Rush defense leaked all night
Gave up 31 rush shots worth 3.60 xG (3 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.
Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.

The Golden Knights beat the Blackhawks 5–2, and the underlying numbers backed the scoreline decisively. Vegas controlled 66 percent of expected goals at five-on-five and held 59 percent of shot attempts—a stranglehold that meant Chicago never generated the quality chances to hang around.
Vegas dictated play from the opening shift. They created dangerous opportunities in the high-danger areas at a 3-of-7 rate (43 percent) compared to Chicago's 0-for-3. The Knights' shot quality averaged 0.079 expected goals per attempt versus Chicago's 0.052, a gap rooted in positioning and execution.
Transition hockey was the difference. Vegas scored three times off the rush on 31 chances; Chicago answered with two on 23. I. Barbashev's turnover with 4 seconds left in the game led directly to M. Stone's empty-netter from 38 feet (51 percent expected goal probability), the kind of play that closes out games when one team already controls possession.
The early period set the tone. V. Olofsson's power-play snap from 36 feet opened the scoring. T. Connelly tapped in a rebound 2 seconds after his own shot to make it 2–0. J. Eichel's snap from 6 feet off another rebound made it 3–1 before Chicago scored twice—J. Greenway's wrist shot from 31 feet and P. Kane from 8 feet, both off the rush—but N. Hanifin's wrist shot from 22 feet and Stone's empty-netter closed it out.
S. Knight faced the heavier workload and stopped 32 of 36 shots at 0.889 save percentage. C. Hart allowed 2 on 26 at 0.923 save percentage. Vegas's possession dominance meant neither goaltender was tested when the game mattered most—it was decided early.
Three Stars: J. Eichel (1G, 2A), S. Theodore (2A), B. McNabb (2A).
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.
Golden Knights run the Blackhawks off the ice on the underlying numbers
The Golden Knights earned this one.
The board read CHI 2, VGK 5. The chances read CHI 2.5, VGK 5.0.
Both sides finished close to what their chances were worth. This one was earned on the ice.
V. Olofsson makes it 0–1.
The Blackhawks went 0 for 3 from the slot.
Golden Knights run the Blackhawks off the ice on the underlying numbers
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 breakdownSnap shot from 36 feet, a 12% chance (off the rush), past S. Knight. Win probability moved 15 points.On the ice: N. Dowd, I. Barbashev, R. Andersson, P. Wotherspoon, M. Gatcomb · against P. Kane, B. Byram, S. Rinzel, O. Moore, R. Kantserov
Tip-in from 6 feet, a 6% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (a rebound), past S. Knight. 2s after a VGK shot by T. Connelly. Win probability moved 13 points.On the ice: N. Dowd, R. Andersson, P. Wotherspoon, M. Gatcomb, B. Bowman · against J. Greenway, C. Smith, W. Kaiser, R. Greene, A. Levshunov
Wrist shot from 31 feet, a 10% chance (off the rush), past C. Hart. Win probability moved 14 points.On the ice: J. Greenway, C. Smith, W. Kaiser, R. Greene, A. Levshunov · against N. Dowd, R. Andersson, P. Wotherspoon, M. Gatcomb, B. Bowman
Snap shot from 6 feet, a 22% chance, past S. Knight. 2s after a VGK block. Win probability moved 14 points.On the ice: N. Dowd, N. Hanifin, J. Lauzon, M. Gatcomb, B. Bowman · against I. Cole, P. Kane, S. Rinzel, O. Moore, R. Kantserov
Wrist shot from 9 feet, a 6% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past C. Hart. R. Andersson was 52s into his shift for the defending side. Win probability moved 14 points.On the ice: I. Cole · against R. Andersson, P. Wotherspoon, B. Bowman, T. Connelly
Wrist shot from 22 feet, a 19% chance (off the rush), past S. Knight. Win probability moved 14 points.
Slap shot from 39 feet, a 51% chance (off the rush). 4s after a VGK takeaway by I. Barbashev.
score reads CHI–VGK
VGK went 3-for-7 from high danger on 2.01 expected goals — 1.0 above expected.
CHI finished -0.5 against expected, VGK +0.0.
Wrist shots carried the volume: CHI went 2-for-21, VGK 1-for-21. VGK scored 3 of theirs off the rush.
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 →
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+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5
Best skater on the ice by our rating: J. Eichel (VGK), 18:01 of ice, 1-2, 71% of the expected goals while he was out.
| Skater | TOI | G-A | SOG | ixG | xG% | PD/PT | Impact | /60 | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J. GreenwayL | 14:08 | 1-0 | 5 | 0.35 | 28 | 0/0 | 0.83 | 3.52 | B |
| P. KaneR | 21:36 | 1-0 | 4 | 0.30 | 15 | 0/0 | 0.64 | 1.79 | C |
| R. GreeneC | 14:43 | 0-1 | 1 | 0.10 | 28 | 0/0 | 0.39 | 1.58 | C |
| W. KaiserD | 20:33 | 0-1 | 0 | 0.00 | 37 | 0/0 | 0.34 | 0.99 | C |
| N. LardisL | 11:44 | 0-0 | 2 | 0.07 | 26 | 1/0 | 0.26 | 1.30 | C |
| F. NazarC | 18:01 | 0-0 | 3 | 0.61 | 39 | 0/0 | 0.24 | 0.81 | C |
| R. DonatoC | 12:50 | 0-0 | 2 | 0.17 | 26 | 0/0 | 0.10 | 0.45 | D |
| S. RinzelD | 18:16 | 0-0 | 2 | 0.12 | 12 | 1/0 | -0.02 | -0.05 | D |
| T. BertuzziL | 16:53 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.09 | 38 | 0/0 | -0.07 | -0.26 | D |
| O. MooreC | 13:57 | 0-0 | 2 | 0.19 | 19 | 0/0 | -0.11 | -0.46 | D |
| B. ByramD | 25:08 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.14 | 23 | 0/0 | -0.22 | -0.52 | D |
| A. MangiapaneL | 5:23 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.15 | 30 | 0/1 | -0.13 | -1.44 | D |
| A. VlasicD | 20:01 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.00 | 27 | 0/0 | -0.30 | -0.90 | D |
| A. LevshunovD | 19:14 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.07 | 30 | 0/0 | -0.30 | -0.93 | F |
| A. FrondellC | 17:40 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.11 | 16 | 0/0 | -0.33 | -1.13 | F |
| R. KantserovR | 17:07 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.04 | 13 | 0/0 | -0.36 | -1.25 | F |
| C. SmithR | 15:16 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.01 | 30 | 0/0 | -0.37 | -1.47 | F |
| I. ColeD | 12:42 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.00 | 11 | 0/1 | -0.69 | -3.24 | F |
| Skater | TOI | G-A | SOG | ixG | xG% | PD/PT | Impact | /60 | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J. EichelC | 18:01 | 1-2 | 2 | 0.40 | 71 | 0/0 | 2.71 | 9.02 | A+ |
| T. ConnellyL | 11:22 | 1-0 | 4 | 0.45 | 90 | 0/0 | 1.79 | 9.44 | A+ |
| V. OlofssonL | 13:57 | 1-0 | 2 | 0.17 | 91 | 0/0 | 1.62 | 6.98 | A+ |
| N. HanifinD | 18:51 | 1-0 | 3 | 0.25 | 80 | 0/0 | 1.72 | 5.49 | A |
| I. BarbashevL | 14:27 | 0-2 | 1 | 0.20 | 61 | 0/0 | 1.50 | 6.21 | A |
| B. McNabbD | 18:45 | 0-2 | 1 | 0.04 | 74 | 0/0 | 1.53 | 4.89 | A |
| S. TheodoreD | 21:22 | 0-2 | 1 | 0.01 | 75 | 0/0 | 1.59 | 4.46 | A |
| M. StoneR | 17:11 | 1-0 | 1 | 0.51 | 71 | 0/0 | 1.28 | 4.46 | A |
| T. HertlC | 15:44 | 0-0 | 4 | 1.10 | 81 | 0/0 | 1.24 | 4.71 | B |
| M. GatcombC | 10:31 | 0-1 | 3 | 0.31 | 58 | 1/1 | 0.97 | 5.53 | B |
| J. LauzonD | 17:20 | 0-0 | 3 | 0.07 | 80 | 0/0 | 0.97 | 3.37 | B |
| N. DowdC | 12:37 | 0-1 | 0 | 0.00 | 58 | 0/0 | 0.81 | 3.85 | B |
| M. MarnerR | 21:21 | 0-0 | 4 | 0.58 | 73 | 0/0 | 0.84 | 2.36 | B |
| B. HowdenC | 17:16 | 0-0 | 3 | 0.34 | 91 | 0/0 | 0.76 | 2.63 | B |
| W. KarlssonC | 17:26 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.01 | 88 | 0/0 | 0.56 | 1.92 | C |
| R. AnderssonD | 18:46 | 0-0 | 2 | 0.04 | 70 | 0/0 | 0.54 | 1.72 | C |
| B. BowmanR | 10:58 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.42 | 60 | 0/0 | 0.38 | 2.06 | C |
| P. WotherspoonD | 20:08 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.06 | 57 | 1/1 | 0.19 | 0.56 | D |
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, CHI: T. Teravainen, E. Del Mastro, K. Korchinski. Scratched, VGK: D. Coghlan, R. Lavoie. Referees Kyle Rehman and Graham Skilliter; linesmen Matt MacPherson and Jonny Murray.
CHI Created 2.52 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 3 high-danger shots (0.61 xG) and 23 rush shots (1.81 xG).
VGK Created 4.97 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 7 high-danger shots (2.01 xG) and 31 rush shots (3.60 xG).
CHI Allowed 4.97 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 7 high-danger shots (2.01 xG) and 31 rush shots (3.60 xG).
VGK Allowed 2.52 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 3 high-danger shots (0.61 xG) and 23 rush shots (1.81 xG).
CHI Rush shots 23–31, rush xG 1.81–3.60 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).
VGK Rush shots 31–23, rush xG 3.60–1.81 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).
CHI 0-for-2 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 0.33 PP xG.
VGK 1-for-3 on the power play (33%; league ≈21%) with 1.08 PP xG.
CHI +0.97 goals saved above expected on 36 shots against.
VGK +0.52 goals saved above expected on 26 shots against.
CHI Took 3 penalties for 6 PIM vs 2 for 4 on the other side.
VGK Took 2 penalties for 4 PIM vs 3 for 6 on the other side.
Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral
CHI Finishing -0.52 goals vs xG plus +0.97 GSAx of save luck = +0.45 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.
VGK Finishing +0.03 goals vs xG plus +0.52 GSAx of save luck = +0.55 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.
Gave up 31 rush shots worth 3.60 xG (3 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.
Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.
3 goals on 31 rush shots worth 3.60 xG.
Gave up 23 rush shots worth 1.81 xG (2 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.
Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.
2 goals on 23 rush shots worth 1.81 xG.
3 goals on 7 high-danger shots (43% conversion on 2.01 xG).
The Golden Knights controlled 66% of expected goals (4.97–2.52) and won 5-2 — result matched process.
Each club shoots toward its own end — CHI 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.
Vegas should win. The model projects a 2.7 to 3.5 game with the Golden Knights at 63% win probability. The advantage stems from one source: underlying play. Vegas controls shot attempts at 52.3% Corsi, a gap that translates to more time attacking. The Golden Knights' expected-goals advantage of 54.5% to 43.5% compounds that edge.
Tomas Hertl drives Vegas's offense at 1.46 expected goals per 60 minutes, carrying 5 goals and 34 assists with 12 high-danger goals—the highest xG/60 rate on Vegas's roster. He's accumulated 57 high-danger shot attempts. If Chicago's shutdown assignment can't collapse and protect the slot, Vegas opens a scoring advantage before puck drop.
Mark Stone supplies 14 goals, 45 assists, and 15 high-danger goals at 1.25 expected goals per 60 minutes.
Arvid Soderblom is Chicago's liability. Over 26 games, he's minus-10.7 goals saved above expected—he's leaking goals consistently. Chicago's defensive profile reads hard to score on only because the team runs 0.996 PDO (barely lucky), not because Soderblom performs at an elite level.
The goaltending gap widens Vegas's advantage. S. Knight has posted plus-11.7 goals saved above expected over 55 games at 90.2% save percentage. C. Hart owns minus-5.6 goals above expected over 18 starts at 89.1%—a gap of 17.2 goals in Vegas's favor this season.
Vegas's PDO sits cold at 0.983, though, which means the Golden Knights are underperforming their underlying play and due for positive regression. Chicago's 0.996 PDO is barely lucky, but that variance works against them when it reverses—meaning Vegas's theoretical edge compresses somewhat when luck normalizes.
Tyler Bertuzzi carries Chicago's offense with 1.08 expected goals per 60, 20 goals, 26 assists, and 12 high-danger goals on a 12.2% shooting rate. Anton Frondell sits at 1.06 expected goals per 60 despite just 3 goals, 6 assists, and 1 high-danger goal—tight shooting luck that can't sustain.
Vegas should escape, but Chicago's variance edge and the pronounced goaltending gap compress the model's prediction into a more realistic margin than the Golden Knights' underlying dominance alone suggests.
Season rates in this preview are from 2025-26 — this season's sample isn't live yet.
VGK by 26 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score CHI 2.7–3.5 VGK; 16% chance it's tied after 60.
VGK holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.996 vs 0.983) says CHI has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.
Tomas Hertl: 5G 34A, 1.46 xG/60, 12 high-danger goals.
Highest individual xG/60 on VGK. Gets 57 HD shots. Limit slot access.
Key matchup: Neutralize Tomas Hertl (5G, 1.46 xG/60, 12 HD goals)
Arvid Soderblom: -10.7 GSAx over 26 games.
Shoot from everywhere — volume beats a cold crease.
Anton Frondell is on ice for 3.02 xGA/60 and 9 high-danger shots against this season.
Hunt matchups against Anton Frondell's shifts with the top line.
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.