Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Minnesota Wild sweater
← Sat, Oct 10 · the slate
Breakdown · MIN at FLA

J. Wallstedt stands tall as the Wild edge the Panthers

FinalSat, Oct 10
MINMinnesota Wild4FLAFlorida Panthers1
The verdict · earned

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

MIN 4 · FLA 1
◆ By the ModelOct 10, 8:51 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 Wild beat the Panthers 4-1, with K. Kaprizov scoring the goals that mattered and J. Wallstedt holding Florida in check.

The most telling number belongs to Florida. The Panthers finished 2.74 goals below what their chances should have produced. Expected goals measures how many goals a team's shots should have yielded, given where they came from. By that standard, Florida's one goal is a finishing problem, not a shortage of chances.

Minnesota's play holds up too. The Wild took 56% of five-on-five expected goals, so the win rests on the chances and not only the bounces.

J. Wallstedt made 29 saves on 30 shots. His save percentage of 0.967 is the number that matters most: he kept nearly everything Florida produced out of the net. He also stopped all 5 high-danger shots he faced.

J. Markstrom stopped 25 of 28 shots, a respectable night that did not change the result.

K. Kaprizov scored three times. His first, a snap shot from 26 feet on the power play, pushed Minnesota's lead to 2-0. M. Boldy opened the scoring at 00:53 of the first with a snap shot from 42 feet off the rush. Florida's only goal came from M. Tkachuk, a wrist shot from 9 feet on a rebound, which cut the lead to 2-1 early in the second.

Minnesota was dangerous on the counter. It scored 3 goals on 28 rush chances.

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

Data: NHL play-by-play and shift charts, Backcheck expected-goals model

The goals

  • MIN 1–0, 00:53 of the first. M. Boldy, snap shot from 42 feet, a 5% chance by the model (off the rush), past J. Markstrom. Assists: J. Spurgeon, K. Kaprizov. 10 seconds after a FLA hit by M. Tkachuk. Win probability moved 14 points.
  • MIN 2–0, 06:18 of the first on the power play. K. Kaprizov, snap shot from 26 feet, a 14% chance by the model (off the rush), past J. Markstrom. Assists: M. Shabanov, Q. Hughes. Win probability moved 13 points.
  • FLA 2–1, 02:18 of the second. M. Tkachuk, wrist shot from 9 feet, a 14% chance by the model (a rebound), past J. Wallstedt. 2 seconds after a FLA shot by M. Tkachuk. Win probability moved 15 points.
  • MIN 3–1, 05:00 of the second. K. Kaprizov, snap shot from 28 feet, a 16% chance by the model (off the rush), past J. Markstrom. Assists: M. Boldy, J. Eriksson Ek. Win probability moved 16 points.
  • MIN 4–1, 18:56 of the third into an empty net. K. Kaprizov, wrist shot from 59 feet, a 66% chance by the model. 7 seconds after a FLA blocked shot by K. Kaprizov.

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
MIN
4
FLA
1

J. Wallstedt stands tall as the Wild edge the Panthers

Chances 4.8 – 3.7Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Wild earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
MIN
4.78
FLA
3.74
56% of the chances44%

The board read MIN 4, FLA 1. The chances read MIN 4.8, FLA 3.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
MIN
−0.8
goals above expected
MIN4.78 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
FLA3.74 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Panthers left 2.7 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
The swing
+16
win-probability points
67% → 82% for MIN
FLA 100%the game, start to finish
MIN 100%P1 · P2 · P3
MINP2 05:00

K. Kaprizov makes it 3–1.

In-game win model · fitted on 5,248 games
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 00:53MINM. Boldy5%1–0
  2. P1 06:18MINK. KaprizovPP14%2–0
  3. P2 02:18FLAM. Tkachuk14%2–1
  4. P2 05:00MINK. Kaprizov16%3–1
  5. P3 18:56MINK. KaprizovEN66%4–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
MIN
51 shots
4
Final
96 shots
FLA
45 shots
1
MIN attackFLA attack
MIN FLA Goal
51
shots · 4 in
45
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
MINFLA
1 / 6
2.01 xG
High danger
0 / 5
1.32 xG
2 / 24
2.43 xG
Medium
1 / 20
2.04 xG
1 / 27
0.35 xG
Low
0 / 33
0.38 xG

The Panthers went 0 for 5 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
J. Wallstedt
+2.7
MIN · 29/30 · 59:58
Best save · a 41% chance, backhand from 6 ft · P2 13:58
B
J. Markstrom
+0.4
FLA · 25/28 · 57:46
Best save · a 23% chance, snap from 12 ft · P3 01:44
Best skater on the ice
A+
MIN
K. Kaprizov
L · impact 4.17
20:11
Ice time
3–1
G – A
1.42
Own xG
76%
xG share
Impact · top 4
K. Kaprizov4.2A+
M. Boldy2.2A+
M. Tkachuk1.8A+
M. Shabanov1.2A
Report card
MINFLA
OffenseA+A
DefenseFF
TransitionCC
Special teamsA+D
GoaltendingA+A
DisciplineDB
LuckA-D+
Seven dimensions, A+ to F · basis on the breakdown
Why it went the way it went
Why MIN won
  1. 01J. Wallstedt stole it
  2. 02Dangerous off the rush
  3. 03J. Wallstedt was perfect on high danger
Why FLA lost
  1. 01Rush defense leaked all night
  2. 02Cold finishing night
  3. 03Wasted the best looks
Our storyline model · reasoning on the breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

J. Wallstedt stands tall as the Wild edge the Panthers

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 10–8
  1. 00:53MINM. Boldy(J. Spurgeon, K. Kaprizov)1–0

    Snap shot from 42 feet, a 5% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past J. Markstrom. 10s after a FLA hit by M. Tkachuk. Win probability moved 14 points.On the ice: B. Coleman, J. Brodin, O. Maatta, R. Hartman, M. Shabanov · against S. Jones, N. Mikkola, E. Luostarinen, A. Lundell, S. Vilmanis

  2. 06:18MINK. Kaprizovpower play(M. Shabanov, Q. Hughes)2–0

    Snap shot from 26 feet, a 14% chance (off the rush), past J. Markstrom. Win probability moved 13 points.On the ice: J. Spurgeon, B. Coleman, Y. Trenin, Q. Hughes, N. Sturm · against L. Eller, S. Jones, S. Reinhart, N. Mikkola, B. Tkachuk

2ndshots 6–9
  1. 02:18FLAM. Tkachuk2–1

    Wrist shot from 9 feet, a 14% chance (a rebound), past J. Wallstedt. 2s after a FLA shot by M. Tkachuk. Win probability moved 15 points.On the ice: L. Eller, D. Kulikov, R. Gudas, S. Reinhart, B. Tkachuk · against B. Brink, D. Hunt, R. Lorenz, D. Yurov, D. Spacek

  2. 05:00MINK. Kaprizov(M. Boldy, J. Eriksson Ek)3–1

    Snap shot from 28 feet, a 16% chance (off the rush), past J. Markstrom. Win probability moved 16 points.On the ice: J. Spurgeon, J. Eriksson Ek, K. Kaprizov, Q. Hughes, M. Boldy · against C. Verhaeghe, A. Ekblad, S. Bennett, G. Forsling, M. Tkachuk

3rdshots 13–13
  1. 18:56MINK. Kaprizovempty net4–1

    Wrist shot from 59 feet, a 66% chance, a near-certain one. 7s after a FLA block.

score reads MIN–FLA

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.78
MIN chances
Goals their shots were worth
−0.8
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.053
MIN puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
49.6%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.78Expected goals3.74
MIN 56% of the chance quality
29Shots on goal30
6High-danger chances5
57All attempts (Corsi)58
Adjusted for score: MIN 42% · FLA 58%
Faceoffs · FLA won36%off39%neu35%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
MIN1 / 6 · 2.01 xG
FLA0 / 5 · 1.32 xG
Medium dangermid-range
MIN2 / 24 · 2.43 xG
FLA1 / 20 · 2.04 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
MIN1 / 27 · 0.35 xG
FLA0 / 33 · 0.38 xG

FLA went 0-for-5 from high danger on 1.32 expected goals — 1.3 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
MIN
4 G · 4.78 xG · -0.8
FLA
1 G · 3.74 xG · -2.7
0123456

MIN finished -0.8 against expected, FLA -2.7.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
MIN
SNAP3/20
WRIST1/13
TIP IN0/8
SLAP0/6
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/7
FLA
SNAP0/18
WRIST1/13
TIP IN0/5
SLAP0/5
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/13
MIN
FLA
Off the rush
3 G on 28
2.70 xG
0 G on 29
2.75 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3
0.48 xG
1 G on 4
0.70 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: MIN went 3-for-20, FLA 0-for-18. MIN scored 3 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
J. Wallstedt
MIN · 29/30 · .967
started · 59:58
+2.7
saved above expected
A+
the night
Attempts faced
44
Avg chance faced
8.5%
Stopped vs expected
0.977 vs 0.915
Rebounds allowed
4 · 1 scored on
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/51.3+1.3
Medium1/202.0+1.0
Low0/190.4+0.4
Shorthanded0/141.9+1.9
Tips & deflections0/60.3+0.3
The save
41% chance stopped, a backhand from 6 ft · P2 13:58
The one to have back
14% chance went in, a wrist from 9 ft · P2 02:18

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. Markstrom
FLA · 25/28 · .893
started · 57:46
+0.4
saved above expected
B
the night
Attempts faced
47
Avg chance faced
7.2%
Stopped vs expected
0.936 vs 0.928
Rebounds allowed
3
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/40.8+0.8
Medium2/222.2+0.2
Low1/210.3-0.7
Shorthanded1/101.1+0.1
Tips & deflections0/80.5+0.5
The save
23% chance stopped, a snap from 12 ft · P3 01:44
The one to have back
5% chance went in, a snap from 42 ft · P1 00:53

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: K. Kaprizov (MIN), 20:11 of ice, 3-1, 76% of the expected goals while he was out.

MIN18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
K. KaprizovL20:113-176A+
M. BoldyL20:561-166A+
M. ShabanovR13:270-171A
Q. HughesD25:360-176A
J. Eriksson EkC18:120-164A
B. BrinkR10:510-076A
R. HartmanR13:430-062A
J. SpurgeonD24:390-140B
D. YurovR15:080-055C
R. LorenzL7:120-060C
Y. TreninC12:360-043C
D. SpacekD9:510-047C
N. SturmC12:510-031D
O. MaattaD21:330-042D
D. HuntD11:480-025D
J. BrodinD23:160-041D
M. McCarronC11:360-014F
B. ColemanL16:360-041F
FLA18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
M. TkachukL18:331-074A+
A. LundellC19:220-071B
S. BennettC20:500-069B
B. ImamaL7:310-040B
A. EkbladD21:190-067B
B. TkachukL17:340-054B
S. JonesD23:060-056B
C. VerhaegheC19:360-070C
E. LuostarinenC15:040-049C
S. ReinhartC20:140-047C
S. VilmanisL13:330-065C
G. ForslingD18:150-043D
G. HathawayR9:510-038D
L. EllerC18:060-038D
N. MikkolaD16:530-040D
R. GudasD14:090-019F
D. KulikovD14:220-019F
S. LaffertyC9:300-022F

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, MIN: Z. Bogosian, M. Foligno, M. Kiersted. Scratched, FLA: B. Marchand, U. Balinskis. Referees Kyle Rehman and Kelly Sutherland; linesmen Matt MacPherson and Jonny Murray.

Graded against a league-average game

Report card

Seven dimensions · A+ to F
DimensionMINFLA
Offense
▸Basis

MIN Created 4.78 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 6 high-danger shots (2.01 xG) and 28 rush shots (2.70 xG).

FLA Created 3.74 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 5 high-danger shots (1.32 xG) and 29 rush shots (2.75 xG).

A+
100
A
94
Defense
▸Basis

MIN Allowed 3.74 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 5 high-danger shots (1.32 xG) and 29 rush shots (2.75 xG).

FLA Allowed 4.78 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 6 high-danger shots (2.01 xG) and 28 rush shots (2.70 xG).

F
56
F
43
Transition
▸Basis

MIN Rush shots 28–29, rush xG 2.70–2.75 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

FLA Rush shots 29–28, rush xG 2.75–2.70 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

C
74
C
76
Special teams
▸Basis

MIN 1-for-3 on the power play (33%; league ≈21%) with 1.15 PP xG.

FLA 0-for-5 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 1.83 PP xG.

A+
97
D
63
Goaltending
▸Basis

MIN +2.74 goals saved above expected on 30 shots against.

FLA +1.78 goals saved above expected on 28 shots against.

A+
100
A
93
Discipline
▸Basis

MIN Took 9 penalties for 29 PIM vs 7 for 25 on the other side.

FLA Took 7 penalties for 25 PIM vs 9 for 29 on the other side.

D
65
B
85
Luck

Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

▸Basis

MIN Finishing -0.78 goals vs xG plus +2.74 GSAx of save luck = +1.96 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

FLA Finishing -2.74 goals vs xG plus +1.78 GSAx of save luck = -0.96 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

A-
91
D+
67
Source · NHL play-by-play · xG engine · luck graded separately
What the model flagged
STRENGTHMIN

J. Wallstedt stole it

J. Wallstedt stopped 29 of 30 (0.967) — +2.74 goals saved above expected in a 3-goal game.

WARNINGFLA

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 28 rush shots worth 2.70 xG (3 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

STRENGTHMIN

Dangerous off the rush

3 goals on 28 rush shots worth 2.70 xG.

LUCKFLA

Cold finishing night

Scored 1 on 3.74 xG — -2.74 vs expected. The looks were there; the finish will come back.

WARNINGMIN

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 29 rush shots worth 2.75 xG (0 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

STRENGTHFLA

Dangerous off the rush

0 goals on 29 rush shots worth 2.75 xG.

96 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
MIN
51 shots
4
Final
96 shots
FLA
45 shots
1
MIN attackFLA attack
MIN FLA Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — MIN left, FLA 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
K. Kaprizov
#97 · L · MIN
3 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 20:11 on ice · +2
M. Boldy
#12 · L · MIN
1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 20:56 on ice · +2
Q. Hughes
#43 · D · MIN
0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 25:36 on ice
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page