Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Nashville Predators sweater
← Sat, Mar 21 · the slate
Breakdown · VGK at NSH

J. Annunen stands tall as the Predators edge the Golden Knights

FinalSat, Mar 21
VGKVegas Golden Knights1NSHNashville Predators4
The verdict · stolen

The Predators stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.46–3.66 and won anyway.

VGK 1 · NSH 4
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 8:08 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

Vegas looked dominant by the underlying metrics—4.46 expected goals, seven high-danger chances—and still lost 4-1. The Golden Knights' mistake was precision: they generated quality but lacked finish. Nashville won on volume that mattered: four goals scored off the rush, a reminder that transition speed trumps possession time.

The xG split favored Vegas 55-45, a slight edge that understates how the game actually played. Nashville held just 33% of shot attempts (20–40) but turned scarcity into lethality. J. Annunen's brilliance made that strategy work—he stopped 39 of 40 shots with a 0.975 save percentage, overperforming expected by 3.46 goals. That's nearly Vegas's entire underperformance gap: the Golden Knights missed by 3.46 on their own, wasting chances A. Schmid couldn't prevent. Schmid made Vegas's high-danger defense look sound (5 saves on 5 HD chances), but transition hockey is harder to stop than volume.

Vegas went 0-for-7 on high-danger chances. Nashville converted just 0-for-5 from close range, then scored four on 20 rush attempts. Ryan O'Reilly scored from the doorstep (P2, 14:53). S. Stamkos added two in 17:39 of ice time. O'Reilly and R. Josi supplied additional points.

Vegas earned the better game by metrics. Nashville earned the better win. J. Annunen's overperformance cost Vegas 3.46 goals; precision cost them the rest.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Mar 21
VGK
1
NSH
4

J. Annunen stands tall as the Predators edge the Golden Knights

Chances 4.5 – 3.7Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Golden Knights deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
VGK
4.46
NSH
3.66
55% of the chances45%

The board read VGK 1, NSH 4. The chances read VGK 4.5, NSH 3.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NSH
+0.3
goals above expected
NSH3.66 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
VGK4.46 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Golden Knights left 3.5 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 00:40NSHS. Stamkos0–1
  2. P2 01:24NSHS. StamkosPP0–2
  3. P2 11:56NSHT. JostSH0–3
  4. P2 13:10VGKS. TheodorePP1–3
  5. P2 14:53NSHR. O'ReillyPP1–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
VGK
59 shots
1
Final
90 shots
NSH
31 shots
4
VGK attackNSH attack
VGK NSH Goal
59
shots · 1 in
31
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
VGKNSH
0 / 7
1.52 xG
High danger
0 / 5
1.57 xG
0 / 19
2.20 xG
Medium
3 / 15
1.78 xG
1 / 51
0.74 xG
Low
1 / 20
0.32 xG

The Golden Knights went 0 for 7 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
J. Annunen
+3.5
NSH · 39/40
D
A. Schmid
−0.3
VGK · 16/20
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

J. Annunen stands tall as the Predators edge the Golden Knights

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 20–4
  1. 00:40NSHS. Stamkos(R. O'Reilly)0–1
2ndshots 10–11
  1. 01:24NSHS. Stamkospower play(F. Forsberg, J. Marchessault)0–2
  2. 11:56NSHT. Jostshorthanded(B. Skjei)0–3
  3. 13:10VGKS. Theodorepower play(I. Barbashev, B. Howden)1–3
  4. 14:53NSHR. O'Reillypower play(S. Stamkos, R. Josi)1–4
3rdshots 10–5no goals

    score reads VGK–NSH

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    3.66
    NSH chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    +0.3
    Finishing
    Goals above what those chances were worth
    1.087
    NSH puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    34.2%
    Shot attempts
    Under half — they were outshot
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    4.46Expected goals3.66
    VGK 55% of the chance quality
    40Shots on goal20
    7High-danger chances5
    77All attempts (Corsi)40
    Adjusted for score: VGK 72% · NSH 28%
    Faceoffs · NSH won28%off24%neu74%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    VGK0 / 7 · 1.52 xG
    NSH0 / 5 · 1.57 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    VGK0 / 19 · 2.20 xG
    NSH3 / 15 · 1.78 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    VGK1 / 51 · 0.74 xG
    NSH1 / 20 · 0.32 xG

    VGK went 0-for-19 from medium danger on 2.20 expected goals — 2.2 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    VGK
    1 G · 4.46 xG · -3.5
    NSH
    4 G · 3.66 xG · +0.3
    012345

    VGK finished -3.5 against expected, NSH +0.3.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    VGK
    WRIST1/35
    SNAP0/8
    SLAP0/7
    TIP IN0/6
    BACKHAND0/2
    BETWEEN LEGS0/1
    DEFLECTED0/0
    POKE0/0
    OTHER0/18
    NSH
    WRIST1/13
    SNAP2/6
    SLAP0/5
    TIP IN0/2
    BACKHAND0/3
    BETWEEN LEGS0/0
    DEFLECTED1/1
    POKE0/1
    OTHER0/9
    VGK
    NSH
    Off the rush
    0 G on 36
    3.21 xG
    4 G on 20
    2.21 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 5
    0.79 xG
    0 G on 4
    0.62 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: VGK went 1-for-35, NSH 1-for-13. NSH scored 4 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. Schmid
    VGK · 16/20 · .800
    -0.3
    saved above expected
    D
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/51.6+1.6
    Medium3/151.8-1.2
    Low1/200.3-0.7

    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. Annunen
    NSH · 39/40 · .975
    +3.5
    saved above expected
    A+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/71.5+1.5
    Medium0/192.2+2.2
    Low1/510.7-0.3

    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

    90 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    VGK
    59 shots
    1
    Final
    90 shots
    NSH
    31 shots
    4
    VGK attackNSH attack
    VGK NSH Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — VGK left, NSH 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
    S. Stamkos
    #91 · C · NSH
    2 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 17:39 on ice · +1
    R. O'Reilly
    #90 · C · NSH
    1 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 19:06 on ice · +1
    R. Josi
    #59 · D · NSH
    0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 24:18 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Sat, Mar 21
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 12, 8:05 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 draws this nearly even: Vegas at 52% to win, with a projected score of 2.5–2.4 in the Golden Knights' favor. This is as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

    The underlying numbers favor Vegas. The Golden Knights own a 54.0% 5v5 xG% advantage over Nashville's 49.0%, and they control play with a 52.0% Corsi edge. But they're running ice-cold—their 0.983 PDO signals a team due for positive regression. The Predators' 0.992 PDO suggests they've gotten their share of bounces, though their recent form—4-4-2 in their last 10 games—tells a different story. Vegas has cratered to -8 goal differential over the same span.

    Goaltending adds uncertainty. Both J. Annunen and A. Schmid are on back-to-backs, creating the possibility of a backup appearance or diminished performance.

    Brandon Saad anchors Vegas's offense at 0.91 xG/60 with 3G and 6A, but his 4.1% shooting rate reflects underperformance relative to his opportunities. Tomas Hertl provides secondary scoring at 0.88 xG/60, backed by 5G and 17A, though his 4.3% conversion also signals due for regression upside.

    Nashville's Zachary L'Heureux posts 4G on 0.85 xG/60, but 1 high-danger goal and 16.0% shooting suggest he's running hot. Filip Forsberg is the steadier scorer: 23G and 17A at 0.80 xG/60, with 4 high-danger goals indicating he converts the quality looks that matter.

    The structural case runs to Vegas, constructed on better underlying metrics. But Nashville's recent form, the goaltending uncertainty, and the scoring variance on both sides compress the edge. That 52% projection earns its coin-flip label.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    VGK 52%
    52%
    VGK
    Model favorite
    52%
    48%
    VGK50NSH

    VGK by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score VGK 2.5–2.4 NSH; 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
    VGK← edge
    edge →NSH
    54.0%49.0%
    52.0%50.0%
    2.522.48
    2.112.58
    2.121.84
    2.102.21
    0.9830.992

    VGK holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.983 vs 0.992) says NSH has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    VGK
    3-7-0
    -8 GD · 1d rest
    NSH
    4-4-2
    +0 GD · 1d rest
    0.983
    VGK PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    0.992
    NSH 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 49.0%.
    Regression watch
    • 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 49.0%.
    • J. Annunen is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • A. Schmid is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • The Predators are the hotter team by points pace (4-4-2 in their last 10).
    • The Golden Knights are underwater at -8 goal differential over their last 10.
    • The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    VGK
    Expected in goal
    A. Schmid
    back-to-back1.000 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.

    NSH
    Expected in goal
    J. Annunen
    back-to-back.962 last start
    Backup Juuse Saros · -9.3 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
    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
    NSH
    Zachary L'Heureux4G 0A
    0.85 xG/60 · 1 HD · 16.0% sh
    Filip Forsberg23G 17A
    0.80 xG/60 · 4 HD · 13.6% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next

    Back to the front page