Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Vancouver Canucks sweater
← Sat, Apr 11 · the slate
Breakdown · VAN at SJS

Canucks edge the Sharks in a shootout

Final / OTSat, Apr 11
VANVancouver Canucks4SJSSan Jose Sharks3
The verdict · coin flip

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

VAN 4 · SJS 3
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 11:28 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 Canucks won 4–3 in a shootout despite the Sharks dominating the underlying metrics. Sharks expected goals (3.60) outpaced Vancouver's (3.48), but Linus Karlsson's shootout goal from the high slot decided it.

The Sharks controlled play — they held 44% of shot attempts (32–41 on goal) and generated 8 high-danger chances to Vancouver's 3. Yet they squandered their opportunities: five rebound chances went unconverted, and they scored just 2 goals on 28 rush chances.

Vancouver's power play was decisive. The Canucks scored twice on 14 power plays (0.81 expected goals), winning the margins where games are decided. In five-on-five play, they were outhit and outchanced, but penalty discipline kept them ahead into overtime.

K. Lankinen (VAN) stopped 29 of 32 with a 0.906 save percentage — 0.60 above expected. Y. Askarov (SJS) was sharp in regulation, saving 38 of 41 (0.927).

  • M. Celebrini (SJS) — 2A in 22:14
  • I. Chernyshov (SJS) — 2G in 17:59
  • F. Hronek (VAN) — 1A in 30:55
The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · SO · Apr 11
VAN
4
SJS
3

Canucks edge the Sharks in a shootout

Chances 3.5 – 3.6Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Canucks took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value
VAN
3.48
SJS
3.60
49% of the chances51%

The board read VAN 4, SJS 3. The chances read VAN 3.5, SJS 3.6.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
VAN
+0.5
goals above expected
VAN3.48 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
SJS3.60 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored

Both sides finished close to what their chances were worth. This one was earned on the ice.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 16:19SJSI. Chernyshov0–1
  2. P2 05:56VANM. Rossi1–1
  3. P2 09:02SJST. Toffoli1–2
  4. P2 17:37VANJ. DeBruskPP2–2
  5. P3 12:44SJSI. Chernyshov2–3
  6. P3 17:00VANT. BluegerPP3–3
  7. SO 00:00SJSM. CelebriniPP3–3
+2 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
VAN
59 shots
5
Final
107 shots
SJS
48 shots
4
VAN attackSJS attack
VAN SJS Goal

Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

59
shots · 5 in
48
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
VANSJS
1 / 3
0.80 xG
High danger
1 / 8
1.62 xG
1 / 16
1.67 xG
Medium
1 / 13
1.46 xG
1 / 47
1.00 xG
Low
1 / 34
0.52 xG

High-danger looks: VAN 1 of 3, SJS 1 of 8.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B
K. Lankinen
+0.6
VAN · 29/32
B
Y. Askarov
+0.5
SJS · 38/41
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Canucks edge the Sharks in a shootout

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 10–12
  1. 16:19SJSI. Chernyshov(M. Celebrini)0–1
2ndshots 14–10
  1. 05:56VANM. Rossi(V. Mancini)1–1
  2. 09:02SJST. Toffoli(S. Dickinson, M. Misa)1–2
  3. 17:37VANJ. DeBruskpower play(F. Hronek, E. Pettersson)2–2
3rdshots 14–8
  1. 12:44SJSI. Chernyshov(M. Celebrini, D. Orlov)2–3
  2. 17:00VANT. Bluegerpower play(L. Karlsson)3–3
OTshots 3–2no goals
    SO
    1. 00:00SJSM. Celebrinipower play3–3
    2. 00:00VANJ. DeBruskpower play3–3
    3. 00:00VANL. Karlssonpower play3–3

    score reads VAN–SJS

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    3.48
    VAN chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    +0.5
    Finishing
    Goals above what those chances were worth
    0.991
    VAN puck luck
    About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
    54.5%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    3.48Expected goals3.60
    SJS 51% of the chance quality
    41Shots on goal32
    3High-danger chances8
    66All attempts (Corsi)55
    Adjusted for score: VAN 56% · SJS 44%
    Faceoffs · SJS won44%off38%neu47%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    VAN1 / 3 · 0.80 xG
    SJS1 / 8 · 1.62 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    VAN1 / 16 · 1.67 xG
    SJS1 / 13 · 1.46 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    VAN1 / 47 · 1.00 xG
    SJS1 / 34 · 0.52 xG

    VAN went 1-for-16 from medium danger on 1.67 expected goals — 0.7 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    VAN
    4 G · 3.48 xG · +0.5
    SJS
    3 G · 3.60 xG · -0.6
    012345

    VAN finished +0.5 against expected, SJS -0.6.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    VAN
    WRIST3/33
    TIP IN0/7
    SLAP0/8
    BACKHAND0/3
    SNAP0/2
    OTHER0/13
    SJS
    WRIST2/33
    TIP IN0/3
    SLAP0/1
    BACKHAND1/5
    SNAP0/0
    OTHER0/13
    VAN
    SJS
    Off the rush
    1 G on 25
    1.97 xG
    2 G on 28
    2.63 xG
    Off rebounds
    1 G on 4
    0.62 xG
    0 G on 5
    0.63 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: VAN went 3-for-33, SJS 2-for-33. SJS 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
    K. Lankinen
    VAN · 29/32 · .906
    +0.6
    saved above expected
    B
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/81.6+0.6
    Medium1/131.5+0.5
    Low1/340.5-0.5

    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

    Y. Askarov
    SJS · 38/41 · .927
    +0.5
    saved above expected
    B
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/30.8-0.2
    Medium1/161.7+0.7
    Low1/471.0+0.0

    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

    107 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    VAN
    59 shots
    5
    Final
    107 shots
    SJS
    48 shots
    4
    VAN attackSJS attack
    VAN SJS Goal

    Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

    Each club shoots toward its own end — VAN left, SJS 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. Celebrini
    #71 · C · SJS
    0 G · 2 A · 5 SOG · 22:14 on ice · +2
    I. Chernyshov
    #92 · L · SJS
    2 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 17:59 on ice · +2
    F. Hronek
    #17 · D · VAN
    0 G · 1 A · 6 SOG · 30:55 on ice · -2
    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, 11:25 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

    San Jose owns this matchup by process, not recent results. The model projects VAN 2.4 - 2.7 SJS, with the Sharks at 55% win probability—a lean built entirely on underlying advantage.

    Recent play masks the true picture. San Jose is 5-4-1 in their last 10 but underwater at -8 goal differential. Vancouver is worse: -22 over the same stretch. Both teams' records are misleading.

    The real edge lives in 5v5 play. San Jose dominates shot quality at 48.0% xG versus Vancouver's 44.0%. The possession difference is narrower—47.0% Corsi for the Sharks to 46.0% for the Canucks—but consistent. This underlying advantage is what the model is exploiting.

    The complication is PDO regression. Vancouver's 0.974 PDO signals they are running cold and due for positive bounce-back; San Jose's 0.998 suggests they are inflated. If the Canucks' finishing cold spell corrects itself and the Sharks' hot shooting regresses toward league average, the model's edge shrinks. The underlying play may assert itself differently than this projection assumes.

    Goaltending adds uncertainty. Y. Askarov and N. Tolopilo are each on back-to-backs tonight. Watch for backup starts or diminished performance—a tired starter often leaks a goal, enough to flip a close game.

    For Vancouver, Drew O'Connor merits attention: 13 goals, 11 assists, 11.8% shooting rate, and 0.85 xG per 60 minutes. For San Jose, Igor Chernyshov offers the same profile—6 goals, 8 assists, 15.0% shooting, 0.91 xG/60. Both are the kind of high-variance threats that can swing a tight matchup in a single shift.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    SJS 55%
    55%
    SJS
    Model favorite
    45%
    55%
    VAN50SJS

    SJS by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score VAN 2.4–2.7 SJS; 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
    VAN← edge
    edge →SJS
    44.0%48.0%
    46.0%47.0%
    2.222.33
    2.812.56
    1.601.99
    2.562.32
    0.9740.998

    SJS holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.974 vs 0.998) says SJS has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    VAN
    1-9-0
    -22 GD · 1d rest
    SJS
    5-4-1
    -8 GD · 1d rest
    0.974
    VAN PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    0.998
    SJS PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Where the edges live
    • The Sharks own the underlying play — 48.0% 5v5 xG vs 44.0%.
    Regression watch
    • The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.
    Things to watch
    • The Sharks own the underlying play — 48.0% 5v5 xG vs 44.0%.
    • Y. Askarov is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • N. Tolopilo is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • The Sharks are the hotter team by points pace (5-4-1 in their last 10).
    • The Sharks are underwater at -8 goal differential over their last 10.
    • The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    VAN
    Expected in goal
    N. Tolopilo
    back-to-back.846 last start
    Backup Kevin Lankinen · -19.3 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.

    SJS
    Expected in goal
    Y. Askarov
    back-to-back.800 last start
    Backup Yaroslav Askarov · -18.9 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
    VAN
    Filip Chytil3G 0A
    1.03 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh
    Drew O'Connor13G 11A
    0.85 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.8% sh
    SJS
    Pavol Regenda5G 1A
    1.10 xG/60 · 2 HD · 16.1% sh
    Igor Chernyshov6G 8A
    0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next

    Back to the front page