Motion-blurred skater in a Nashville Predators sweater

Breakdown · MIN at NSH

Predators steal one from the Wild against the run of play

FinalSat, Apr 11

MINMinnesota Wild1 NSHNashville Predators2

The verdict · stolen

The Predators stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.17–2.22 and won anyway.

MIN 1 · NSH 2

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 11:17 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

Nashville won 2-1 despite Minnesota dominating the underlying play. The Wild controlled 59% of expected goals at 5-on-5 and held a 5–2 edge in high-danger chances. Yet Nashville's goaltending and sharpness overrode Minnesota's superior positioning.

The shot attempts split even at 22 each, but expected goals diverged sharply: Minnesota 3.17, Nashville 2.22. That 41-59 gap should have favored Minnesota. Instead, Nashville capitalized on its chances while Minnesota misfired. The Wild underperformed their xG by 2.17 goals, erasing any advantage their dominance had built.

J. Annunen (NSH) saved 2.17 goals above expected, a 0.955 save percentage that masked how thoroughly his team was outplayed. J. Wallstedt (MIN) stopped 20 of 22, posting a 0.909 save percentage that left Minnesota's superior play unrewarded.

Michael McCarron's snap from the slot in the third period crystallized Nashville's ruthlessness: a goal born from opportunism. S. Stamkos (NSH) orchestrated the attack with 1G and 1A in 21:33. R. O'Reilly (NSH) added an assist in 21:35. J. Brodin (MIN) contributed for the losing side with an assist in 18:50.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Apr 11

MIN

NSH

Predators steal one from the Wild against the run of play

Chances 3.2 – 2.2Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Wild deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

MIN

3.17

NSH

2.22

59% of the chances41%

The board read MIN 1, NSH 2. The chances read MIN 3.2, NSH 2.2.

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

Luck check

NSH

−0.2

goals above expected

NSH2.22 expected · 2 scored

Expected

Scored

MIN3.17 expected · 1 scored

Expected

Scored

The Wild left 2.2 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 15:01NSHS. Stamkos0–1
P2 06:34NSHM. Wood0–2
P3 06:54MINM. McCarron1–2

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

Where the shots came from

MIN

43 shots

Final

77 shots

NSH

34 shots

MIN NSH GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 1 in

shots · 2 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

MINNSH

1 / 5

1.13 xG

High danger

0 / 2

0.47 xG

0 / 13

1.50 xG

Medium

2 / 10

1.15 xG

0 / 43

0.54 xG

Low

0 / 36

0.60 xG

High-danger looks: MIN 1 of 5, NSH 0 of 2.

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

In the net

J. Annunen

+2.2

NSH · 21/22

J. Wallstedt

+0.2

MIN · 20/22

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Predators steal one from the Wild against the run of play

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 7–14

15:01NSHS. Stamkos(L. Evangelista, R. O'Reilly)0–1

2ndshots 4–7

06:34NSHM. Wood(S. Stamkos, N. Perbix)0–2

3rdshots 11–1

06:54MINM. McCarron(J. Brodin)1–2

score reads MIN–NSH

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

2.22

NSH chances

Goals their shots were worth

−0.2

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.025

NSH puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

44.0%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.17Expected goals2.22

MIN 59% of the chance quality

22Shots on goal22

5High-danger chances2

61All attempts (Corsi)48

Adjusted for score: MIN 60% · NSH 40%

Faceoffs · NSH won44%off42%neu69%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

MIN1 / 5 · 1.13 xG

NSH0 / 2 · 0.47 xG

Medium dangermid-range

MIN0 / 13 · 1.50 xG

NSH2 / 10 · 1.15 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

MIN0 / 43 · 0.54 xG

NSH0 / 36 · 0.60 xG

MIN went 0-for-13 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

MIN

1 G · 3.17 xG · -2.2

NSH

2 G · 2.22 xG · -0.2

01234

MIN finished -2.2 against expected, NSH -0.2.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

MIN

WRIST0/26

SNAP1/6

TIP IN0/5

SLAP0/2

BACKHAND0/2

WRAP AROUND0/0

POKE0/1

DEFLECTED0/1

OTHER0/18

NSH

WRIST1/16

SNAP0/7

TIP IN0/2

SLAP0/4

BACKHAND0/3

WRAP AROUND1/2

POKE0/0

DEFLECTED0/0

OTHER0/14

MIN

NSH

Off the rush

0 G on 27

2.29 xG

1 G on 22

1.65 xG

Off rebounds

1 G on 3

0.70 xG

0 G on 1

0.13 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: MIN went 0-for-26, NSH 1-for-16.

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. Wallstedt

MIN · 20/22 · .909

+0.2

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/20.5+0.5

Medium2/101.1-0.8

Low0/360.6+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

J. Annunen

NSH · 21/22 · .955

+2.2

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/51.1+0.1

Medium0/131.5+1.5

Low0/430.5+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

77 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

MIN

43 shots

Final

77 shots

NSH

34 shots

MIN NSH GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — MIN 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

1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 21:33 on ice · +2

R. O'Reilly

#90 · C · NSH

0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 21:35 on ice · +1

J. Brodin

#25 · D · MIN

0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 18:50 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Apr 11

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 11:16 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 2.6-2.6 game with Minnesota at 50% to win.

Minnesota owns the underlying play: a 52.0% 5v5 xG share against Nashville's 49.0%. That should typically decide hockey games. But the Corsi split complicates the story—Nashville leads 50.0% to 48.0%, suggesting the Predators control the flow despite conceding more chances. Minnesota's PDO of 1.007 versus Nashville's 0.992 bridges the gap: the Wild are running hot in conversion while the Predators run cold. The result is a genuine coin flip.

Both teams face identical uncertainty in net. J. Saros and F. Gustavsson are both on back-to-backs, meaning either side could deploy a backup or risk a fatigued starter.

Matt Boldy carries Minnesota's offense at 0.89 xG per 60, with 22 goals and 18 assists. He's converted 5 high-danger chances at a 13.7% rate—volume and precision in tandem. Robby Fabbri is likely unavailable, though he operates at 0.88 xG/60 when healthy. Nashville counters with Zachary L'Heureux, generating chances at 0.85 xG/60 despite just 4 goals; his 16.0% shooting rate points to regression. Filip Forsberg anchors the Predators with 0.80 xG/60, 23 goals, 17 assists, and 4 high-danger goals at a 13.6% clip.

The defensive seams matter in a game this close. Matt Kiersted is Minnesota's liability; Jonathan Marchessault is Nashville's. Either breakdown creates the margin.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

MIN 50%

50%

MIN

Model favorite

50%

MIN50NSH

MIN by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score MIN 2.6–2.6 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

MIN← edge

edge →NSH

52.0%49.0%

48.0%50.0%

2.552.48

2.402.58

2.041.84

1.932.21

1.0070.992

MIN holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.007 vs 0.992) says MIN has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

MIN

6-4-0

+4 GD · 1d rest

NSH

5-4-1

+3 GD · 1d rest

1.007

MIN 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 Wild own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.

Things to watch

The Wild own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
J. Saros is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
F. Gustavsson is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

MIN

Expected in goal

F. Gustavsson

back-to-back.750 last start

Backup Filip Gustavsson · +1.4 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. Saros

back-to-back.852 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

MIN

Matt Boldy22G 18A

0.89 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh

Robby Fabbri2G 3A

0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.9% 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