Backcheck
Recap · LAK at VAN

Canucks steal one from the Kings against the run of play

The Canucks stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.41–2.43 and won anyway.

By the ModelJul 12, 11:53 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
LAK
Los Angeles Kings
3
Home
VAN
Vancouver Canucks
4
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.41Expected goals2.43
58% share for the better side
34Shot attempts (SOG)25
5High-danger chances2
56Corsi (all attempts)50
Score-adjusted: 53% / 47%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

The Canucks won 4–3 in overtime despite losing the expected-goals battle 3.41–2.43. The Kings controlled 58% of expected goals at 5v5 — a decisive advantage that typically carries winners. Vancouver's goaltending and finishing closed a gap that should have been insurmountable.

Shot attempts and high-danger chances told the same story. Los Angeles out-shot Vancouver 34–25 and dominated the crease 5–2. K. Lankinen stopped 31 of 34 (0.912 SV%). D. Kuemper had 21 saves on 25 (0.840 SV%), underperforming his expected value by 1.57 goals. Vancouver overperformed their xG by 1.57 — either elite finishing or lucky bounces.

Jake DeBrusk's wrist shot from the doorstep at 02:58 of overtime sent the Canucks home.

In transition, both teams found their rhythm. Vancouver converted 3 of 24 rush attempts; Los Angeles managed 2 of 27. The margin was thin but decisive when it mattered most.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
LAK2 / 5 · 1.05 xG
VAN1 / 2 · 0.56 xG
Medium dangermid-range
LAK1 / 16 · 1.75 xG
VAN2 / 11 · 1.26 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
LAK0 / 35 · 0.61 xG
VAN1 / 37 · 0.60 xG

LAK went 2-for-5 from high danger on 1.05 expected goals — 0.9 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
LAK
3 G · 3.41 xG · -0.4
VAN
4 G · 2.43 xG · +1.6
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
D. KuemperLAK
-1.6
K. LankinenVAN
+0.4

LAK finished -0.4 against expected, VAN +1.6 — D. Kuemper (LAK) allowed 1.6 more goals than expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
LAK
WRIST0/19
SNAP2/12
TIP IN0/6
BACKHAND1/3
SLAP0/3
BAT0/1
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/11
VAN
WRIST2/28
SNAP1/2
TIP IN0/1
BACKHAND1/3
SLAP0/1
BAT0/0
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/15
LAK
VAN
Off the rush
2 G on 27 · 2.50 xG
3 G on 24 · 1.90 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 6 · 0.56 xG
1 G on 1 · 0.16 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: LAK went 0-for-19, VAN 2-for-28. VAN scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
A. Laferriere
#14 · R · LAK
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 20:34 TOI · +1
Q. Byfield
#55 · R · LAK
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 19:19 TOI · +1
E. Pettersson
#40 · C · VAN
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 18:02 TOI · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • VAN won despite being outplayed by xG (42%). Goaltending or finishing carried them.
  • D. Kuemper (LAK) gave up 1.6 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
  • LAK was clinical in the high-danger zone — 2/5 on HD chances (40%).
  • VAN was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 24 rush chances.
  • LAK was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 27 rush chances.
  • LAK created 6 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • VAN outperformed their expected goals by 1.6 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · LAK at VAN · 10:00 PM ET

The Kings are the model's lean over the Canucks — with PDO regression in play

By the ModelJul 12, 12:05 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

55%
LAK
Model favorite
55%
45%
LAK50VAN

LAK by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score LAK 2.62.3 VAN; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

LAK← edge
edge →VAN
52.0%5v5 xG%44.0%
52.0%Corsi%46.0%
2.42xGF / 602.22
2.20xGA / 602.81
1.85Goals for / gm1.60
1.71Goals against / gm2.56
1.002PDO — luck, not skill0.974

LAK holds 6 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.002 vs 0.974) says LAK has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The Kings are the model's pick: a projected 2.6–2.3 victory with 55% win probability. That edge rests on three pillars—possession dominance, momentum, and Vancouver's regression risk.

LA has earned it in season-long play. At 5v5, the Kings generate 52.0% expected goals relative to Vancouver's 44.0%, a significant control gap that extends to Corsi, where they own 52.0% to the Canucks' 46.0%. These are not marginal edges; they reflect a team that dictates territory and shot volume.

Recent form exaggerates the gap. The Kings are 6-1-3 in their last 10 games. The Canucks sit -16 in goal differential over the same span—one trajectory ascending, one descending.

The sharpest edge is Vancouver's PDO. At 0.974, the Canucks are running cold, their combined shooting and goaltending percentages beneath league average. Regression typically flows toward the mean, which favors LA's sustainability over Vancouver's recent record. The Kings sit at 1.002, marginally overperforming, a softer regression target.

Rest adds minor leverage. LA enters on three days; Vancouver on one. That gap flows in the right direction.

Goaltending is the variable. N. Tolopilo takes the back-to-back, raising the possibility of fatigue or a surprise backup start. Either scenario creates opportunity for Vancouver to generate volume and capitalize on variance.

The player-level picture favors LA. Alex Laferriere is the primary threat—0.87 expected goals per 60, 16 goals, 18 assists, two high-danger chances, and a 9.9% shooting rate at the high end of sustainability. Jared Wright (0.83 xG/60, 0 goals, 4 assists) contributes secondary volume. Vancouver counters with Filip Chytil, whose 1.03 xG/60 and 15.0% shooting rate reflect efficiency despite just three goals. Drew O'Connor (0.85 xG/60, 13 goals, 11 assists, three high-danger chances, 11.8% shooting) supplies steadier production.

The underlying story doesn't shift: the Kings' process edge in possession, volume, and rest outweighs Vancouver's narrow path to variance.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

LAK
Alex Laferriere16G 18A
0.87 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.9% sh
Jared Wright0G 4A
0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% sh
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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters