Motion-blurred skater in a Edmonton Oilers sweater
Breakdown · SEA at EDM

Oilers shut out the Kraken, 3-0

The verdict · earned

The Oilers earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.

SEA 0 · EDM 3
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 9:51 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 scoreboard was decisive, but the shot totals told a different story. The Oilers controlled expected goals 3.40–2.25 despite fewer attempts. The gap came down to quality: 0.074 expected goals per shot for Edmonton versus 0.038 for Seattle. Nearly double the efficiency.

Connor McDavid broke through in the third period with a wrist shot from the point at 17:34. Two more goals followed off the rush, where Edmonton's transition play overwhelmed Seattle. The Kraken had just 1 high-danger chance to Edmonton's 4, and 2.25 expected goals amounted to nothing.

P. Grubauer (SEA) kept the deficit manageable—21/23 saves, outperforming expected by 1.40 goals. C. Ingram (EDM) was flawless: 27/27 saves, 1.000 SV%, running 2.25 above expected. When a goalie outperforms expected by that margin, the scoreboard reflects it.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Mar 31
SEA
0
EDM
3

Oilers shut out the Kraken, 3-0

Chances 2.3 – 3.4Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Oilers earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
SEA
2.25
EDM
3.40
40% of the chances60%

The board read SEA 0, EDM 3. The chances read SEA 2.3, EDM 3.4.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
EDM
−0.4
goals above expected
EDM3.40 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
SEA2.25 expected · 0 scored
Expected
Scored

The Kraken left 2.3 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 05:28EDMM. Jones0–1
  2. P1 12:43EDMK. Kapanen0–2
  3. P3 17:34EDMC. McDavidEN0–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
SEA
43 shots
0
Final
81 shots
EDM
38 shots
3
SEA attackEDM attack
SEA EDM Goal
43
shots · 0 in
38
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
SEAEDM
0 / 1
0.18 xG
High danger
1 / 4
1.34 xG
0 / 12
1.35 xG
Medium
1 / 15
1.62 xG
0 / 47
0.72 xG
Low
1 / 27
0.45 xG

High-danger looks: SEA 0 of 1, EDM 1 of 4.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
C. Ingram
+2.3
EDM · 27/27
B+
P. Grubauer
+1.4
SEA · 21/23
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Oilers shut out the Kraken, 3-0

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 6–12
  1. 05:28EDMM. Jones(J. Walman)0–1
  2. 12:43EDMK. Kapanen0–2
2ndshots 13–9no goals
    3rdshots 8–3
    1. 17:34EDMC. McDavidempty net(R. Nugent-Hopkins, Z. Hyman)0–3

    score reads SEA–EDM

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    3.40
    EDM chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    −0.4
    Finishing
    Goals below what those chances were worth
    1.065
    EDM puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    43.4%
    Shot attempts
    Under half — they were outshot
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    2.25Expected goals3.40
    EDM 60% of the chance quality
    27Shots on goal24
    1High-danger chances4
    60All attempts (Corsi)46
    Adjusted for score: SEA 63% · EDM 37%
    Faceoffs · EDM won44%off18%neu68%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    SEA0 / 1 · 0.18 xG
    EDM1 / 4 · 1.34 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    SEA0 / 12 · 1.35 xG
    EDM1 / 15 · 1.62 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    SEA0 / 47 · 0.72 xG
    EDM1 / 27 · 0.45 xG

    SEA went 0-for-12 from medium danger on 1.35 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    SEA
    0 G · 2.25 xG · -2.3
    EDM
    3 G · 3.40 xG · -0.4
    01234

    SEA finished -2.3 against expected, EDM -0.4.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    SEA
    SNAP0/24
    WRIST0/5
    SLAP0/8
    BACKHAND0/2
    TIP IN0/3
    DEFLECTED0/0
    BAT0/1
    OTHER0/17
    EDM
    SNAP0/3
    WRIST2/21
    SLAP0/7
    BACKHAND0/3
    TIP IN0/2
    DEFLECTED1/2
    BAT0/0
    OTHER0/8
    SEA
    EDM
    Off the rush
    0 G on 22
    1.47 xG
    2 G on 25
    2.21 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 2
    0.14 xG
    0 G on 1
    0.13 xG

    Snap shots carried the volume: SEA went 0-for-24, EDM 0-for-3. EDM 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
    P. Grubauer
    SEA · 21/23 · .913
    +1.4
    saved above expected
    B+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/41.3+0.3
    Medium1/151.6+0.6
    Low1/270.5-0.6

    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

    C. Ingram
    EDM · 27/27 · 1.000
    +2.3
    saved above expected
    A
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/10.2+0.2
    Medium0/121.4+1.4
    Low0/470.7+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

    81 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    SEA
    43 shots
    0
    Final
    81 shots
    EDM
    38 shots
    3
    SEA attackEDM attack
    SEA EDM Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — SEA left, EDM 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
    C. McDavid
    #97 · C · EDM
    1 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 19:46 on ice · +1
    Z. Hyman
    #18 · L · EDM
    0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 17:39 on ice · +1
    R. Nugent-Hopkins
    #93 · C · EDM
    0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 17:35 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Tue, Mar 31
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 12, 9:49 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 leans Oilers at 57% win probability in a projected 2.3-2.7 game. Edmonton's advantage is structural: superior underlying play supported by a PDO running cold enough to expect positive regression.

    Edmonton has momentum on the calendar. The Oilers are 6-3-1 over their last 10 games, capturing the firmer recent record. Seattle has not: the Kraken sit at -9 goal differential over the same stretch, evidence of a team hemorrhaging close games.

    The season numbers explain the deeper lean. Edmonton controls 52.0% of expected goals at 5v5, compared to Seattle's 46.0%. That 6-point edge in xG% isn't random noise. Edmonton's Corsi tells the same story—50.0% versus 45.0%—a territorial tilt that favors directional control and sustained offensive zone time. This is how Edmonton manufactures wins: by living in Seattle's end and forcing reactive hockey.

    The PDO angle sweetens the case considerably. Edmonton's PDO sits at 0.982, running cold relative to league-average luck, a sign of a team whose shooting percentage and save percentage are both underperforming what their underlying play deserves. Seattle's is 1.011, running warm. Regression typically punishes the latter and rewards the former. If Edmonton normalizes shooting and save percentages toward the mean while Seattle regresses, the margin widens.

    Players to Watch

    Seattle

    • Shane Wright: 0.77 xG/60, 8G 10A, 4 HD goals, 10.4% shooting
    • Berkly Catton: 0.68 xG/60, 6G 8A, 5 HD goals, 8.8% shooting

    Edmonton

    • Zach Hyman: 1.23 xG/60, 14G 13A, 1 HD goals, 13.0% shooting
    • Connor McDavid: 0.92 xG/60, 25G 33A, 5 HD goals, 13.7% shooting

    Seattle's scoring threats operate within narrow ranges. Neither Wright nor Catton generates the kind of consistent Grade-A volume that breaks through tight checking. Edmonton's top tier operates at a different altitude: Hyman's 1.23 xG/60 and McDavid's dual-threat production (25G, 33A) represent the kind of sustained pressure that compounds when PDO winds blow favorably.

    The defensive vulnerabilities—Chandler Stephenson for Seattle and Jake Walman for Edmonton—matter less than territorial advantage. Edmonton's control will limit Seattle's scoring volume regardless.

    The verdict: Edmonton's underlying dominance, coupled with PDO regression and recent form, makes 57% a sound projection.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    EDM 57%
    57%
    EDM
    Model favorite
    43%
    57%
    SEA50EDM

    EDM by 14 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score SEA 2.3–2.7 EDM; 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
    SEA← edge
    edge →EDM
    46.0%52.0%
    45.0%50.0%
    2.132.64
    2.512.47
    1.872.13
    1.952.29
    1.0110.982

    EDM holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.011 vs 0.982) says SEA has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    SEA
    3-5-2
    -9 GD · 3d rest
    EDM
    6-3-1
    -2 GD · 3d rest
    1.011
    SEA PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    0.982
    EDM PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Where the edges live
    • The Oilers own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.
    • The Oilers drive Corsi at 50.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    Regression watch
    • The Oilers' PDO is 0.982 — running cold, due for positive regression.
    Things to watch
    • The Oilers own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.
    • The Oilers drive Corsi at 50.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    • The Oilers are the hotter team by points pace (6-3-1 in their last 10).
    • The Kraken are underwater at -9 goal differential over their last 10.
    • The Oilers' PDO is 0.982 — running cold, due for positive regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    SEA
    Expected in goal
    P. Grubauer
    3 days rest.944 last start
    Backup Joey Daccord · -6.2 GSAx this season

    No completed game on file for this club yet.

    EDM
    Expected in goal
    C. Ingram
    3 days rest.939 last start
    Backup Connor Ingram · +1.7 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
    SEA
    Shane Wright8G 10A
    0.77 xG/60 · 4 HD · 10.4% sh
    Berkly Catton6G 8A
    0.68 xG/60 · 5 HD · 8.8% sh
    EDM
    Zach Hyman14G 13A
    1.23 xG/60 · 1 HD · 13.0% sh
    Connor McDavid25G 33A
    0.92 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next