Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a New Jersey Devils sweater
← Sat, Oct 10 · the slate
Breakdown · VAN at NJD

Devils pull away from the Canucks

FinalSat, Oct 10
VANVancouver Canucks1NJDNew Jersey Devils4
The verdict · earned

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

VAN 1 · NJD 4
◆ By the ModelOct 10, 6:10 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 Devils pulled away in the second period on the power play, and the 4-1 final tells only part of the story.

The most telling number is the one that disagrees with the scoreboard. Expected goals is the model's count of how many goals a set of chances should have produced. Vancouver's chances added up to 2.77, and the Canucks scored once. That gap is the story the score hides.

New Jersey earned the result underneath. The Devils controlled 60% of five-on-five expected goals, and their power play produced 3 power-play goals.

Nico Hischier's snap shot from the doorstep at 19:50 of the second period made it 4-1, and it was the turning point.

Vancouver's biggest concern was defending the rush. The Canucks allowed 32 rush shots, and the gaps in transition showed up in every period.

J. Allen stopped 20 of 21 shots. Save percentage, the share of shots kept out, reached 0.952. That kept Vancouver 1.77 goals below what the shots should have produced.

The numbers cannot say whether the finishing was luck or skill, or what was said in the room. That is the beat's story, and it is worth reading.

The goals

  • VAN 1–0, 05:27 of the first on the power play. L. Karlsson, snap shot from 25 feet, a 20% chance by the model, past J. Allen. Assists: B. Boeser, J. DeBrusk. 9 seconds after a VAN shot by J. DeBrusk. Win probability moved 15 points.
  • NJD 1–1, 08:03 of the first on the power play. N. Hischier, wrist shot from 18 feet, a 14% chance by the model (off the rush), past L. Meriläinen. Assists: A. Gritsyuk, L. Hughes. Win probability moved 16 points.
  • NJD 1–2, 16:24 of the first. J. Boqvist, wrist shot from 7 feet, a 12% chance by the model (a rebound), past K. Lankinen. Assists: A. Lombardi. 2 seconds after a NJD shot by A. Lombardi. K. Lankinen was 111 seconds into his shift for the defending side. Win probability moved 17 points.
  • NJD 1–3, 04:36 of the second on the power play. J. Bratt, wrist shot from 14 feet, a 12% chance by the model (a rebound), past L. Meriläinen. Assists: N. Hischier, J. Hughes. 3 seconds after a NJD shot by N. Hischier. Win probability moved 13 points.
  • NJD 1–4, 19:50 of the second on the power play. N. Hischier, snap shot from 7 feet, a 20% chance by the model (off the rush), past L. Meriläinen. Assists: J. Hughes, J. Bratt. Win probability moved 6 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 · Oct 10
VAN
1
NJD
4

Devils pull away from the Canucks

Chances 2.8 – 4.2Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Devils earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
VAN
2.77
NJD
4.15
40% of the chances60%

The board read VAN 1, NJD 4. The chances read VAN 2.8, NJD 4.2.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NJD
−0.1
goals above expected
NJD4.15 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
VAN2.77 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Canucks left 1.8 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
The swing
+17
win-probability points
54% → 70% for NJD
NJD 100%the game, start to finish
VAN 100%P1 · P2 · P3
NJDP1 16:24

J. Boqvist makes it 1–2.

In-game win model · fitted on 5,248 games
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 05:27VANL. KarlssonPP20%1–0
  2. P1 08:03NJDN. HischierPP14%1–1
  3. P1 16:24NJDJ. Boqvist12%1–2
  4. P2 04:36NJDJ. BrattPP12%1–3
  5. P2 19:50NJDN. HischierPP20%1–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
VAN
34 shots
1
Final
82 shots
NJD
48 shots
4
VAN attackNJD attack
VAN NJD Goal
34
shots · 1 in
48
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
VANNJD
1 / 4
0.83 xG
High danger
1 / 3
0.58 xG
0 / 15
1.64 xG
Medium
3 / 29
3.26 xG
0 / 24
0.30 xG
Low
0 / 30
0.31 xG

High-danger looks: VAN 1 of 4, NJD 1 of 3.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
J. Allen
+1.8
NJD · 20/21 · 60:00
Best save · a 22% chance, wrist from 8 ft · P2 15:15
B
L. Meriläinen
+0.7
VAN · 31/34 · 54:33
Best save · a 20% chance, wrist from 13 ft · P3 11:17
+1 more on the full breakdown
Best skater on the ice
A+
NJD
N. Hischier
C · impact 2.90
18:59
Ice time
2–1
G – A
0.71
Own xG
57%
xG share
Impact · top 4
N. Hischier2.9A+
J. Bratt2.4A+
J. Hughes2.3A+
J. DeBrusk1.8A
Report card
VANNJD
OffenseB-A+
DefenseFD+
TransitionDB+
Special teamsA+A+
GoaltendingCA
DisciplineC-B-
LuckD-B+
Seven dimensions, A+ to F · basis on the breakdown
Why it went the way it went
Why NJD won
  1. 01Dangerous off the rush
  2. 02Power play cashed in
  3. 03J. Allen tilted the crease
Why VAN lost
  1. 01Rush defense leaked all night
  2. 02Cold finishing night
  3. 03PDO ran cold
Our storyline model · reasoning on the breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Devils pull away from the Canucks

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 8–10
  1. 05:27VANL. Karlssonpower play(B. Boeser, J. DeBrusk)1–0

    Snap shot from 25 feet, a 20% chance, past J. Allen. 9s after a VAN shot by J. DeBrusk. Win probability moved 15 points.On the ice: B. Gallagher, A. Bains, M. Sasson, T. Willander, Z. Buium · against B. Dillon, C. Glass, J. Boqvist, D. Chisholm, A. Lombardi

  2. 08:03NJDN. Hischierpower play(A. Gritsyuk, L. Hughes)1–1

    Wrist shot from 18 feet, a 14% chance (off the rush), past L. Meriläinen. Win probability moved 16 points.On the ice: D. Hamilton, J. Siegenthaler, C. Glass, J. Boqvist, A. Lombardi · against L. Karlsson, P. Cotter, M. Rossi, T. Willander, Z. Buium

  3. 16:24NJDJ. Boqvist(A. Lombardi)1–2

    Wrist shot from 7 feet, a 12% chance (a rebound), past K. Lankinen. 2s after a NJD shot by A. Lombardi. K. Lankinen was 111s into his shift for the defending side. Win probability moved 17 points.On the ice: B. Pesce, C. Glass, J. Boqvist, L. Hughes, A. Lombardi · against J. Oleksiak, J. DeBrusk, E. Pettersson, K. Lankinen, J. Lekkerimäki, T. Willander

2ndshots 9–15
  1. 04:36NJDJ. Brattpower play(N. Hischier, J. Hughes)1–3

    Wrist shot from 14 feet, a 12% chance (a rebound), past L. Meriläinen. 3s after a NJD shot by N. Hischier. Win probability moved 13 points.On the ice: D. Hamilton, J. Siegenthaler, E. Rodrigues, A. Gritsyuk, D. Mercer · against J. Oleksiak, L. Karlsson, P. Cotter, M. Rossi, T. Willander

  2. 19:50NJDN. Hischierpower play(J. Hughes, J. Bratt)1–4

    Snap shot from 7 feet, a 20% chance (off the rush), past L. Meriläinen. Win probability moved 6 points.On the ice: B. Dillon, B. Pesce, C. Glass, D. Mercer · against B. Boeser, J. DeBrusk, F. Hronek, E. Pettersson, D. O'Connor

3rdshots 4–12no goals

    score reads VAN–NJD

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    4.15
    NJD chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    −0.1
    Finishing
    Goals below what those chances were worth
    1.041
    NJD puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    59.0%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    2.77Expected goals4.15
    NJD 60% of the chance quality
    21Shots on goal37
    4High-danger chances3
    43All attempts (Corsi)62
    Adjusted for score: VAN 46% · NJD 54%
    Faceoffs · NJD won60%off53%neu54%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    VAN1 / 4 · 0.83 xG
    NJD1 / 3 · 0.58 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    VAN0 / 15 · 1.64 xG
    NJD3 / 29 · 3.26 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    VAN0 / 24 · 0.30 xG
    NJD0 / 30 · 0.31 xG

    VAN went 0-for-15 from medium danger on 1.64 expected goals — 1.6 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    VAN
    1 G · 2.77 xG · -1.8
    NJD
    4 G · 4.15 xG · -0.1
    012345

    VAN finished -1.8 against expected, NJD -0.1.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    VAN
    WRIST0/18
    SNAP1/5
    SLAP0/3
    BACKHAND0/2
    TIP IN0/4
    DEFLECTED0/0
    WRAP AROUND0/1
    OTHER0/10
    NJD
    WRIST3/29
    SNAP1/6
    SLAP0/4
    BACKHAND0/4
    TIP IN0/2
    DEFLECTED0/3
    WRAP AROUND0/0
    OTHER0/14
    VAN
    NJD
    Off the rush
    0 G on 24
    2.27 xG
    2 G on 32
    3.10 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 0
    0.00 xG
    2 G on 5
    0.42 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: VAN went 0-for-18, NJD 3-for-29. NJD 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
    L. Meriläinen
    VAN · 31/34 · .912
    started · 54:33
    +0.7
    saved above expected
    B
    the night
    Attempts faced
    44
    Avg chance faced
    8.3%
    Stopped vs expected
    0.932 vs 0.917
    Rebounds allowed
    4 · 1 scored on
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/30.6-0.4
    Medium2/252.8+0.8
    Low0/160.3+0.3
    Shorthanded3/81.0-2.0
    Tips & deflections0/50.4+0.4
    The save
    20% chance stopped, a wrist from 13 ft · P3 11:17
    The one to have back
    12% chance went in, a wrist from 14 ft · P2 04:36

    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

    K. Lankinen
    VAN · 2/3 · .667
    in relief · 05:27
    -0.5
    saved above expected
    —
    the night
    Attempts faced
    4
    Avg chance faced
    12.0%
    Stopped vs expected
    0.750 vs 0.880
    Rebounds allowed
    1 · 1 scored on
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    Medium1/40.5-0.5
    The save
    14% chance stopped, a wrist from 6 ft · P1 18:25
    The one to have back
    12% chance went in, a wrist from 7 ft · P1 16:24

    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

    J. Allen
    NJD · 20/21 · .952
    started · 60:00
    +1.8
    saved above expected
    A
    the night
    Attempts faced
    34
    Avg chance faced
    8.1%
    Stopped vs expected
    0.971 vs 0.919
    Rebounds allowed
    0
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/40.8-0.2
    Medium0/151.6+1.6
    Low0/150.3+0.3
    Shorthanded1/20.4-0.6
    Tips & deflections0/40.3+0.3
    The save
    22% chance stopped, a wrist from 8 ft · P2 15:15
    The one to have back
    20% chance went in, a snap from 25 ft · P1 05:27

    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: N. Hischier (NJD), 18:59 of ice, 2-1, 57% of the expected goals while he was out.

    VAN18 skaters
    SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
    J. DeBruskL17:150-163A
    L. KarlssonC14:461-025B
    B. BoeserR16:580-158B
    L. SchennD16:060-068C
    E. PetterssonC17:320-048C
    M. RossiC15:460-025C
    J. OleksiakD16:290-037C
    L. OhgrenL14:120-033D
    E. PetterssonD19:310-039D
    J. LekkerimäkiR14:390-048D
    B. GallagherR11:530-031D
    F. HronekD19:280-033D
    Z. BuiumD24:360-038D
    D. O'ConnorL16:500-044F
    A. BainsL11:000-033F
    T. WillanderD21:050-036F
    M. SassonC10:400-032F
    P. CotterL15:110-013F
    NJD18 skaters
    SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
    N. HischierC18:592-157A+
    J. BrattL16:151-180A+
    J. HughesC16:280-283A+
    J. BoqvistC12:291-059A
    A. GritsyukR12:570-153A
    A. LombardiC14:060-150A
    L. HughesD23:130-157A
    D. HamiltonD19:160-078B
    T. MeierR16:530-050B
    D. MercerC14:110-063B
    A. ManthaR9:400-082B
    L. EvangelistaR18:570-055B
    J. SiegenthalerD19:370-069C
    B. PesceD22:380-053C
    C. GlassC14:060-062C
    B. DillonD16:370-041C
    D. ChisholmD14:470-048D
    E. RodriguesC13:560-044D

    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, VAN: G. Brisebois, A. Räty, V. Mancini. Scratched, NJD: C. Brown, J. Kovacevic, R. Poirier. Referees Francois St-Laurent and Stephen Hiff; linesmen Julien Fournier and Brandon Grillo.

    Graded against a league-average game

    Report card

    Seven dimensions · A+ to F
    DimensionVANNJD
    Offense
    ▸Basis

    VAN Created 2.77 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 4 high-danger shots (0.83 xG) and 24 rush shots (2.27 xG).

    NJD Created 4.15 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 3 high-danger shots (0.58 xG) and 32 rush shots (3.10 xG).

    B-
    81
    A+
    97
    Defense
    ▸Basis

    VAN Allowed 4.15 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 3 high-danger shots (0.58 xG) and 32 rush shots (3.10 xG).

    NJD Allowed 2.77 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 4 high-danger shots (0.83 xG) and 24 rush shots (2.27 xG).

    F
    53
    D+
    69
    Transition
    ▸Basis

    VAN Rush shots 24–32, rush xG 2.27–3.10 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

    NJD Rush shots 32–24, rush xG 3.10–2.27 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

    D
    63
    B+
    87
    Special teams
    ▸Basis

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

    NJD 3-for-4 on the power play (75%; league ≈21%) with 0.96 PP xG.

    A+
    100
    A+
    100
    Goaltending
    ▸Basis

    VAN +0.15 goals saved above expected on 37 shots against.

    NJD +1.77 goals saved above expected on 21 shots against.

    C
    76
    A
    93
    Discipline
    ▸Basis

    VAN Took 4 penalties for 8 PIM vs 2 for 6 on the other side.

    NJD Took 2 penalties for 6 PIM vs 4 for 8 on the other side.

    C-
    70
    B-
    80
    Luck

    Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

    ▸Basis

    VAN Finishing -1.77 goals vs xG plus +0.15 GSAx of save luck = -1.62 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

    NJD Finishing -0.15 goals vs xG plus +1.77 GSAx of save luck = +1.62 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

    D-
    62
    B+
    88
    Source · NHL play-by-play · xG engine · luck graded separately
    What the model flagged
    WARNINGVAN

    Rush defense leaked all night

    Gave up 32 rush shots worth 3.10 xG (2 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

    STRENGTHNJD

    Dangerous off the rush

    2 goals on 32 rush shots worth 3.10 xG.

    STRENGTHNJD

    Power play cashed in

    3-for-4 on the power play (75%) on 0.96 PP xG.

    WARNINGNJD

    Rush defense leaked all night

    Gave up 24 rush shots worth 2.27 xG (0 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

    LUCKVAN

    Cold finishing night

    Scored 1 on 2.77 xG — -1.77 vs expected. The looks were there; the finish will come back.

    STRENGTHVAN

    Dangerous off the rush

    0 goals on 24 rush shots worth 2.27 xG.

    82 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    VAN
    34 shots
    1
    Final
    82 shots
    NJD
    48 shots
    4
    VAN attackNJD attack
    VAN NJD Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — VAN left, NJD 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
    N. Hischier
    #13 · C · NJD
    2 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 18:59 on ice
    J. Hughes
    #86 · C · NJD
    0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 16:28 on ice
    J. Bratt
    #63 · L · NJD
    1 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 16:15 on ice
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    Keep going

    Where to next

    Back to the front page