Motion-blurred skater in a Calgary Flames sweater

Breakdown · STL at CGY

Flames edge the Blues in a shootout

Final / OTWed, Mar 18

The verdict · coin flip

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

STL 1 · CGY 2

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 7:49 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 shootout robbed St. Louis of an earned result. The Blues generated 3.14 expected goals to Calgary's 2.91—a 52–48 split—yet lost 2–1 in the shootout.

Possession favored Calgary (54% of shot attempts), but quality told a different story. The Blues created more high-danger chances (5 to 4), driving their xG advantage. Yet St. Louis managed 0–5 on those premium opportunities.

Both teams squandered their chances relative to underlying metrics. The Flames underperformed their xG by 0.91 goals; the Blues underperformed theirs by 2.14. That St. Louis escaped with superior offense yet lost came down to elite goaltending.

D. Cooley (CGY) made the difference, saving 2.14 goals above expected on a 0.962 save percentage—stopping all 5 high-danger chances the Blues created. He finished 25–26. J. Hofer (STL) was nearly as good at 0.968 and 1.91 goals above expected, but Matvei Gridin's shootout snap shot from the high slot proved decisive.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · SO · Mar 18

STL

CGY

Flames edge the Blues in a shootout

Chances 3.1 – 2.9Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Flames took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value

STL

3.14

CGY

2.91

52% of the chances48%

The board read STL 1, CGY 2. The chances read STL 3.1, CGY 2.9.

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

Luck check

CGY

−0.9

goals above expected

CGY2.91 expected · 2 scored

Expected

Scored

STL3.14 expected · 1 scored

Expected

Scored

The Blues left 2.1 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 02:34CGYC. Zary0–1
P2 03:47STLD. Holloway1–1
SO 00:00CGYJ. FarabeePP1–1
SO 00:00CGYM. GridinPP1–1

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

Where the shots came from

STL

41 shots

Final

84 shots

CGY

43 shots

STL CGY GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

shots · 1 in

shots · 3 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

STLCGY

0 / 5

1.13 xG

High danger

1 / 4

0.87 xG

1 / 15

1.61 xG

Medium

0 / 14

1.50 xG

0 / 33

0.40 xG

Low

0 / 34

0.54 xG

The Blues went 0 for 5 from the slot.

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

In the net

D. Cooley

+2.1

CGY · 25/26

J. Hofer

+1.9

STL · 30/31

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Flames edge the Blues in a shootout

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 8–11

02:34CGYC. Zary(R. Strome)0–1

2ndshots 6–6

03:47STLD. Holloway(J. Snuggerud, R. Thomas)1–1

3rdshots 9–7no goals

OTshots 3–7no goals

00:00CGYJ. Farabeepower play1–1
00:00CGYM. Gridinpower play1–1

score reads STL–CGY

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

2.91

CGY chances

Goals their shots were worth

−0.9

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.000

CGY puck luck

About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces

49.5%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.14Expected goals2.91

STL 52% of the chance quality

26Shots on goal31

5High-danger chances4

53All attempts (Corsi)52

Adjusted for score: STL 52% · CGY 48%

Faceoffs · CGY won59%off39%neu48%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

STL0 / 5 · 1.13 xG

CGY1 / 4 · 0.87 xG

Medium dangermid-range

STL1 / 15 · 1.61 xG

CGY0 / 14 · 1.50 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

STL0 / 33 · 0.40 xG

CGY0 / 34 · 0.54 xG

CGY went 0-for-14 from medium danger on 1.50 expected goals — 1.5 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

STL

1 G · 3.14 xG · -2.1

CGY

2 G · 2.91 xG · -0.9

01234

STL finished -2.1 against expected, CGY -0.9.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

STL

WRIST0/27

SLAP0/5

SNAP1/2

BACKHAND0/3

TIP IN0/2

OTHER0/14

CGY

WRIST0/20

SLAP0/7

SNAP0/6

BACKHAND1/3

TIP IN0/4

OTHER0/12

STL

CGY

Off the rush

1 G on 23

2.28 xG

1 G on 22

2.04 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 2

0.32 xG

0 G on 2

0.23 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: STL went 0-for-27, CGY 0-for-20.

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 · 30/31 · .968

+1.9

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/40.9-0.1

Medium0/141.5+1.5

Low0/340.5+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

D. Cooley

CGY · 25/26 · .962

+2.1

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/51.1+1.1

Medium1/151.6+0.6

Low0/330.4+0.4

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

84 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

STL

41 shots

Final

84 shots

CGY

43 shots

STL CGY GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

Each club shoots toward its own end — STL left, CGY 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

D. Holloway

#81 · L · STL

1 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 21:40 on ice · +1

R. Strome

#22 · C · CGY

0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 19:50 on ice

R. Thomas

#18 · C · STL

0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 19:49 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Wed, Mar 18

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 7:46 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 STL 2.5 - 2.5 CGY game with the Flames at 50% win probability. This is as close to even money as the numbers get.

Recent form tilts slightly toward St. Louis. The Blues have gone 7-2-1 in their last 10 games, while Calgary sits at -21 goal differential over the same stretch—a team leaking goals when it matters most. Yet underlying metrics tell a murkier story. St. Louis leads expected goals percentage at 49.0% to Calgary's 47.0%, a marginal edge. Possession favors the Flames: their 49.0% Corsi% tops St. Louis's 48.0%. The two teams are closer to twins than opponents.

The Flames' season-long PDO of 0.985 is the tell. They're running cold on the luck axis, which means positive regression is lurking. A team generating decent chances but converting at below-league rates has nowhere to go but up—if they get out of this one healthy.

Jimmy Snuggerud drives St. Louis's attack. The winger carries 15 goals and 22 assists with an elite 0.86 expected goals per 60 minutes; his 11.9% shooting percentage translates to two high-danger goals. Dylan Holloway pairs with him at 13 goals and 24 assists (0.82 xG/60, 10.8% shooting, one high-danger goal). They're the reason St. Louis's PDO sits at 1.000—elite shot quality, above-average puck luck.

Calgary counters with Blake Coleman, who leads the Flames with 16 goals and 12 assists. Coleman's 0.89 xG/60 is generation-tier elite, backed by two high-danger goals. His 11.4% shooting rate reflects true finishing skill. Matt Coronato (10 goals, 16 assists, 0.80 xG/60) rounds out the threat level, though his 6.6% shooting—well below his expected output—hints at the same regression tailwind blowing Calgary's way.

The matchup hinges on whether St. Louis's recent hot streak and superior individual talent outweigh Calgary's underlying possession edge. The Flames have the chance to play at even odds if their shots start going in. The Blues are the hotter team, but the model's certainty is practically zero. Flip a coin.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

CGY 50%

50%

CGY

Model favorite

50%

STL50CGY

CGY by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score STL 2.5–2.5 CGY; 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 →CGY

49.0%47.0%

48.0%49.0%

2.342.36

2.402.66

2.001.76

2.122.15

1.0000.985

STL holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.000 vs 0.985) says STL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

STL

7-2-1

+11 GD · 3d rest

CGY

2-7-1

-21 GD · 2d rest

1.000

STL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.985

CGY PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch

The Flames' PDO is 0.985 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Things to watch

The Blues are the hotter team by points pace (7-2-1 in their last 10).
The Flames are underwater at -21 goal differential over their last 10.
The Flames' PDO is 0.985 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

STL

Expected in goal

J. Binnington

3 days rest.813 last start

Backup Joel Hofer · +11.7 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

CGY

Expected in goal

D. Wolf

2 days rest.833 last start

Backup Dustin Wolf · -1.8 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

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

CGY

Blake Coleman16G 12A

0.89 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.4% sh

Matt Coronato10G 16A

0.80 xG/60 · 0 HD · 6.6% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page