrics abandoned by the final buzzer, and a goaltender standing in the way of statistical inevitability.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Mar 2
CAR
1
SEA
2

Kraken steal one from the Hurricanes against the run of play

Chances 3.5 – 1.6Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Hurricanes deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
CAR
3.46
SEA
1.56
69% of the chances31%

The board read CAR 1, SEA 2. The chances read CAR 3.5, SEA 1.6.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
SEA
+0.4
goals above expected
SEA1.56 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored
CAR3.46 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Hurricanes left 2.5 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P2 03:22SEAK. Kakko0–1
  2. P2 08:48SEAB. Meyers0–2
  3. P2 18:30CARN. Ehlers1–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
CAR
57 shots
1
Final
81 shots
SEA
24 shots
2
CAR attackSEA attack
CAR SEA Goal
57
shots · 1 in
24
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
CARSEA
0 / 2
0.46 xG
High danger
0 / 2
0.41 xG
1 / 18
2.00 xG
Medium
1 / 7
0.68 xG
0 / 62
1.00 xG
Low
1 / 21
0.47 xG

High-danger looks: CAR 0 of 2, SEA 0 of 2.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
J. Daccord
+2.5
SEA · 35/36
D
F. Andersen
−0.4
CAR · 13/15
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Kraken steal one from the Hurricanes against the run of play

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 13–7no goals
    2ndshots 14–6
    1. 03:22SEAK. Kakko(A. Larsson)0–1
    2. 08:48SEAB. Meyers(F. Gaudreau, A. Larsson)0–2
    3. 18:30CARN. Ehlers(J. Martinook, S. Walker)1–2
    3rdshots 9–2no goals

      score reads CAR–SEA

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

      The numbers

      XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
      1.56
      SEA chances
      Goals their shots were worth
      +0.4
      Finishing
      Goals above what those chances were worth
      1.054
      SEA puck luck
      Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
      26.8%
      Shot attempts
      Under half — they were outshot
      Split by club

      Who controlled the game

      3.46Expected goals1.56
      CAR 69% of the chance quality
      36Shots on goal15
      2High-danger chances2
      82All attempts (Corsi)30
      Adjusted for score: CAR 76% · SEA 24%
      Faceoffs · SEA won36%off53%neu77%def
      Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
      How the game was won

      The danger ladder

      shotsgoalsexpected
      High dangerslot & crease
      CAR0 / 2 · 0.46 xG
      SEA0 / 2 · 0.41 xG
      Medium dangermid-range
      CAR1 / 18 · 2.00 xG
      SEA1 / 7 · 0.68 xG
      Low dangerperimeter & point
      CAR0 / 62 · 1.00 xG
      SEA1 / 21 · 0.47 xG

      CAR went 1-for-18 from medium danger on 2.00 expected goals — 1.0 left on the table.

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

      Finishing vs expected

      expectedactual
      CAR
      1 G · 3.46 xG · -2.5
      SEA
      2 G · 1.56 xG · +0.4
      01234

      CAR finished -2.5 against expected, SEA +0.4.

      Source · Backcheck xG model
      Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +
      What they shot — and what went in

      Shot diet

      goalsshots
      CAR
      WRIST1/38
      SLAP0/10
      BACKHAND0/2
      TIP IN0/4
      SNAP0/3
      WRAP AROUND0/0
      OTHER0/25
      SEA
      WRIST1/15
      SLAP0/1
      BACKHAND1/5
      TIP IN0/1
      SNAP0/1
      WRAP AROUND0/1
      OTHER0/6
      CAR
      SEA
      Off the rush
      1 G on 31
      2.47 xG
      2 G on 17
      1.16 xG
      Off rebounds
      0 G on 2
      0.29 xG
      0 G on 3
      0.32 xG

      Wrist shots carried the volume: CAR went 1-for-38, SEA 1-for-15. SEA 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
      F. Andersen
      CAR · 13/15 · .867
      -0.4
      saved above expected
      D
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger0/20.4+0.4
      Medium1/70.7-0.3
      Low1/210.5-0.5

      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 · 35/36 · .972
      +2.5
      saved above expected
      A
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger0/20.5+0.5
      Medium1/182.0+1.0
      Low0/621.0+1.0

      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

      81 shots · press play to watch the game back

      Where the shots came from

      NHL play-by-play coordinates
      CAR
      57 shots
      1
      Final
      81 shots
      SEA
      24 shots
      2
      CAR attackSEA attack
      CAR SEA Goal

      Each club shoots toward its own end — CAR 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
      A. Larsson
      #6 · D · SEA
      0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 21:42 on ice
      S. Walker
      #26 · D · CAR
      0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 20:41 on ice · +1
      N. Ehlers
      #27 · L · CAR
      1 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 17:02 on ice · +1
      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, 5:11 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

      Carolina arrives as the favorite. The model projects a 2.7–2.3 Hurricanes win with 57% win probability, backed by form and underlying play: Carolina has gone 8-0-2 in their last 10 games.

      The Hurricanes own the territorial game convincingly. They post a 56.0% xG rate to Seattle's 46.0%, and drive Corsi at 60.0% compared to the Kraken's 45.0%. This is not a close matchup on the ice—Carolina generates more chances and controls play.

      The slip is PDO. Carolina runs at 0.984, meaning their finishing and goaltending luck have underperformed their underlying creation. That gap typically closes; expect the Hurricanes to earn their true talent level. Seattle, meanwhile, sits at 1.011—luck that doesn't sustain—and faces the inverse regression.

      Both goalies face back-to-back fatigue. J. Daccord and F. Andersen each carry workload risk, opening the door for Seattle if either start tired or a backup takes the crease.

      On the ice, focus on Carolina's shot-creators. Jackson Blake operates at 1.06 xG/60 with 14 goals on 19 assists, a 10.9% shooting rate, and 2 high-danger goals. Seth Jarvis runs 0.98 xG/60 with 17 goals on 12 assists at 11.9% shooting, though only 1 high-danger goal. Seattle's Shane Wright (0.77 xG/60, 8 goals, 10 assists, 4 high-danger goals, 10.4% shooting) and Berkly Catton (0.68 xG/60, 6 goals, 8 assists, 5 high-danger goals, 8.8% shooting) need to reverse inefficiency.

      Carolina carries a defensive weak link in Charles Alexis Legault. Seattle's is Chandler Stephenson. Neither team converts at high-danger odds—both at 0% HD goal rate and 0% rebound rate—margins unsustainable and due to tighten.

      The model likes Carolina. The play supports it.

      What the model said beforehand

      The model's lean

      CAR 57%
      57%
      CAR
      Model favorite
      57%
      43%
      CAR50SEA

      CAR by 14 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score CAR 2.7–2.3 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
      CAR← edge
      edge →SEA
      56.0%46.0%
      60.0%45.0%
      2.982.13
      2.312.51
      2.261.87
      1.951.95
      0.9841.011

      CAR holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.984 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
      CAR
      8-0-2
      +11 GD · 1d rest
      SEA
      6-4-0
      +5 GD · 1d rest
      0.984
      CAR PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      1.011
      SEA PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      What decides it

      Keys to the game

      Where the edges live
      • The Hurricanes own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.
      • The Hurricanes drive Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
      Regression watch
      • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
      Things to watch
      • The Hurricanes own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.
      • The Hurricanes drive Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
      • J. Daccord is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
      • F. Andersen is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
      • The Hurricanes are the hotter team by points pace (8-0-2 in their last 10).
      • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
      Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

      Lineups

      NHL box score
      CAR
      Expected in goal
      F. Andersen
      back-to-back.931 last start
      Backup Brandon Bussi · +2.8 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.

      SEA
      Expected in goal
      J. Daccord
      back-to-back.964 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
      CAR
      Jackson Blake14G 19A
      1.06 xG/60 · 2 HD · 10.9% sh
      Seth Jarvis17G 12A
      0.98 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.9% 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