Motion-blurred skater in a green sweater

Breakdown · DET at DAL

Stars edge the Red Wings in overtime

Final / OTSat, Mar 14

The verdict · coin flip

The Stars won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

DET 2 · DAL 3

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 7:11 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

The Stars won 3-2 in overtime despite Detroit's 3.61–3.44 expected-goals advantage. This outcome required Dallas's goaltending to exceed expectations and Detroit's finishers to fall short by identical margins: 1.61 goals each.

J. Oettinger saved 1.61 goals above expected, posting a 0.917 save percentage against six Red Wings high-danger chances. Detroit held five high-danger opportunities, crashed the net for three rebound chances (one converted), and underperformed its xG by 1.61. The underlying structures were even: 24 shots each, quality chances distributed. Dallas separated itself through rush efficiency, scoring 2 goals on 28 chances.

Thomas Harley's snap shot from the high slot at 02:06 of overtime decided the game. J. Gibson, Detroit's starter, finished with a 0.875 save percentage (21/24).

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · OT · Mar 14

DET

DAL

Stars edge the Red Wings in overtime

Chances 3.6 – 3.4Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Stars took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value

DET

3.61

DAL

3.44

51% of the chances49%

The board read DET 2, DAL 3. The chances read DET 3.6, DAL 3.4.

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

Luck check

DAL

−0.4

goals above expected

DAL3.44 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

DET3.61 expected · 2 scored

Expected

Scored

The Red Wings left 1.6 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

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

Every goal, in order

P1 08:57DALW. Johnston0–1
P2 02:19DALM. BuntingPP0–2
P3 06:51DETS. Edvinsson1–2
P3 16:34DETL. Raymond2–2
OT 02:06DALT. Harley2–3

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

Where the shots came from

DET

41 shots

Final

83 shots

DAL

42 shots

DET DAL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 2 in

shots · 3 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

DETDAL

1 / 6

1.77 xG

High danger

1 / 5

1.19 xG

1 / 11

1.24 xG

Medium

2 / 16

1.62 xG

0 / 36

0.60 xG

Low

0 / 39

0.63 xG

High-danger looks: DET 1 of 6, DAL 1 of 5.

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

In the net

J. Oettinger

+1.6

DAL · 22/24

J. Gibson

+0.4

DET · 21/24

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Stars edge the Red Wings in overtime

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 4–9

08:57DALW. Johnston(M. Bourque, N. Lundkvist)0–1

2ndshots 4–8

02:19DALM. Buntingpower play(J. Hryckowian, J. Robertson)0–2

3rdshots 14–6

06:51DETS. Edvinsson(M. Seider, J. van Riemsdyk)1–2
16:34DETL. Raymond(E. Finnie, A. DeBrincat)2–2

OTshots 2–1

02:06DALT. Harley(W. Johnston)2–3

score reads DET–DAL

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.44

DAL chances

Goals their shots were worth

−0.4

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.012

DAL puck luck

About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces

53.1%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.61Expected goals3.44

DET 51% of the chance quality

24Shots on goal24

6High-danger chances5

53All attempts (Corsi)60

Adjusted for score: DET 51% · DAL 49%

Faceoffs · DAL won63%off27%neu41%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

DET1 / 6 · 1.77 xG

DAL1 / 5 · 1.19 xG

Medium dangermid-range

DET1 / 11 · 1.24 xG

DAL2 / 16 · 1.62 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

DET0 / 36 · 0.60 xG

DAL0 / 39 · 0.63 xG

DET went 1-for-6 from high danger on 1.77 expected goals — 0.8 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

DET

2 G · 3.61 xG · -1.6

DAL

3 G · 3.44 xG · -0.4

01234

DET finished -1.6 against expected, DAL -0.4.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

DET

SNAP1/18

WRIST0/6

TIP IN0/5

SLAP0/4

BACKHAND0/5

WRAP AROUND0/1

DEFLECTED0/1

BAT1/1

OTHER0/12

DAL

SNAP2/26

WRIST0/5

TIP IN1/4

SLAP0/3

BACKHAND0/2

WRAP AROUND0/2

DEFLECTED0/0

BAT0/0

OTHER0/18

DET

DAL

Off the rush

1 G on 22

2.37 xG

2 G on 28

2.62 xG

Off rebounds

1 G on 3

0.83 xG

0 G on 1

0.10 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: DET went 1-for-18, DAL 2-for-26. DAL 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

J. Gibson

DET · 21/24 · .875

+0.4

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/51.2+0.2

Medium2/161.6-0.4

Low0/390.6+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

J. Oettinger

DAL · 22/24 · .917

+1.6

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/61.8+0.8

Medium1/111.2+0.2

Low0/360.6+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

83 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

DET

41 shots

Final

83 shots

DAL

42 shots

DET DAL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — DET 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

W. Johnston

#53 · C · DAL

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 19:52 on ice · +1

M. Seider

#53 · D · DET

0 G · 1 A · 6 SOG · 27:44 on ice

T. Harley

#55 · D · DAL

1 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 22:43 on ice

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, 7:10 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

The model projects a 2.3–2.5 goal game with Dallas at 54% win probability. This is as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

Dallas is the hotter team: 9-0-1 in their last 10 games. Detroit is underwater, sitting at minus-5 goal differential over the same span—a team failing to finish.

The five-on-five picture is more nuanced. Dallas leads in expected goals at 51.0% but trails in Corsi (47.0% vs. Detroit's 49.0%), generating higher-quality chances while ceding volume. Dallas's PDO of 1.024 tells the real story: the Stars are running hot and bound for regression, while Detroit's 0.985 PDO suggests puck luck has abandoned them.

Watch for J. Oettinger to either start on back-to-back rest or yield to Dallas's backup. That decision will matter.

Players to Watch

Detroit: Alex DeBrincat (0.88 xG/60, 17G 28A, 2 HD goals, 9.0% shooting) and Marco Kasper (0.81 xG/60, 7G 8A, 1 HD goal, 6.1% shooting) carry the offensive load. Kasper's suppressed shooting rate suggests positive regression ahead.

Dallas: Jason Robertson (0.96 xG/60, 25G 21A, 2 HD goals, 12.4% shooting) is the far more dangerous scorer. Michael Bunting (0.83 xG/60, 8G 14A, 7.6% shooting) adds depth.

Detroit's defensive weak link is Axel Sandin-Pellikka. Dallas's is Tyler Myers.

The Stars' superior pacing and Dallas's marginal five-on-five advantage should favor the home team. But Detroit's puck-luck deficit colliding with Dallas's unsustainable PDO make this exactly what the model says: a toss.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DAL 54%

54%

DAL

Model favorite

46%

54%

DET50DAL

DAL by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score DET 2.3–2.5 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

DET← edge

edge →DAL

49.0%51.0%

49.0%47.0%

2.382.36

2.502.29

1.732.07

2.071.68

0.9851.024

DAL holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.985 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

DET

4-5-1

-5 GD · 2d rest

DAL

9-0-1

+22 GD · 1d rest

0.985

DET PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.024

DAL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch

The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.

Things to watch

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 (9-0-1 in their last 10).
The Red Wings are underwater at -5 goal differential over 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

DET

Expected in goal

J. Gibson

2 days rest.893 last start

Backup John Gibson · +11.7 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

DAL

Expected in goal

J. Oettinger

back-to-back.938 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.

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

DET

Alex DeBrincat17G 28A

0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.0% sh

Marco Kasper7G 8A

0.81 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.1% 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

Back to the front page