Backcheck
Recap · PHI at LAK

Flyers edge the Kings in a shootout

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

By the ModelJul 12, 8:00 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
PHI
Philadelphia Flyers
4
Home
LAK
Los Angeles Kings
3
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

2.94Expected goals3.02
51% share for the better side
20Shot attempts (SOG)25
4High-danger chances3
49Corsi (all attempts)70
Score-adjusted: 40% / 60%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Philadelphia's 4-3 shootout win over Los Angeles defied the underlying numbers. Expected goals split 3.02 to the Kings, 2.94 to the Flyers. Yet the Flyers overperformed their xG by 1.06 goals, stealing a game the metrics favored L.A.

The Kings dominated volume. They held 56% of shot attempts (25–20 on goal) and 4–3 in high-danger chances. Los Angeles was particularly lethal off the rush: 2 goals on 29 chances, the kind of finishing that should close games.

Philadelphia's path to victory ran through precision. At 0.060 xG per shot, the Flyers generated higher-quality looks than the Kings' 0.043 per shot. Both teams scored twice from low-danger situations, the sort of goals born from defensive lapses.

Rebounding work separated them slightly. The Flyers created six rebound chances and converted one. The Kings created three and converted one. That volume edge, compounded across small margins, proved decisive.

In net, S. Ersson (PHI) stopped 22 of 25 (0.880 SV%). D. Kuemper (LAK) made 17 of 20 (0.850 SV%). A marginal gap through regulation; the shootout erased it.

Matvei Michkov finished it with a wrist shot from the high slot, ending a game the underlying numbers supported going either way.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
PHI1 / 4 · 0.94 xG
LAK0 / 3 · 0.67 xG
Medium dangermid-range
PHI0 / 15 · 1.62 xG
LAK1 / 14 · 1.56 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
PHI2 / 30 · 0.37 xG
LAK2 / 53 · 0.78 xG

PHI went 2-for-30 from low danger on 0.37 expected goals — 1.6 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
PHI
4 G · 2.94 xG · +1.1
LAK
3 G · 3.02 xG · -0.0
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
S. ErssonPHI
+0.0
D. KuemperLAK
-0.1

PHI finished +1.1 against expected, LAK -0.0 — D. Kuemper (LAK) allowed 0.1 more goals than expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
PHI
WRIST2/20
TIP IN0/2
SLAP0/4
BACKHAND1/5
SNAP0/1
OTHER0/17
LAK
WRIST2/29
TIP IN0/7
SLAP0/5
BACKHAND0/0
SNAP1/3
OTHER0/26
PHI
LAK
Off the rush
1 G on 20 · 1.76 xG
2 G on 29 · 2.19 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 6 · 0.97 xG
1 G on 3 · 0.43 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: PHI went 2-for-20, LAK 2-for-29. LAK scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
A. Panarin
#10 · L · LAK
1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 26:25 TOI · +1
R. Ristolainen
#55 · D · PHI
0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 21:57 TOI · +3
N. Cates
#27 · L · PHI
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 20:27 TOI · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • PHI had the higher quality looks — 0.060 xG/shot vs 0.043.
  • LAK scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • PHI scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • LAK was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 29 rush chances.
  • LAK created 3 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • PHI created 6 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · PHI at LAK · 10:30 PM ET

Flyers at Kings: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 12, 8:13 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

54%
LAK
Model favorite
46%
54%
PHI50LAK

LAK by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score PHI 2.22.4 LAK; 19% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

PHI← edge
edge →LAK
51.0%5v5 xG%52.0%
48.0%Corsi%52.0%
2.26xGF / 602.42
2.20xGA / 602.20
1.96Goals for / gm1.85
1.82Goals against / gm1.71
1.008PDO — luck, not skill1.002

LAK holds 5 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.008 vs 1.002) says PHI has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.2–2.4 goal game with the Kings at 54% win probability—about as close to a pick'em as the regular season offers.

Los Angeles controls the ice. They drive Corsi at 52.0% while Philadelphia sits at 48.0%, a territorial edge that translates to sustained offensive pressure and volume. But Philadelphia compensates through efficiency: their expected goals percentage (51.0%) nearly matches the Kings' 52.0%, meaning the Flyers do more with less. Both teams' PDO values (1.008 and 1.002) suggest their actual goals align with underlying talent—no unsustainable variance waiting to revert.

The Kings enjoy a rest edge. Three days between games versus Philadelphia's five gives Los Angeles freshness. It compounds in the third period, when legs tire and momentum becomes currency.

Offensively, Owen Tippett drives the Flyers at 0.88 xG/60 with 19 goals and 2 high-danger chances on 12.1% shooting. Christian Dvorak (0.81 xG/60, 12 goals, 3 HD chances, 11.2% shooting) provides the secondary threat. Los Angeles counters with Alex Laferriere—0.87 xG/60, 16 goals, 2 HD chances at 9.9% shooting—who matches Tippett's tier. Jared Wright (0.83 xG/60, 0 goals, 4 assists) operates in reserve.

The model has it right: Los Angeles' territorial edge and rest advantage justify 54%, but neither is large enough to eliminate doubt. Goaltending and execution will decide this one.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

PHI
Owen Tippett19G 18A
0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.1% sh
Christian Dvorak12G 21A
0.81 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.2% sh
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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters