Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Vegas Golden Knights sweater
← Thu, Sep 24 · the slate
Breakdown · UTA at VGK · Preseason

Golden Knights edge the Mammoth in overtime

Final / OTThu, Sep 24
UTAUtah Mammoth4VGKVegas Golden Knights5
The verdict · earned

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

UTA 4 · VGK 5
Preseason · exhibition

Split squads and prospects, not the club that will take the ice in October. The shots and grades below describe this game only: nothing here counts toward season records, form, rankings or player numbers.

◆ By the ModelSep 26, 1:22 PMxG: xgboost-0.765Edited 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 Golden Knights didn't generate much in the slot but still won 5-4 in overtime. They dominated the underlying game and were lethal off the rush. J. Eichel's overtime winner came off the rush at 00:39, the exact wrong moment for the Mammoth to give one up.

The numbers reveal the disconnect. The Golden Knights held 58% of expected goals and 62% of shot attempts. The Mammoth got the better looks per shot (0.077 xG/shot vs 0.053), yet still lost. The Golden Knights were lethal off the rush, scoring twice on 31 chances, and went 0 for 7 on high-danger chances but won anyway.

The power play made the difference. The Golden Knights were dominant: 2 goals on 12 power-play shots, worth 1.31 expected goals. Both came in the third period. M. Stone's rebound at 13:06 tied it 3–3; T. Hertl's off-rush chance at 19:32 made it 4–4 and sent this to overtime.

The goalies were both terrible. S. Cossa stopped 30 of 35 shots but gave up 0.93 more goals than expected. A. Hill stopped 17 of 21 and gave up 1.06 more—worse on a worse workload. Hill's performance should have buried the Golden Knights, but their offense more than made up for it.

The Mammoth wasn't helpless. Z. Jones, L. O'Brien, A. Duda, and T. Lavoie all scored, with K. Stenlund recording 3 assists. They were lethal off the rush too—2 goals on 19 chances, a better rate than the Golden Knights's 2 on 31. S. Cossa was a wall on high-danger attempts: 100% save percentage on 7 high-danger shots. But their offense was spread across four players. The Golden Knights's was concentrated: J. Eichel (1G, 2A), M. Stone (1G, 1A), and S. Theodore (3A) ran the show. That's what separated the two teams.

The goals

  • VGK 0–1, 09:38 of the first. V. Olofsson, snap shot from 27 feet, an 8% chance by the model, past S. Cossa. Assists: S. Theodore. 5 seconds after a VGK faceoff win by T. Hertl. Win probability moved 15 points.
  • UTA 1–1, 18:21 of the first on the power play. Z. Jones, wrist shot from 50 feet, a 1% chance by the model, past A. Hill. Assists: K. Stenlund. 2 seconds after a UTA faceoff win by K. Stenlund. Win probability moved 17 points.
  • UTA 2–1, 19:01 of the first. L. O'Brien, backhander from 12 feet, an 8% chance by the model (a rebound), past A. Hill. Assists: Y. Borikov, K. Stenlund. 1 second after a UTA shot by Y. Borikov. Win probability moved 19 points.
  • UTA 3–1, 14:06 of the second. A. Duda, snap shot from 39 feet, a 6% chance by the model (off the rush), past A. Hill. Assists: J. McBain, K. Yamamoto. Win probability moved 16 points.
  • VGK 3–2, 05:19 of the third. J. Lauzon, slap shot from 58 feet, a 3% chance by the model, past S. Cossa. Assists: N. Hanifin, N. Dowd. Win probability moved 16 points.
  • VGK 3–3, 13:06 of the third on the power play. M. Stone, wrist shot from 8 feet, a 14% chance by the model (a rebound), past S. Cossa. Assists: J. Eichel, S. Theodore. 2 seconds after a VGK shot by J. Eichel. Win probability moved 36 points.
  • UTA 4–3, 18:29 of the third. T. Lavoie, wrist shot from 16 feet, a 14% chance by the model (off the rush), past A. Hill. Assists: K. Stenlund, Z. Jones. Win probability moved 46 points.
  • VGK 4–4, 19:32 of the third on the power play. T. Hertl, wrist shot from 8 feet, a 14% chance by the model (off the rush), past S. Cossa. Assists: M. Marner, J. Eichel. Win probability moved 49 points.
  • VGK 4–5, 00:39 of overtime. J. Eichel, wrist shot from 31 feet, a 6% chance by the model (off the rush), past S. Cossa. Assists: M. Stone, S. Theodore. Win probability moved 50 points.

What the numbers can't tell you. Whether the finishing was luck or skill, why the benches were run the way they were, who was hurt, and anything said in the room. That is the beat's story, and it is worth reading.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · OT · Preseason · Sep 24
UTA
4
VGK
5

Golden Knights edge the Mammoth in overtime

Chances 2.9 – 4.1Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Golden Knights earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
UTA
2.94
VGK
4.07
42% of the chances58%

The board read UTA 4, VGK 5. The chances read UTA 2.9, VGK 4.1.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
VGK
+0.9
goals above expected
VGK4.07 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
UTA2.94 expected · 4 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
The swing
+50
win-probability points
50% → 100% for VGK
VGK 100%the game, start to finish
UTA 100%P1 · P2 · P3
VGKOT 00:39

J. Eichel makes it 4–5.

In-game win model · fitted on 5,248 games
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 09:38VGKV. Olofsson8%0–1
  2. P1 18:21UTAZ. JonesPP1%1–1
  3. P1 19:01UTAL. O'Brien8%2–1
  4. P2 14:06UTAA. Duda6%3–1
  5. P3 05:19VGKJ. Lauzon3%3–2
  6. P3 13:06VGKM. StonePP14%3–3
  7. P3 18:29UTAT. Lavoie14%4–3
+2 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
UTA
32 shots
4
Final
84 shots
VGK
52 shots
5
UTA attackVGK attack
UTA VGK Goal
32
shots · 4 in
52
shots · 5 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
UTAVGK
0 / 4
1.01 xG
High danger
0 / 7
1.35 xG
3 / 17
1.77 xG
Medium
4 / 21
2.20 xG
1 / 17
0.16 xG
Low
1 / 49
0.52 xG

The Mammoth went 0 for 4 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
D-
S. Cossa
−0.9
UTA · 30/35 · 60:39
Best save · a 20% chance, snap from 18 ft · P1 02:00
D-
A. Hill
−1.1
VGK · 17/21 · 58:57
Best save · a 30% chance, snap from 6 ft · P1 04:18
Best skater on the ice
A+
VGK
J. Eichel
C · impact 3.07
21:10
Ice time
1–2
G – A
0.16
Own xG
70%
xG share
Impact · top 4
J. Eichel3.1A+
S. Theodore3.2A+
M. Stone2.7A+
T. Hertl1.8A
Report card
UTAVGK
OffenseBA+
DefenseFD+
TransitionFA-
Special teamsA+B-
GoaltendingDD
DisciplineDB
LuckCC
Seven dimensions, A+ to F · basis on the breakdown
Why it went the way it went
Why VGK won
  1. 01Dangerous off the rush
  2. 02Power play cashed in
  3. 03Won on the merits
Why UTA lost
  1. 01Rush defense leaked all night
  2. 02Paraded to the penalty box
  3. 03Ran hot in front of the net
Our storyline model · reasoning on the breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Golden Knights edge the Mammoth in overtime

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 / 12 · Final
Every goal, in order

How it happened

NHL play-by-play
1stshots 13–8
  1. 09:38VGKV. Olofsson(S. Theodore)0–1

    Snap shot from 27 feet, an 8% chance, a shot that rarely goes in, past S. Cossa. 5s after a VGK faceoff win by T. Hertl. Win probability moved 15 points.On the ice: B. McNabb, T. Hertl, S. Theodore, V. Olofsson, T. Connelly · against B. Tanev, N. DeSimone, B. McCartney, A. Duda, G. Smith

  2. 18:21UTAZ. Jonespower play(K. Stenlund)1–1

    Wrist shot from 50 feet, a 1% chance, a shot that rarely goes in, past A. Hill. 2s after a UTA faceoff win by K. Stenlund. Win probability moved 17 points.On the ice: L. O'Brien, N. Schmidt, K. Stenlund, D. Simashev, Y. Borikov · against M. Stone, I. Barbashev, N. Hanifin, J. Eichel, J. Lauzon

  3. 19:01UTAL. O'Brien(Y. Borikov, K. Stenlund)2–1

    Backhander from 12 feet, an 8% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (a rebound), past A. Hill. 1s after a UTA shot by Y. Borikov. Win probability moved 19 points.On the ice: B. Tanev, N. DeSimone, B. McCartney, A. Duda, G. Smith · against B. McNabb, W. Karlsson, S. Theodore, M. Marner, B. Howden

2ndshots 4–11
  1. 14:06UTAA. Duda(J. McBain, K. Yamamoto)3–1

    Snap shot from 39 feet, a 6% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past A. Hill. Win probability moved 16 points.On the ice: N. Schmidt, B. Tanev, B. McCartney, D. Simashev, G. Smith · against T. Hertl, I. Barbashev, V. Olofsson, R. Andersson, P. Wotherspoon

3rdshots 4–15
  1. 05:19VGKJ. Lauzon(N. Hanifin, N. Dowd)3–2

    Slap shot from 58 feet, a 3% chance, a shot that rarely goes in, past S. Cossa. Win probability moved 16 points.On the ice: B. McNabb, M. Stone, S. Theodore, J. Eichel, M. Marner · against N. Schmidt, K. Yamamoto, B. Hayton, J. McBain, D. Simashev

  2. 13:06VGKM. Stonepower play(J. Eichel, S. Theodore)3–3

    Wrist shot from 8 feet, a 14% chance (a rebound), past S. Cossa. 2s after a VGK shot by J. Eichel. Win probability moved 36 points.On the ice: N. Dowd, R. Andersson, P. Wotherspoon, J. Rondbjerg, B. Bowman · against N. DeSimone, B. Hayton, J. McBain, J. Roy, A. Duda

  3. 18:29UTAT. Lavoie(K. Stenlund, Z. Jones)4–3

    Wrist shot from 16 feet, a 14% chance (off the rush), past A. Hill. Win probability moved 46 points.On the ice: N. Schmidt, K. Yamamoto, B. Hayton, J. McBain, A. Duda · against M. Stone, T. Hertl, S. Theodore, J. Eichel, M. Marner

  4. 19:32VGKT. Hertlpower play(M. Marner, J. Eichel)4–4

    Wrist shot from 8 feet, a 14% chance (off the rush), past S. Cossa. Win probability moved 49 points.On the ice: N. Dowd, N. Hanifin, J. Lauzon, J. Rondbjerg, B. Bowman · against L. O'Brien, K. Stenlund, B. Tanev, A. Duda, D. Simashev

OTshots 0–1
  1. 00:39VGKJ. Eichel(M. Stone, S. Theodore)4–5

    Wrist shot from 31 feet, a 6% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past S. Cossa. Win probability moved 50 points.

score reads UTA–VGK

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.07
VGK chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.9
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
0.960
VGK puck luck
Below 1.000 — the bounces went against them
67.0%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.94Expected goals4.07
VGK 58% of the chance quality
21Shots on goal35
4High-danger chances7
38All attempts (Corsi)77
Adjusted for score: UTA 32% · VGK 68%
Faceoffs · VGK won75%off59%neu19%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
UTA0 / 4 · 1.01 xG
VGK0 / 7 · 1.35 xG
Medium dangermid-range
UTA3 / 17 · 1.77 xG
VGK4 / 21 · 2.20 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
UTA1 / 17 · 0.16 xG
VGK1 / 49 · 0.52 xG

VGK went 4-for-21 from medium danger on 2.20 expected goals — 1.8 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
UTA
4 G · 2.94 xG · +1.1
VGK
5 G · 4.07 xG · +0.9
0123456

UTA finished +1.1 against expected, VGK +0.9.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
UTA
WRIST2/16
SLAP0/2
SNAP1/7
BACKHAND1/6
TIP IN0/1
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/6
VGK
WRIST3/25
SLAP1/12
SNAP1/6
BACKHAND0/6
TIP IN0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/25
UTA
VGK
Off the rush
2 G on 19
2.23 xG
2 G on 31
3.23 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 4
0.55 xG
1 G on 2
0.26 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: UTA went 2-for-16, VGK 3-for-25. UTA 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
S. Cossa
UTA · 30/35 · .857
started · 60:39 · OT loss
-0.9
saved above expected
D-
the night
Attempts faced
52
Avg chance faced
7.8%
Stopped vs expected
0.904 vs 0.922
Rebounds allowed
2 · 1 scored on
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/71.4+1.4
Medium4/212.2-1.8
Low1/240.5-0.5
Shorthanded2/101.3-0.7
Tips & deflections0/30.3+0.3
The save
20% chance stopped, a snap from 18 ft · P1 02:00
The one to have back
3% chance went in, a slap from 58 ft · P3 05:19

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

A. Hill
VGK · 17/21 · .810
started · 58:57 · win
-1.1
saved above expected
D-
the night
Attempts faced
30
Avg chance faced
9.8%
Stopped vs expected
0.867 vs 0.902
Rebounds allowed
4 · 1 scored on
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/41.0+1.0
Medium3/171.8-1.2
Low1/90.2-0.8
Shorthanded1/40.3-0.7
The save
30% chance stopped, a snap from 6 ft · P1 04:18
The one to have back
1% chance went in, a wrist from 50 ft · P1 18:21

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

Every skater who dressed

Who played

Rated on what they produced and how fast

Best skater on the ice by our rating: J. Eichel (VGK), 21:10 of ice, 1-2, 70% of the expected goals while he was out.

UTA18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
Z. JonesD15:341-152A
K. StenlundC16:160-311A
Y. BorikovR14:190-168A
L. O'BrienC15:291-018B
T. LavoieD15:571-049B
A. DudaD22:591-045B
J. RoyR13:480-061C
C. DesnoyersC12:260-063C
J. McBainC18:360-129C
K. YamamotoR16:410-134C
T. IginlaC11:570-050D
G. SmithC13:270-059D
D. SimashevD21:440-033D
N. SchmidtD21:310-034D
N. DeSimoneD21:320-040D
B. HaytonC17:320-032F
B. McCartneyL11:300-043F
B. TanevL14:200-018F
VGK18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
J. EichelC21:101-270A+
S. TheodoreD26:510-380A+
M. StoneR20:061-180A+
T. HertlC18:321-081A
V. OlofssonL14:021-073A
M. MarnerR19:270-177B
J. LauzonD16:131-045B
T. ConnellyL12:320-071B
B. McNabbD19:120-071B
N. HanifinD17:250-141C
I. BarbashevL13:570-054C
W. KarlssonC16:150-061C
P. WotherspoonD16:110-041C
B. BowmanR14:370-047D
N. DowdC11:560-121D
B. HowdenC15:090-040D
R. AnderssonD17:140-026F
J. RondbjergR10:480-026F

xG% = share of expected goals while on the ice · PD/PT = penalties drawn / taken · “in N min” = a per-60 rate far above the raw total. Impact = 0.75 G + 0.7 A1 + 0.55 A2 + 0.075 SOG + 0.05 BLK + 0.15 penalties drawn − 0.15 taken + 0.01 faceoff wins − 0.01 losses + 0.3 individual xG + 0.5 on-ice xG for − 0.5 on-ice xG against. Rating = 65% impact + 35% impact per 60, as a percentile among the skaters in this game.

Scratched, UTA: A. Lee, V. Trocheck, M. Weegar, N. Schmaltz, A. Poganski, L. Crouse and 35 more. Scratched, VGK: A. Pietrangelo, B. Hickey, M. Dzierkals, L. Johansen, C. Hart, T. Laczynski and 32 more. Referees Brandon Schrader and Graedy Hamilton; linesmen Jonathan Deschamps and Ben O'Quinn.

Graded against a league-average game

Report card

Seven dimensions · A+ to F
DimensionUTAVGK
Offense
▸Basis

UTA Created 2.94 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 4 high-danger shots (1.01 xG) and 19 rush shots (2.23 xG).

VGK Created 4.07 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 7 high-danger shots (1.35 xG) and 31 rush shots (3.23 xG).

B
83
A+
100
Defense
▸Basis

UTA Allowed 4.07 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 7 high-danger shots (1.35 xG) and 31 rush shots (3.23 xG).

VGK Allowed 2.94 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 4 high-danger shots (1.01 xG) and 19 rush shots (2.23 xG).

F
50
D+
67
Transition
▸Basis

UTA Rush shots 19–31, rush xG 2.23–3.23 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

VGK Rush shots 31–19, rush xG 3.23–2.23 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

F
59
A-
91
Special teams
▸Basis

UTA 1-for-2 on the power play (50%; league ≈21%) with 0.30 PP xG.

VGK 1-for-4 on the power play (25%; league ≈21%) with 0.92 PP xG.

A+
100
B-
82
Goaltending
▸Basis

UTA -0.93 goals saved above expected on 35 shots against.

VGK -1.06 goals saved above expected on 21 shots against.

D
66
D
64
Discipline
▸Basis

UTA Took 5 penalties for 10 PIM vs 3 for 6 on the other side.

VGK Took 3 penalties for 6 PIM vs 5 for 10 on the other side.

D
65
B
85
Luck

Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

▸Basis

UTA Finishing +1.06 goals vs xG plus -0.93 GSAx of save luck = +0.13 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

VGK Finishing +0.93 goals vs xG plus -1.06 GSAx of save luck = -0.13 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

C
76
C
74
Source · NHL play-by-play · xG engine · luck graded separately
What the model flagged
WARNINGUTA

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 31 rush shots worth 3.23 xG (2 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.

STRENGTHVGK

Dangerous off the rush

2 goals on 31 rush shots worth 3.23 xG.

WARNINGVGK

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 19 rush shots worth 2.23 xG (2 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.

STRENGTHUTA

Dangerous off the rush

2 goals on 19 rush shots worth 2.23 xG.

LUCKVGK

Wasted the best looks

0-for-7 on high-danger chances worth 1.35 xG — that conversion rate won't stay at zero.

STRENGTHUTA

S. Cossa was perfect on high danger

S. Cossa stopped all 7 high-danger shots he faced (100% HD save rate).

84 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
UTA
32 shots
4
Final
84 shots
VGK
52 shots
5
UTA attackVGK attack
UTA VGK Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — UTA left, VGK 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. Theodore
#27 · D · VGK
0 G · 3 A · 2 SOG · 26:51 on ice · +3
J. Eichel
#9 · C · VGK
1 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 21:10 on ice · +1
K. Stenlund
#82 · C · UTA
0 G · 3 A · 0 SOG · 16:16 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page