Motion-blurred skater in a green sweater
Breakdown · VGK at DAL

Stars run the Golden Knights off the ice on the underlying numbers

The verdict · earned

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

VGK 1 · DAL 2
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 6:37 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

Vegas threw 27 shots at the net and lost 2–1. Dallas won by doing more with less.

The Stars controlled 63% of 5v5 expected goals (3.87–2.30), a dominance that explained the outcome despite trailing in shot volume. Dallas held just 37% of shot attempts (16–27), but their chances were sharper. High-danger opportunities went 8–1 in their favor—that asymmetry is where the game was decided.

J. Oettinger made the scoreline credible. He stopped 26 of 27 (0.963 SV%), converting 1.30 goals above expected into a win-salvaging masterclass. A. Hill, meanwhile, saved 1.87 above expected—strong work that happened to come on a night when the Knights generated quantity without quality. Vegas's shot map was busy but hollow: Dallas generated 0.099 xG per shot attempt against 0.042 for the Knights.

The real story was Dallas's net traffic. They created three rebound opportunities and converted two of them, demonstrating that crashing the zone is a system, not an accident. Vegas got three rebounds too and converted none, a gap that suggests the Stars' offense was built around presence while the Knights' was built on hope.

Jamie Benn's batted-in goal from the doorstep (14:16, P2) was the hinge moment—not flashy, just effective.

Where the stat sheet whispers is in how much each team underperformed its chances. Dallas left 1.87 goals on the ice despite superior positioning. Vegas left 1.30. Both teams scored less than the model predicted, which is rarer than you'd think and explains why the margin was narrower than play suggested.

The underlying story is simple: Dallas played a shorter, deadlier game.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Mar 10
VGK
1
DAL
2

Stars run the Golden Knights off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 2.3 – 3.9Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Stars earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
VGK
2.30
DAL
3.87
37% of the chances63%

The board read VGK 1, DAL 2. The chances read VGK 2.3, DAL 3.9.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
DAL
−1.9
goals above expected
DAL3.87 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored
VGK2.30 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
  1. P2 01:31VGKJ. Eichel1–0
  2. P2 10:41DALO. Bäck1–1
  3. P2 14:16DALJ. BennPP1–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
VGK
37 shots
1
Final
66 shots
DAL
29 shots
2
VGK attackDAL attack
VGK DAL Goal
37
shots · 1 in
29
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
VGKDAL
0 / 1
0.22 xG
High danger
1 / 8
2.54 xG
1 / 15
1.56 xG
Medium
1 / 9
0.98 xG
0 / 39
0.51 xG
Low
0 / 22
0.35 xG

High-danger looks: VGK 0 of 1, DAL 1 of 8.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
A. Hill
+1.9
VGK · 14/16
B+
J. Oettinger
+1.3
DAL · 26/27
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Stars run the Golden Knights 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 4–3no goals
    2ndshots 14–9
    1. 01:31VGKJ. Eichel(S. Theodore, I. Barbashev)1–0
    2. 10:41DALO. Bäck(C. Blackwell, T. Harley)1–1
    3. 14:16DALJ. Bennpower play(W. Johnston, M. Duchene)1–2
    3rdshots 9–4no goals

      score reads VGK–DAL

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

      The numbers

      XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
      3.87
      DAL chances
      Goals their shots were worth
      −1.9
      Finishing
      Goals below what those chances were worth
      1.033
      DAL puck luck
      Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
      41.5%
      Shot attempts
      Under half — they were outshot
      Split by club

      Who controlled the game

      2.30Expected goals3.87
      DAL 63% of the chance quality
      27Shots on goal16
      1High-danger chances8
      55All attempts (Corsi)39
      Adjusted for score: VGK 59% · DAL 41%
      Faceoffs · DAL won56%off71%neu40%def
      Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
      How the game was won

      The danger ladder

      shotsgoalsexpected
      High dangerslot & crease
      VGK0 / 1 · 0.22 xG
      DAL1 / 8 · 2.54 xG
      Medium dangermid-range
      VGK1 / 15 · 1.56 xG
      DAL1 / 9 · 0.98 xG
      Low dangerperimeter & point
      VGK0 / 39 · 0.51 xG
      DAL0 / 22 · 0.35 xG

      DAL went 1-for-8 from high danger on 2.54 expected goals — 1.5 left on the table.

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

      Finishing vs expected

      expectedactual
      VGK
      1 G · 2.30 xG · -1.3
      DAL
      2 G · 3.87 xG · -1.9
      012345

      VGK finished -1.3 against expected, DAL -1.9.

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

      Shot diet

      goalsshots
      VGK
      SNAP1/21
      SLAP0/8
      TIP IN0/4
      WRIST0/2
      BACKHAND0/1
      BAT0/1
      OTHER0/18
      DAL
      SNAP0/11
      SLAP0/3
      TIP IN0/6
      WRIST0/6
      BACKHAND1/2
      BAT1/1
      OTHER0/10
      VGK
      DAL
      Off the rush
      1 G on 24
      1.81 xG
      0 G on 21
      2.30 xG
      Off rebounds
      0 G on 3
      0.26 xG
      2 G on 3
      0.56 xG

      Snap shots carried the volume: VGK went 1-for-21, DAL 0-for-11.

      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
      A. Hill
      VGK · 14/16 · .875
      +1.9
      saved above expected
      A
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger1/82.5+1.5
      Medium1/91.0-0.0
      Low0/220.3+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

      J. Oettinger
      DAL · 26/27 · .963
      +1.3
      saved above expected
      B+
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger0/10.2+0.2
      Medium1/151.6+0.6
      Low0/390.5+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

      66 shots · press play to watch the game back

      Where the shots came from

      NHL play-by-play coordinates
      VGK
      37 shots
      1
      Final
      66 shots
      DAL
      29 shots
      2
      VGK attackDAL attack
      VGK DAL Goal

      Each club shoots toward its own end — VGK left, DAL 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. Eichel
      #9 · C · VGK
      1 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 22:51 on ice · +1
      W. Johnston
      #53 · C · DAL
      0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 22:51 on ice · -1
      S. Theodore
      #27 · D · VGK
      0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 21:56 on ice · +1
      Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
      What the model said beforehand

      Before the game

      Written Tue, Mar 10
      Open the pre-game read
      Written from the numbers

      The read

      Edited for clarity
      ◆ By the ModelJul 12, 6:36 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 Vegas at 51% win probability—as close to a pick'em as the NHL allows. The underlying numbers agree: VGK's superior shot quality (54.0% xG% to Dallas's 51.0%) and territorial control (52.0% Corsi%) offset the Stars' recent heater (9-0-1 in their last 10).

      The real story is regression. Dallas's 1.024 PDO suggests some luck baked in; Vegas's 0.983 suggests the opposite. The Knights should trend upward from here, the Stars downward. That equalizes what appears to be a Dallas hot streak.

      Goaltending adds wrinkle: A. Hill works the second end of a back-to-back, which may shuffle the net for Vegas.

      The Golden Knights' xG% advantage rests on two: Brandon Saad (0.91 xG/60, 3G 6A with 1 HD goal on 4.1% shooting) drives volume, while Tomas Hertl (0.88 xG/60, 5G 17A, 1 HD goal at 4.3%) converts at a lower rate than his shot volume suggests. Both warrant attention.

      Dallas counters with Jason Robertson (0.96 xG/60, 25G 21A, 2 HD goals at 12.4% shooting), who leads the matchup in both volume and efficiency. Michael Bunting (0.83 xG/60, 8G 14A at 7.6% shooting) generates clean looks but hasn't yet cashed the most dangerous ones. Neither team generates HD goals reliably at even strength—VGK and Dallas both sit at 0% of their scoring from high-danger rebounds—so finish matters.

      Defensively, watch Rasmus Andersson for Vegas and Tyler Myers for Dallas as potential weak links in their respective systems.

      The model is right: this is a coin flip tilted only by the regression narrative. Vegas should get better, Dallas regression-prone. That's barely enough edge for play.

      What the model said beforehand

      The model's lean

      VGK 51%
      51%
      VGK
      Model favorite
      51%
      49%
      VGK50DAL

      VGK by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score VGK 2.4–2.3 DAL; 19% 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
      VGK← edge
      edge →DAL
      54.0%51.0%
      52.0%47.0%
      2.522.36
      2.112.29
      2.122.07
      2.101.68
      0.9831.024

      VGK holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.983 vs 1.024) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

      Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
      Form · Last 10
      VGK
      4-6-0
      -3 GD · 1d rest
      DAL
      9-0-1
      +18 GD · 2d rest
      0.983
      VGK PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      1.024
      DAL PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      What decides it

      Keys to the game

      Where the edges live
      • The Golden Knights own the underlying play — 54.0% 5v5 xG vs 51.0%.
      • The Golden Knights drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
      Regression watch
      • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
      • The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.
      Things to watch
      • The Golden Knights own the underlying play — 54.0% 5v5 xG vs 51.0%.
      • The Golden Knights drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
      • A. Hill is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
      • The Stars are the hotter team by points pace (9-0-1 in their last 10).
      • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
      Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

      Lineups

      NHL box score
      VGK
      Expected in goal
      A. Hill
      back-to-back.833 last start
      Backup Akira Schmid · -1.0 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.

      DAL
      Expected in goal
      C. DeSmith
      2 days rest.842 last start
      Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 GSAx this season

      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
      VGK
      Brandon Saad3G 6A
      0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.1% sh
      Tomas Hertl5G 17A
      0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.3% sh
      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
      Keep going

      Where to next