Motion-blurred skater in a Winnipeg Jets sweater
Breakdown · SEA at WPG

Jets pull away from the Kraken

The verdict · earned

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

SEA 2 · WPG 6
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 10:53 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

Seattle had 3.96 expected goals and managed just two. That collapse exceeded any statistical mismatch: Winnipeg held 56% of shot attempts (31–24) and controlled 55% of 5v5 expected goals (4.88–3.96), yet the Kraken's fundamental failure lay in execution.

The Kraken's underperformance—1.96 goals below expected—dwarfs Winnipeg's overperformance of 1.12. Seattle was 0-for-8 on high-danger chances while Winnipeg converted 4-of-9 (44%) in the same situations. Both teams created 17 high-danger looks combined, but that conversion gap determined the outcome.

Vladislav Namestnikov's wrist shot from the wing at 17:56 of the third period exemplified Winnipeg's clinical edge. The Jets also converted three rush-attack goals, further showcasing their opportunism. C. Hellebuyck saved 1.96 above expected, and while P. Grubauer (1.9 above expected) and J. Daccord (2.9 above expected) played admirably, Seattle's prime-chance drought sank the team.

A 55–45 xG split and 9–8 high-danger advantage for Winnipeg forecast a closer game than 6-2. The Jets executed; the Kraken could not.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Apr 6
SEA
2
WPG
6

Jets pull away from the Kraken

Chances 4.0 – 4.9Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Jets earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
SEA
3.96
WPG
4.88
45% of the chances55%

The board read SEA 2, WPG 6. The chances read SEA 4.0, WPG 4.9.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
WPG
+1.1
goals above expected
WPG4.88 expected · 6 scored
Expected
Scored
SEA3.96 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

The Kraken left 2.0 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 09:17SEAJ. Eberle1–0
  2. P1 12:39WPGJ. ToewsPP1–1
  3. P2 09:55WPGG. VilardiPP1–2
  4. P2 12:09WPGK. ConnorPP1–3
  5. P3 02:28SEAJ. McCann2–3
  6. P3 05:59WPGB. Lambert2–4
  7. P3 15:19WPGK. Connor2–5
+1 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
SEA
46 shots
2
Final
99 shots
WPG
53 shots
6
SEA attackWPG attack
SEA WPG Goal
46
shots · 2 in
53
shots · 6 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
SEAWPG
0 / 8
1.64 xG
High danger
4 / 9
2.73 xG
1 / 14
1.67 xG
Medium
1 / 15
1.45 xG
1 / 35
0.64 xG
Low
1 / 40
0.71 xG

The Kraken went 0 for 8 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
J. Daccord
+2.9
SEA · 10/12
A
C. Hellebuyck
+2.0
WPG · 22/24
+1 more on the full breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Jets pull away from the Kraken

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 13–7
  1. 09:17SEAJ. Eberle(M. Beniers)1–0
  2. 12:39WPGJ. Toewspower play(G. Vilardi, J. Morrissey)1–1
2ndshots 4–13
  1. 09:55WPGG. Vilardipower play(J. Toews, M. Scheifele)1–2
  2. 12:09WPGK. Connorpower play(M. Scheifele, J. Morrissey)1–3
3rdshots 7–11
  1. 02:28SEAJ. McCann(K. Kakko)2–3
  2. 05:59WPGB. Lambert(A. Lowry, N. Pionk)2–4
  3. 15:19WPGK. Connor(M. Scheifele, A. Iafallo)2–5
  4. 17:56WPGV. Namestnikovempty net2–6

score reads SEA–WPG

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.88
WPG chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.1
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.059
WPG puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
52.9%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.96Expected goals4.88
WPG 55% of the chance quality
24Shots on goal31
8High-danger chances9
57All attempts (Corsi)64
Adjusted for score: SEA 50% · WPG 50%
Faceoffs · WPG won73%off61%neu40%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
SEA0 / 8 · 1.64 xG
WPG4 / 9 · 2.73 xG
Medium dangermid-range
SEA1 / 14 · 1.67 xG
WPG1 / 15 · 1.45 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
SEA1 / 35 · 0.64 xG
WPG1 / 40 · 0.71 xG

SEA went 0-for-8 from high danger on 1.64 expected goals — 1.6 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
SEA
2 G · 3.96 xG · -2.0
WPG
6 G · 4.88 xG · +1.1
01234567

SEA finished -2.0 against expected, WPG +1.1.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
SEA
WRIST1/21
SLAP0/10
TIP IN0/7
SNAP0/1
BACKHAND1/6
BAT0/1
OTHER0/11
WPG
WRIST3/27
SLAP1/8
TIP IN0/5
SNAP2/10
BACKHAND0/3
BAT0/0
OTHER0/11
SEA
WPG
Off the rush
1 G on 29
2.79 xG
3 G on 31
2.59 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 4
0.63 xG
1 G on 4
0.88 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: SEA went 1-for-21, WPG 3-for-27. WPG scored 3 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 · 15/18 · .833
+1.9
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger4/92.7-1.3
Medium1/151.4+0.5
Low1/400.7-0.3

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

J. Daccord
SEA · 10/12 · .833
+2.9
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger4/92.7-1.3
Medium1/151.4+0.5
Low1/400.7-0.3

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

C. Hellebuyck
WPG · 22/24 · .917
+2.0
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/81.6+1.6
Medium1/141.7+0.7
Low1/350.6-0.4

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

99 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
SEA
46 shots
2
Final
99 shots
WPG
53 shots
6
SEA attackWPG attack
SEA WPG Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — SEA left, WPG 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
M. Scheifele
#55 · C · WPG
0 G · 3 A · 4 SOG · 22:44 on ice · +1
J. Morrissey
#44 · D · WPG
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 22:13 on ice · -1
K. Connor
#81 · L · WPG
2 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 21:30 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Apr 6
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 10:35 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 has this as a genuine coin flip: Seattle projects to 2.3 goals, Winnipeg to 2.5, with the Jets at 54% win probability. A closer look at form and talent explains why neither team owns an edge.

Winnipeg has form on its side, going 5–3–2 over its last ten. Seattle has treaded water at -15 goal differential in that span. But the underlying numbers reveal a tighter match: Winnipeg leads in expected-goal share (48.0% to 46.0%) and Corsi (49.0% to 45.0%), while Seattle's PDO of 1.011—above Winnipeg's 0.998—suggests positive puck luck that will regress. Winnipeg will dictate territorial possession; neither team will control the game.

P. Grubauer's back-to-back complicates Seattle's picture: expect either a backup start or a tired starter. Winnipeg's territorial edge exploits that vulnerability.

In talent, the edge is shallow. Seattle centers on Shane Wright (0.77 xG/60, 8 goals, 10 assists, 4 high-danger goals) and Berkly Catton (0.68 xG/60, 6 goals, 8 assists, 5 HD goals). Winnipeg counters with Nino Niederreiter (0.87 xG/60, 6 goals, 6 assists, 3 HD goals) and Kyle Connor (0.83 xG/60, 25 goals, 30 assists, 2 HD goals). Connor's 13.0% shooting rate flags finish; Niederreiter's higher expected-goal rate indicates an edge in volume creation. The matchup cancels out.

Where it stings: both teams generate almost no high-danger or rebound goals. Seattle's 0% in both categories leaves Grubauer exposed to a single costly mistake. Winnipeg mirrors the weakness. Defensively, Chandler Stephenson is Seattle's liability, Colin Miller Winnipeg's. Neither weakness is pronounced enough to decide the game.

Winnipeg's territorial edge suggests it will tire Seattle out. Seattle's puck luck might hold just long enough. Call it Winnipeg by a hair, only because you have to pick one.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

WPG 54%
53%
WPG
Model favorite
47%
53%
SEA50WPG

WPG by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score SEA 2.3–2.5 WPG; 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
SEA← edge
edge →WPG
46.0%48.0%
45.0%49.0%
2.132.34
2.512.55
1.871.90
1.952.10
1.0110.998

WPG holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.011 vs 0.998) says SEA has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
SEA
2-6-2
-15 GD · 1d rest
WPG
5-3-2
-3 GD · 2d rest
1.011
SEA PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.998
WPG PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Jets drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Things to watch
  • The Jets drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • P. Grubauer is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Jets are the hotter team by points pace (5-3-2 in their last 10).
  • The Kraken are underwater at -15 goal differential over their last 10.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
SEA
Expected in goal
P. Grubauer
back-to-back.900 last start
Backup Joey Daccord · -6.2 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.

WPG
Expected in goal
C. Hellebuyck
2 days rest.938 last start
Backup Connor Hellebuyck · +5.5 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
WPG
Nino Niederreiter6G 6A
0.87 xG/60 · 3 HD · 8.6% sh
Kyle Connor25G 30A
0.83 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.0% sh
Keep going

Where to next