Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a St. Louis Blues sweater
← Sun, Mar 8 · the slate
Breakdown · STL at ANA

Blues shut out the Ducks, 4-0

FinalSun, Mar 8
STLSt. Louis Blues4ANAAnaheim Ducks0
The verdict · earned

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

STL 4 · ANA 0
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 6:15 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

J. Hofer conducted a shutout so complete that he stopped 2.55 goals above what shot quality would predict—a measure of performance that separates masterworks from routine victories. The underlying dominance extended across all metrics: St. Louis commanded 69 percent of 5v5 expected goals (5.72–2.55) and generated 9 high-danger chances to Anaheim's 3.

The Ducks' inefficiency made the margin feel even worse. Anaheim shot just 39 percent of attempts (22–35 on goal) and underperformed their expected goals by 2.55, suggesting they wasted the quality opportunities they created. In contrast, St. Louis converted three times off the rush and scored twice from low-danger situations, plays where the opposing goaltender must execute. The Blues also generated five rebound chances.

Pius Suter's early wrist shot from the point set the tone and opened the account. J. Snuggerud delivered with a goal and assist in 14:58, while P. Broberg (1A, 27:04) and C. Fowler (1A, 21:11) registered from the blue line.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Mar 8
STL
4
ANA
0

Blues shut out the Ducks, 4-0

Chances 5.7 – 2.5Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Blues earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
STL
5.72
ANA
2.55
69% of the chances31%

The board read STL 4, ANA 0. The chances read STL 5.7, ANA 2.5.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
STL
−1.7
goals above expected
STL5.72 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
ANA2.55 expected · 0 scored
Expected
Scored

The Ducks 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 04:22STLJ. Kyrou1–0
  2. P2 10:07STLJ. DrouinPP2–0
  3. P2 12:11STLJ. Snuggerud3–0
  4. P3 15:58STLP. SuterEN4–0
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
STL
53 shots
4
Final
95 shots
ANA
42 shots
0
STL attackANA attack
STL ANA Goal
53
shots · 4 in
42
shots · 0 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
STLANA
1 / 9
3.07 xG
High danger
0 / 3
0.73 xG
1 / 18
1.89 xG
Medium
0 / 11
1.03 xG
2 / 42
0.76 xG
Low
0 / 44
0.79 xG

The Ducks went 0 for 3 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
V. Husso
+2.7
ANA · 31/34
A+
J. Hofer
+2.5
STL · 22/22
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Blues shut out the Ducks, 4-0

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 13–8
    1. 04:22STLJ. Kyrou(J. Neighbours, C. Fowler)1–0
    2. 10:07STLJ. Drouinpower play(P. Broberg, J. Snuggerud)2–0
    3. 12:11STLJ. Snuggerud(R. Thomas, D. Holloway)3–0
    3rdshots 9–7
    1. 15:58STLP. Suterempty net(P. Buchnevich, J. Holl)4–0

    score reads STL–ANA

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    5.72
    STL chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    −1.7
    Finishing
    Goals below what those chances were worth
    1.058
    STL puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    54.3%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    5.72Expected goals2.55
    STL 69% of the chance quality
    35Shots on goal22
    9High-danger chances3
    69All attempts (Corsi)58
    Adjusted for score: STL 50% · ANA 51%
    Faceoffs · ANA won72%off50%neu50%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    STL1 / 9 · 3.07 xG
    ANA0 / 3 · 0.73 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    STL1 / 18 · 1.89 xG
    ANA0 / 11 · 1.03 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    STL2 / 42 · 0.76 xG
    ANA0 / 44 · 0.79 xG

    STL went 1-for-9 from high danger on 3.07 expected goals — 2.1 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    STL
    4 G · 5.72 xG · -1.7
    ANA
    0 G · 2.55 xG · -2.5
    01234567

    STL finished -1.7 against expected, ANA -2.5.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    STL
    SNAP2/21
    WRIST1/17
    SLAP1/8
    TIP IN0/5
    BACKHAND0/2
    OTHER0/16
    ANA
    SNAP0/22
    WRIST0/5
    SLAP0/6
    TIP IN0/7
    BACKHAND0/2
    OTHER0/16
    STL
    ANA
    Off the rush
    3 G on 31
    2.88 xG
    0 G on 24
    1.85 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 5
    1.06 xG
    0 G on 3
    0.29 xG

    Snap shots carried the volume: STL went 2-for-21, ANA 0-for-22. STL scored 3 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 · 22/22 · 1.000
    +2.5
    saved above expected
    A+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/30.7+0.7
    Medium0/111.0+1.0
    Low0/440.8+0.8

    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

    V. Husso
    ANA · 31/34 · .912
    +2.7
    saved above expected
    A+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/93.1+2.1
    Medium1/181.9+0.9
    Low2/420.8-1.2

    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

    95 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    STL
    53 shots
    4
    Final
    95 shots
    ANA
    42 shots
    0
    STL attackANA attack
    STL ANA Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — STL left, ANA 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
    J. Snuggerud
    #21 · R · STL
    1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 14:58 on ice · +1
    P. Broberg
    #6 · D · STL
    0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 27:04 on ice · +1
    C. Fowler
    #17 · D · STL
    0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 21:11 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Sun, Mar 8
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 12, 6:13 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 2.5–2.7 xG game with Anaheim at 55% win probability. That's as close to a pick'em as analytics gets.

    Look at the underlying play. Anaheim generates 52.0% of expected goals at 5v5 while St. Louis manages 49.0%. In territorial possession (Corsi), it's 52.0% to 48.0%. That advantage is real but thin—thin enough that a single hot line, goaltending, or luck can erase it entirely.

    Here's where it breaks: Anaheim's PDO sits at 0.981, signaling regression risk. The Ducks are running cold on finishing and saves alike. St. Louis, at 1.000, is neither lucky nor unlucky—neutral ground.

    Beckett Sennecke leads Anaheim's attack. He's at 1.03 xG per 60 minutes with 20 goals and 8 high-danger chances. His 13.5% shooting rate won't hold. Cutter Gauthier provides secondary punch at 0.99 xG/60 and 25 goals, though his 12.9% shot rate is equally unsustainable.

    St. Louis counters with Jimmy Snuggerud (0.86 xG/60, 15 goals, 2 high-danger tallies) and Dylan Holloway (0.82 xG/60, 13 goals at a 10.8% clip). Both are productive but lack the ceiling of Anaheim's top two. The offensive asymmetry favors the Ducks.

    Goaltending muddies things. Both L. Dostal and J. Binnington are on back-to-backs, which typically means either a backup starter or a tired veteran. Neither has given his team a decisive edge this season.

    The central tension is this: Anaheim should win by the numbers, yet 55% in a single game is barely better than a coin flip when variance enters. St. Louis isn't outmaneuvered—just slightly behind in a narrow slice. The Ducks' underlying edge is real enough to bet over time, hollow enough to lose on any given night.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    ANA 55%
    55%
    ANA
    Model favorite
    45%
    55%
    STL50ANA

    ANA by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score STL 2.5–2.7 ANA; 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 →ANA
    49.0%52.0%
    48.0%52.0%
    2.342.80
    2.402.59
    2.002.09
    2.122.32
    1.0000.981

    ANA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.000 vs 0.981) says STL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    STL
    5-5-0
    +2 GD · 1d rest
    ANA
    7-3-0
    +2 GD · 1d rest
    1.000
    STL PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    0.981
    ANA PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Where the edges live
    • The Ducks own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
    • The Ducks drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    Regression watch
    • The Ducks' PDO is 0.981 — running cold, due for positive regression.
    Things to watch
    • The Ducks own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
    • The Ducks drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    • L. Dostal 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 Ducks' PDO is 0.981 — running cold, due for positive regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    STL
    Expected in goal
    J. Binnington
    back-to-back.920 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.

    ANA
    Expected in goal
    L. Dostal
    back-to-back.821 last start
    Backup Lukas Dostal · -2.9 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
    ANA
    Beckett Sennecke20G 19A
    1.03 xG/60 · 8 HD · 13.5% sh
    Cutter Gauthier25G 16A
    0.99 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.9% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next

    Back to the front page