Motion-blurred skater in a New Jersey Devils sweater

Breakdown · LAK at NJD

Devils hold off the Kings

FinalSat, Mar 14

LAKLos Angeles Kings4 NJDNew Jersey Devils6

The verdict · stolen

The Devils stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.32–3.89 and won anyway.

LAK 4 · NJD 6

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 7:08 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

New Jersey won 6-4 despite trailing in expected goals (3.89–4.32). The Devils finished 2.11 above their xG—variance that counted.

Power play split: both teams scored twice (Devils on 7 shots at 0.92 xG; Kings on 8 at 1.01 xG). Identical efficiency. The game was decided elsewhere.

N. Hischier (2 goals, 2 assists) converted. J. Allen (0.871 SV%) saved tight chances. A. Forsberg (22 saves on 27 shots, 0.815 SV%) underperformed by 1.11 goals—a real shortfall.

High-danger chances deadlocked 6-6. Rebounds told the story: six created by New Jersey (two goals), nine by Los Angeles (zero goals). Rush production mirrored: both three goals each, but the Kings needed 30 chances to New Jersey's 25. Efficiency favored the Devils.

Timo Meier's snap shot from the wing (third period, 19:52) settled the game. New Jersey's efficiency—Hischier's finishes, Allen's save rate—overrode Los Angeles's volume. The Devils played fewer chances, sharper. The Kings played more, duller. On the scoreboard, sharp won.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Mar 14

LAK

NJD

Devils hold off the Kings

Chances 4.3 – 3.9Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Kings deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

LAK

4.32

NJD

3.89

53% of the chances47%

The board read LAK 4, NJD 6. The chances read LAK 4.3, NJD 3.9.

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

Luck check

NJD

+2.1

goals above expected

NJD3.89 expected · 6 scored

Expected

Scored

LAK4.32 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

The Devils scored 2.1 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season

Every goal, in order

P1 07:58NJDC. Glass0–1
P1 11:04NJDN. Hischier0–2
P2 04:15LAKA. KopitarPP1–2
P2 06:03LAKA. Panarin2–2
P2 11:43LAKT. Ward3–2
P3 00:25NJDA. Gritsyuk3–3
P3 12:42NJDN. HischierPP3–4

+3 more on the full breakdown

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

Where the shots came from

LAK

53 shots

Final

96 shots

NJD

43 shots

LAK NJD GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 4 in

shots · 6 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

LAKNJD

1 / 6

1.52 xG

High danger

2 / 6

1.71 xG

2 / 18

2.01 xG

Medium

4 / 14

1.65 xG

1 / 44

0.79 xG

Low

0 / 38

0.53 xG

The Devils buried 2 of 6 high-danger looks.

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

In the net

J. Allen

+0.3

NJD · 27/31

D-

A. Forsberg

−1.1

LAK · 22/27

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Devils hold off the Kings

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 11–14

07:58NJDC. Glass(A. Gritsyuk)0–1
11:04NJDN. Hischier(T. Meier, L. Hughes)0–2

2ndshots 13–4

04:15LAKA. Kopitarpower play(B. Clarke, A. Panarin)1–2
06:03LAKA. Panarin(J. Edmundson, A. Kempe)2–2
11:43LAKT. Ward(B. Clarke, S. Helenius)3–2

3rdshots 7–10

00:25NJDA. Gritsyuk(L. Hameenaho, D. Hamilton)3–3
12:42NJDN. Hischierpower play(C. Brown, J. Bratt)3–4
13:42LAKA. Kopitarpower play(A. Panarin, B. Clarke)4–4
17:31NJDJ. Hughespower play(N. Hischier, D. Hamilton)4–5
19:52NJDT. Meierempty net(N. Hischier)4–6

score reads LAK–NJD

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.89

NJD chances

Goals their shots were worth

+2.1

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.045

NJD puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

46.0%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.32Expected goals3.89

LAK 53% of the chance quality

31Shots on goal28

6High-danger chances6

68All attempts (Corsi)58

Adjusted for score: LAK 56% · NJD 44%

Faceoffs · NJD won50%off48%neu69%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

LAK1 / 6 · 1.52 xG

NJD2 / 6 · 1.71 xG

Medium dangermid-range

LAK2 / 18 · 2.01 xG

NJD4 / 14 · 1.65 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

LAK1 / 44 · 0.79 xG

NJD0 / 38 · 0.53 xG

NJD went 4-for-14 from medium danger on 1.65 expected goals — 2.4 above expected.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

LAK

4 G · 4.32 xG · -0.3

NJD

6 G · 3.89 xG · +2.1

01234567

LAK finished -0.3 against expected, NJD +2.1.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

LAK

SNAP1/18

WRIST1/16

TIP IN1/8

SLAP1/8

BACKHAND0/2

WRAP AROUND0/1

OTHER0/15

NJD

SNAP4/16

WRIST1/16

TIP IN1/5

SLAP0/2

BACKHAND0/3

WRAP AROUND0/1

OTHER0/15

LAK

NJD

Off the rush

3 G on 30

2.67 xG

3 G on 25

2.04 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 9

1.14 xG

2 G on 6

0.87 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: LAK went 1-for-18, NJD 4-for-16. LAK 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

A. Forsberg

LAK · 22/27 · .815

-1.1

saved above expected

D-

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/61.7-0.3

Medium4/141.6-2.4

Low0/380.5+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. Allen

NJD · 27/31 · .871

+0.3

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/61.5+0.5

Medium2/182.0+0.0

Low1/440.8-0.2

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

96 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

LAK

53 shots

Final

96 shots

NJD

43 shots

LAK NJD GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — LAK left, NJD 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

N. Hischier

#13 · C · NJD

2 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 20:26 on ice

A. Panarin

#10 · L · LAK

1 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 20:20 on ice · -2

B. Clarke

#92 · D · LAK

0 G · 3 A · 1 SOG · 20:19 on ice · -1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Mar 14

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 7:06 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 LAK 2.5 - 2.5 NJD game. The Kings sit at 50% win probability — as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

The Kings are underwater at -10 goal differential over their last 10, a sign that underlying play hasn't matched results. But their 5v5 xG% of 52.0% and Corsi% of 52.0% indicate they've been the better team in sustained play. The Devils' xG% (50.0%) and Corsi% (51.0%) are slightly lower, keeping them in a tighter margin. New Jersey's PDO sits at 0.971 — they're running cold on puck luck, and regression favors them tonight. Los Angeles counters with a PDO of 1.002, which is neutral to slightly above expected, meaning their goal-getting tracks closer to their chance creation.

The goaltending question looms: D. Kuemper is on a back-to-back. Whether that means a tired starter or a backup kickoff remains uncertain, but New Jersey should exploit any opening in goal. Both teams generate few high-danger chances: LAK sits at 0% HD goal rate and 0% rebound goal rate; NJD matches that output. Expect low-event hockey. LAK's defensive weak link is Adrian Kempe; NJD's is Johnathan Kovacevic.

Alex Laferriere leads LA's scoring. Jared Wright provides depth scoring. Timo Meier and Jack Hughes drive New Jersey's offense.

Players to Watch

Los Angeles

Alex Laferriere — 0.87 xG/60, 16G 18A, 2 HD goals, 9.9% shooting
Jared Wright — 0.83 xG/60, 0G 4A

New Jersey

Timo Meier — 1.08 xG/60, 13G 15A, 3 HD goals, 6.7% shooting
Jack Hughes — 0.88 xG/60, 18G 17A, 1 HD goals, 11.5% shooting

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

LAK 50%

50%

LAK

Model favorite

50%

LAK50NJD

LAK by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score LAK 2.5–2.5 NJD; 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

LAK← edge

edge →NJD

52.0%50.0%

52.0%51.0%

2.422.45

2.202.50

1.851.66

1.712.23

1.0020.971

LAK holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.002 vs 0.971) says LAK has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

LAK

4-5-1

-10 GD · 1d rest

NJD

4-6-0

-3 GD · 2d rest

1.002

LAK PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.971

NJD PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch

The Devils' PDO is 0.971 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Things to watch

D. Kuemper is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Kings are underwater at -10 goal differential over their last 10.
The Devils' PDO is 0.971 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

LAK

Expected in goal

D. Kuemper

back-to-back.913 last start

Backup Darcy Kuemper · -5.8 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.

NJD

Expected in goal

J. Markstrom

2 days rest.828 last start

Backup Jacob Markstrom · -11.9 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

LAK

Alex Laferriere16G 18A

0.87 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.9% sh

Jared Wright0G 4A

0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% sh

NJD

Timo Meier13G 15A

1.08 xG/60 · 3 HD · 6.7% sh

Jack Hughes18G 17A

0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.5% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page