Motion-blurred skater in a Edmonton Oilers sweater
Breakdown · SEA at EDM

Oilers run the Kraken off the ice on the underlying numbers

The verdict · earned

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

SEA 1 · EDM 3
◆ By the ModelOct 3, 9:55 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

Edmonton beat Seattle 3-1. Connor McDavid scored the clincher into an empty net late in the third, but the Oilers' dominance through transition arrived much earlier.

The expected goals split reveals how wide the gap actually was. Edmonton controlled 67% of 5v5 expected goals (3.95–1.94), but that understates the dominance — they held only 56% of shot attempts, meaning their shots were far more dangerous per-shot. Seattle's 20 attempts generated 1.94 expected goals; Edmonton's 25 added up to 3.95. The Kraken's offense, such as it was, happened on thin ice.

Edmonton was lethal in transition. The Oilers generated 28 rush chances worth 2.94 expected goals and converted two of them, essentially deciding the game by the end of the second period. Seattle created 3 rebound opportunities and cashed none of them — the effort was there, the execution wasn't.

P. Grubauer stopped 1.9 goals above expected, a 22-save, 0.917 save percentage night that was among Seattle's best hopes. It couldn't matter. When one team controls play entirely in open ice and converts rush chances, a goalie's excellence becomes background noise. D. Levi made 19 saves on 20 shots for a 0.950 save percentage, above expected as well, but faced a far lighter workload.

Seattle won the special teams battle — one power-play goal, no penalties in the third. Edmonton's penalty kill was a liability. Neither of it mattered once Edmonton seized transition. The Kraken were running catch-up by the second intermission.

The goals

  • EDM 0–1, 02:51 of the first. O. Michaels, wrist shot from 24 feet, a 4% chance by the model (off the rush), past P. Grubauer. Assists: A. Formenton. Win probability moved 14 points.
  • SEA 1–1, 09:06 of the second on the power play. B. McMann, wrist shot from 19 feet, an 8% chance by the model (off the rush), past D. Levi. Assists: J. Eberle, C. Stephenson. Win probability moved 21 points.
  • EDM 1–2, 17:33 of the third. L. Draisaitl, snap shot from 13 feet, a 24% chance by the model (off the rush), past P. Grubauer. Assists: C. McDavid, R. Shea. 10 seconds after an EDM missed shot by R. Shea. Win probability moved 40 points.
  • EDM 1–3, 18:55 of the third into an empty net. C. McDavid, wrist shot from 89 feet, a 51% chance by the model. Assists: V. Podkolzin. 1 second after a SEA hit by B. Montour.

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 · Oct 3
SEA
1
EDM
3

Oilers run the Kraken off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 1.9 – 4.0Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Oilers earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
SEA
1.94
EDM
3.95
33% of the chances67%

The board read SEA 1, EDM 3. The chances read SEA 1.9, EDM 4.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
EDM
−0.9
goals above expected
EDM3.95 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
SEA1.94 expected · 1 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
+40
win-probability points
52% → 93% for EDM
EDM 100%the game, start to finish
SEA 100%P1 · P2 · P3
EDMP3 17:33

L. Draisaitl makes it 1–2.

In-game win model · fitted on 5,248 games
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 02:51EDMO. Michaels4%0–1
  2. P2 09:06SEAB. McMannPP8%1–1
  3. P3 17:33EDML. Draisaitl24%1–2
  4. P3 18:55EDMC. McDavidEN51%1–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
SEA
27 shots
1
Final
69 shots
EDM
42 shots
3
SEA attackEDM attack
SEA EDM Goal
27
shots · 1 in
42
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
SEAEDM
0 / 3
0.62 xG
High danger
2 / 7
1.81 xG
1 / 10
1.08 xG
Medium
0 / 15
1.72 xG
0 / 24
0.24 xG
Low
1 / 40
0.42 xG

The Kraken went 0 for 3 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
P. Grubauer
+1.4
SEA · 22/24 · 59:06
Best save · a 24% chance, snap from 16 ft · P3 08:38
B+
D. Levi
+0.9
EDM · 19/20 · 59:38
Best save · a 23% chance, snap from 25 ft · P2 03:21
Best skater on the ice
A+
EDM
C. McDavid
C · impact 2.65
26:17
Ice time
1–1
G – A
1.03
Own xG
71%
xG share
Impact · top 4
C. McDavid2.6A+
L. Draisaitl2.4A+
V. Podkolzin1.4A+
B. McMann1.4A
Report card
SEAEDM
OffenseD+A+
DefenseFB-
TransitionFA
Special teamsA+D-
GoaltendingAB
DisciplineC-B-
LuckBC
Seven dimensions, A+ to F · basis on the breakdown
Why it went the way it went
Why EDM won
  1. 01Dangerous off the rush
  2. 02Won on the merits
  3. 03D. Levi tilted the crease
Why SEA lost
  1. 01Rush defense leaked all night
  2. 02Paraded to the penalty box
  3. 03Cold finishing night
Our storyline model · reasoning on the breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Oilers run the Kraken 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 breakdown
backcheckreport.com
01 / 12 · Final
Every goal, in order

How it happened

NHL play-by-play
1stshots 5–10
  1. 02:51EDMO. Michaels(A. Formenton)0–1

    Wrist shot from 24 feet, a 4% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past P. Grubauer. Win probability moved 14 points.On the ice: M. Ekholm, L. Draisaitl, C. McDavid, E. Bouchard, V. Podkolzin · against J. Eberle, C. Stephenson, B. Montour, B. McMann, R. Evans

2ndshots 11–4
  1. 09:06SEAB. McMannpower play(J. Eberle, C. Stephenson)1–1

    Wrist shot from 19 feet, an 8% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past D. Levi. Win probability moved 21 points.On the ice: A. Larsson, F. Gaudreau, V. Dunn, M. Samoskevich, B. Meyers · against L. Draisaitl, J. Walman, C. McDavid, E. Bouchard, V. Podkolzin

3rdshots 4–11
  1. 17:33EDML. Draisaitl(C. McDavid, R. Shea)1–2

    Snap shot from 13 feet, a 24% chance (off the rush), past P. Grubauer. 10s after an EDM miss by R. Shea. Win probability moved 40 points.

  2. 18:55EDMC. McDavidempty net(V. Podkolzin)1–3

    Wrist shot from 89 feet, a 51% chance. 1s after a SEA hit by B. Montour.

score reads SEA–EDM

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.95
EDM chances
Goals their shots were worth
−0.9
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.021
EDM puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
62.6%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

1.94Expected goals3.95
EDM 67% of the chance quality
20Shots on goal25
3High-danger chances7
37All attempts (Corsi)62
Adjusted for score: SEA 39% · EDM 61%
Faceoffs · EDM won61%off47%neu53%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
SEA0 / 3 · 0.62 xG
EDM2 / 7 · 1.81 xG
Medium dangermid-range
SEA1 / 10 · 1.08 xG
EDM0 / 15 · 1.72 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
SEA0 / 24 · 0.24 xG
EDM1 / 40 · 0.42 xG

EDM went 0-for-15 from medium danger on 1.72 expected goals — 1.7 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
SEA
1 G · 1.94 xG · -0.9
EDM
3 G · 3.95 xG · -0.9
012345

SEA finished -0.9 against expected, EDM -0.9.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
SEA
WRIST1/17
SNAP0/4
SLAP0/4
TIP IN0/1
BACKHAND0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/10
EDM
WRIST2/8
SNAP1/20
SLAP0/8
TIP IN0/4
BACKHAND0/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
OTHER0/20
SEA
EDM
Off the rush
1 G on 16
1.67 xG
2 G on 28
2.94 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3
0.23 xG
0 G on 1
0.20 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: SEA went 1-for-17, EDM 2-for-8. EDM 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
P. Grubauer
SEA · 22/24 · .917
started · 59:06 · loss
+1.4
saved above expected
B+
the night
Attempts faced
41
Avg chance faced
8.4%
Stopped vs expected
0.951 vs 0.916
Rebounds allowed
1
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/61.3+0.3
Medium0/151.7+1.7
Low1/200.4-0.6
Shorthanded0/100.9+0.9
Tips & deflections0/40.3+0.3
The save
24% chance stopped, a snap from 16 ft · P3 08:38
The one to have back
4% chance went in, a wrist from 24 ft · P1 02:51

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

D. Levi
EDM · 19/20 · .950
started · 59:38 · win
+0.9
saved above expected
B+
the night
Attempts faced
26
Avg chance faced
7.5%
Stopped vs expected
0.962 vs 0.925
Rebounds allowed
3
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/30.6+0.6
Medium1/101.1+0.1
Low0/130.2+0.2
Shorthanded1/30.4-0.6
Tips & deflections0/10.0+0.0
The save
23% chance stopped, a snap from 25 ft · P2 03:21
The one to have back
8% chance went in, a wrist from 19 ft · P2 09:06

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: C. McDavid (EDM), 26:17 of ice, 1-1, 71% of the expected goals while he was out.

SEA18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
B. McMannC17:581-063A
J. EberleR17:100-170A
C. StephensonC18:070-162A
J. McCannL14:290-068B
B. CattonC15:400-071B
C. FleuryD13:470-051B
R. LindgrenD13:570-054C
B. MontourD23:210-056C
F. GaudreauC11:370-032C
M. SamoskevichR11:540-087C
K. KakkoR13:110-062C
R. EvansD19:030-057D
S. WrightC14:400-067D
M. BeniersC16:060-054D
B. MeyersC10:590-029D
V. DunnD23:500-055D
R. WintertonC11:260-040D
A. LarssonD23:390-025F
EDM18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
C. McDavidC26:171-171A+
L. DraisaitlC24:081-085A+
V. PodkolzinR20:220-179A+
O. MichaelsR13:581-06A
E. BouchardD27:010-083A
A. FormentonL14:030-15B
J. WalmanD13:520-072B
C. DachC12:330-050B
T. EmbersonD11:220-070B
K. KapanenR17:480-059C
R. SheaD21:310-115C
M. JonesL9:420-078C
I. HowardL8:220-020D
M. JosephR15:040-03D
T. FredericC8:150-023F
M. EkholmD22:410-039F
J. SamanskiC6:180-015F
C. MurphyD19:210-03F

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, SEA: J. Mahura, C. Douglas, V. Ottavainen. Scratched, EDM: Z. Hyman, S. Stastney, S. Mukhamadullin. Referees Pierre Lambert and Brandon Blandina; linesmen Mark Shewchyk and Jeremy Faucher.

Graded against a league-average game

Report card

Seven dimensions · A+ to F
DimensionSEAEDM
Offense
▸Basis

SEA Created 1.94 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 3 high-danger shots (0.62 xG) and 16 rush shots (1.67 xG).

EDM Created 3.95 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 7 high-danger shots (1.81 xG) and 28 rush shots (2.94 xG).

D+
69
A+
99
Defense
▸Basis

SEA Allowed 3.95 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 7 high-danger shots (1.81 xG) and 28 rush shots (2.94 xG).

EDM Allowed 1.94 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 3 high-danger shots (0.62 xG) and 16 rush shots (1.67 xG).

F
51
B-
81
Transition
▸Basis

SEA Rush shots 16–28, rush xG 1.67–2.94 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

EDM Rush shots 28–16, rush xG 2.94–1.67 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

F
56
A
94
Special teams
▸Basis

SEA 1-for-2 on the power play (50%; league ≈21%) with 0.36 PP xG.

EDM 0-for-3 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 0.93 PP xG.

A+
100
D-
60
Goaltending
▸Basis

SEA +1.95 goals saved above expected on 24 shots against.

EDM +0.94 goals saved above expected on 20 shots against.

A
94
B
84
Discipline
▸Basis

SEA Took 7 penalties for 25 PIM vs 6 for 23 on the other side.

EDM Took 6 penalties for 23 PIM vs 7 for 25 on the other side.

C-
70
B-
80
Luck

Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

▸Basis

SEA Finishing -0.94 goals vs xG plus +1.95 GSAx of save luck = +1.01 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

EDM Finishing -0.95 goals vs xG plus +0.94 GSAx of save luck = -0.01 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

B
83
C
75
Source · NHL play-by-play · xG engine · luck graded separately
What the model flagged
WARNINGSEA

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 28 rush shots worth 2.94 xG (2 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

STRENGTHEDM

Dangerous off the rush

2 goals on 28 rush shots worth 2.94 xG.

STRENGTHEDM

Won on the merits

The Oilers controlled 67% of expected goals (3.95–1.94) and won 3-1 — result matched process.

WARNINGEDM

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 16 rush shots worth 1.67 xG (1 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

STRENGTHSEA

P. Grubauer tilted the crease

P. Grubauer stopped 22 of 24 (0.917), +1.95 goals above expected.

STRENGTHSEA

Dangerous off the rush

1 goals on 16 rush shots worth 1.67 xG.

69 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
SEA
27 shots
1
Final
69 shots
EDM
42 shots
3
SEA attackEDM attack
SEA EDM Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — SEA left, EDM 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
C. McDavid
#97 · C · EDM
1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 26:17 on ice · +2
L. Draisaitl
#29 · C · EDM
1 G · 0 A · 5 SOG · 24:08 on ice · +2
R. Shea
#6 · D · EDM
0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 21:31 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Oct 3
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelOct 3, 9:05 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 favors Edmonton decisively — 58% win probability on a 3.0–3.5 goal spread — and the underlying data backs the lean. The Oilers hold a concrete territorial advantage that should press into expected-goal dominance, but both teams face opposing regression forces that could scramble the outcome.

Edmonton drives shot attempts at 56.8%, a decisive edge over Seattle's 43.7%. That territorial tilt should translate, yet the expected-goals gap narrows significantly: Edmonton at 58.6%, Seattle at 58.2%. The gap is real but thin — close enough that PDO swings could dominate.

Edmonton's 0.900 PDO is running cold and overdue for positive correction, a tailwind for the Oilers. Seattle's 1.157 runs hot and due for negative swing, a headwind. Together, those forces favor Edmonton, though PDO swings can carry entire games.

The goaltending matchup tilts sharply toward the Oilers. J. Daccord has registered +1.8 goals above expected in one game with a 96.0% save percentage, while D. Levi sits at -4.0 on a 68.2% save percentage — a 5.8-goal edge for Edmonton's starter.

Both teams are dangerous in the slot. Seattle scores at 18% from the slot — 9 goals on 50 shots — while Edmonton converts at 22% on 10 goals from 45 attempts. Whichever team closes that area early controls the goal-scoring margins.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

EDM 58%
59%
EDM
Model favorite
41%
59%
SEA50EDM

EDM by 18 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score SEA 3.0–3.5 EDM; 16% 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
SEA← edge
edge →EDM
58.2%58.6%
43.7%56.8%
4.203.89
3.022.75
6.007.00
1.006.50
1.1570.900

EDM holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.157 vs 0.900) says SEA has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 1–2
SEA
1-0-0
+5 GD · 1d rest
EDM
1-0-1
+1 GD · 1d rest
1.157
SEA PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.900
EDM PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

TACTICAL

The Oilers drive Corsi at 56.8%

The Oilers drive Corsi at 56.8% — expect territorial tilt.

WARNINGEDM

Regression watch: Oilers

The Oilers' PDO is 0.900 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Weight the underlying numbers over the recent results.

WARNINGSEA

Regression watch: Kraken

The Kraken's PDO is 1.157 — running hot, expect some regression.

Weight the underlying numbers over the recent results.

TACTICALSEA

Hot Zone: Kraken

Their most productive scoring zone over last 5 games.

Most goals from slot (9G on 50 shots, 18%) — deny that lane

Where the edges live
  • The Oilers drive Corsi at 56.8% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Oilers' PDO is 0.900 — running cold, due for positive regression.
  • The Kraken's PDO is 1.157 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Oilers drive Corsi at 56.8% — expect territorial tilt.
  • Goalie matchup: J. Daccord (+1.8 GSAx in 1 GP, 96.0% SV) vs D. Levi (-4.0 GSAx in 1 GP, 68.2% SV).
  • J. Daccord has the GSAx edge — 5.8 goals above his counterpart this season.
  • The Oilers' PDO is 0.900 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
SEA
vs CGY · Thu, Oct 1
Expected in goal
J. Daccord
1 day rest.960 last start59:30 played
Forwards · 12
  • J. Eberle17:52
  • C. Stephenson16:59
  • M. Beniers16:58
  • J. McCann17:54
  • R. Winterton16:17
  • B. Catton19:00
  • C. Douglas05:58
  • S. Wright15:55
  • J. Melanson09:31
  • B. McMann16:05
  • K. Kakko16:49
  • F. Gaudreau13:58
Defence · 6
  • A. Larsson18:48
  • J. Mahura14:28
  • V. Dunn20:37
  • R. Evans20:42
  • R. Lindgren14:28
  • B. Montour24:11
EDM
vs VAN · Thu, Oct 1
Expected in goal
D. Levi
1 day rest.682 last start59:51 played
Backup Tristan Jarry · -3.8 GSAx this season
Forwards · 12
  • T. Frederic10:55
  • M. Joseph15:07
  • A. Formenton16:15
  • L. Draisaitl20:19
  • C. Dach12:46
  • K. Kapanen18:48
  • O. Michaels13:23
  • M. Jones11:41
  • I. Howard10:58
  • J. Samanski08:41
  • V. Podkolzin18:04
  • C. McDavid22:03
Defence · 6
  • E. Bouchard24:21
  • C. Murphy24:47
  • R. Shea23:05
  • M. Ekholm20:42
  • S. Mukhamadullin10:01
  • J. Walman13:02

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.

Keep going

Where to next