Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Carolina Hurricanes sweater
← Sat, Oct 10 · the slate
Breakdown · CAR at CHI

Hurricanes pull away from the Blackhawks

FinalSat, Oct 10
CARCarolina Hurricanes5CHIChicago Blackhawks2
The verdict · earned

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

CAR 5 · CHI 2
◆ By the ModelOct 10, 9:48 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 Hurricanes beat the Blackhawks 5-2, and the scoring came from across the lineup. M. Jankowski, S. Aho, J. Blake, T. Hall and J. Martinook all found the net, and Chicago never got within a goal.

Chicago's finishing fell short of its chances. The Blackhawks finished 1.06 goals below their expected goals, so the chances they created were worth more than the two they scored.

Carolina controlled 59% of five-on-five expected goals. Chicago held 40% of shot attempts, so the Hurricanes were the team doing the attacking.

Carolina's rush game did the damage: 4 goals on 29 chances. The Hurricanes were also clinical in the high-danger zone, converting 3 of 6 chances there.

B. Bussi stopped 24 of 26 shots for Carolina. His save percentage was 0.923.

On the other end, S. Knight faced 39 shots for Chicago and let in more goals than that workload should have allowed.

Chicago's last goal came from O. Moore at 14:14 of the third, a wrist shot past B. Bussi.

The goals

  • CAR 1–0, 19:03 of the first. M. Jankowski, wrist shot from 9 feet, a 20% chance by the model (off the rush), past S. Knight. Assists: J. Kotkaniemi, E. Robinson. 7 seconds after a CAR takeaway by J. Slavin. Win probability moved 19 points.
  • CAR 2–0, 02:09 of the second shorthanded. S. Aho, wrist shot from 27 feet, a 19% chance by the model (off the rush), past S. Knight. Assists: K. Miller. Win probability moved 15 points.
  • CAR 3–0, 03:28 of the second. J. Blake, wrist shot from 11 feet, a 20% chance by the model, past S. Knight. Assists: L. Stankoven, J. Martinook. 4 seconds after a CAR shot by L. Stankoven. Win probability moved 9 points.
  • CHI 3–1, 04:40 of the second. R. Kantserov, wrist shot from 17 feet, a 14% chance by the model (off the rush), past B. Bussi. 6 seconds after a CHI takeaway by R. Kantserov. Win probability moved 9 points.
  • CAR 4–1, 06:05 of the second. T. Hall, slap shot from 32 feet, a 14% chance by the model (off the rush), past S. Knight. Assists: J. Blake, M. Reilly. Win probability moved 9 points.
  • CAR 5–1, 05:00 of the third. J. Martinook, backhander from 26 feet, a 3% chance by the model (off the rush), past S. Knight. Assists: N. Ehlers, M. Reilly.
  • CHI 5–2, 14:14 of the third. O. Moore, wrist shot from 10 feet, an 8% chance by the model (off the rush), past B. Bussi. Assists: W. Kaiser, R. Donato.

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
CAR
5
CHI
2

Hurricanes pull away from the Blackhawks

Chances 4.4 – 3.1Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Hurricanes earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
CAR
4.38
CHI
3.06
59% of the chances41%

The board read CAR 5, CHI 2. The chances read CAR 4.4, CHI 3.1.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
CAR
+0.6
goals above expected
CAR4.38 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
CHI3.06 expected · 2 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
+19
win-probability points
47% → 65% for CAR
CHI 100%the game, start to finish
CAR 100%P1 · P2 · P3
CARP1 19:03

M. Jankowski makes it 1–0.

In-game win model · fitted on 5,248 games
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 19:03CARM. Jankowski20%1–0
  2. P2 02:09CARS. AhoSH19%2–0
  3. P2 03:28CARJ. Blake20%3–0
  4. P2 04:40CHIR. Kantserov14%3–1
  5. P2 06:05CART. Hall14%4–1
  6. P3 05:00CARJ. Martinook3%5–1
  7. P3 14:14CHIO. Moore8%5–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
CAR
56 shots
5
Final
93 shots
CHI
37 shots
2
CAR attackCHI attack
CAR CHI Goal
56
shots · 5 in
37
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
CARCHI
3 / 6
1.19 xG
High danger
0 / 2
0.39 xG
1 / 25
2.82 xG
Medium
2 / 23
2.40 xG
1 / 41
0.37 xG
Low
0 / 23
0.27 xG

The Hurricanes buried 3 of 6 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
B. Bussi
+1.1
CAR · 24/26 · 59:17
Best save · a 20% chance, wrist from 11 ft · P2 12:37
D
S. Knight
−0.6
CHI · 34/39 · 57:49
Best save · a 23% chance, snap from 18 ft · P2 00:16
Best skater on the ice
A+
CAR
J. Blake
R · impact 2.52
15:54
Ice time
1–1
G – A
0.42
Own xG
69%
xG share
Impact · top 4
J. Blake2.5A+
S. Aho2.0A+
M. Reilly1.9A+
M. Jankowski1.6A
Report card
CARCHI
OffenseA+B-
DefenseD+F
TransitionB+D-
Special teamsFF
GoaltendingBD+
DisciplineCC
LuckB+D-
Seven dimensions, A+ to F · basis on the breakdown
Why it went the way it went
Why CAR won
  1. 01Dangerous off the rush
  2. 02Clinical in the slot
  3. 03Won on the merits
Why CHI lost
  1. 01Rush defense leaked all night
  2. 02S. Knight was beaten from the slot
  3. 03Cold finishing night
Our storyline model · reasoning on the breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Hurricanes pull away from the Blackhawks

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 16–7
  1. 19:03CARM. Jankowski(J. Kotkaniemi, E. Robinson)1–0

    Wrist shot from 9 feet, a 20% chance (off the rush), past S. Knight. 7s after a CAR takeaway by J. Slavin. Win probability moved 19 points.On the ice: M. Jankowski, J. Slavin, J. Chatfield, E. Robinson, J. Kotkaniemi · against T. Teravainen, D. Toninato, R. Donato, B. Byram, A. Levshunov

2ndshots 14–6
  1. 02:09CARS. Ahoshorthanded(K. Miller)2–0

    Wrist shot from 27 feet, a 19% chance (off the rush), past S. Knight. Win probability moved 15 points.On the ice: S. Aho, S. Walker, K. Miller, L. Stankoven · against R. Donato, R. Greene, S. Rinzel, N. Lardis, O. Moore

  2. 03:28CARJ. Blake(L. Stankoven, J. Martinook)3–0

    Wrist shot from 11 feet, a 20% chance, past S. Knight. 4s after a CAR shot by L. Stankoven. Win probability moved 9 points.On the ice: M. Jankowski, J. Slavin, J. Chatfield, E. Robinson, J. Kotkaniemi · against J. Greenway, B. Byram, C. Smith, O. Moore, A. Levshunov

  3. 04:40CHIR. Kantserov3–1

    Wrist shot from 17 feet, a 14% chance (off the rush), past B. Bussi. 6s after a CHI takeaway by R. Kantserov. Win probability moved 9 points.On the ice: I. Cole, J. Greenway, A. Vlasic, C. Smith, O. Moore · against J. Slavin, W. Carrier, S. Aho, J. Chatfield, A. Svechnikov

  4. 06:05CART. Hall(J. Blake, M. Reilly)4–1

    Slap shot from 32 feet, a 14% chance (off the rush), past S. Knight. Win probability moved 9 points.On the ice: M. Jankowski, S. Walker, E. Robinson, K. Miller, J. Kotkaniemi · against I. Cole, T. Teravainen, D. Toninato, R. Donato, A. Vlasic

3rdshots 9–13
  1. 05:00CARJ. Martinook(N. Ehlers, M. Reilly)5–1

    Backhander from 26 feet, a 3% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past S. Knight.On the ice: T. Hall, M. Reilly, S. Gostisbehere, L. Stankoven, J. Blake · against I. Cole, P. Kane, A. Vlasic, R. Greene, N. Lardis

  2. 14:14CHIO. Moore(W. Kaiser, R. Donato)5–2

    Wrist shot from 10 feet, an 8% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past B. Bussi.

score reads CAR–CHI

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.38
CAR chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.6
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.028
CAR puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
60.0%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.38Expected goals3.06
CAR 59% of the chance quality
39Shots on goal26
6High-danger chances2
72All attempts (Corsi)48
Adjusted for score: CAR 55% · CHI 45%
Faceoffs · CHI won41%off40%neu56%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
CAR3 / 6 · 1.19 xG
CHI0 / 2 · 0.39 xG
Medium dangermid-range
CAR1 / 25 · 2.82 xG
CHI2 / 23 · 2.40 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
CAR1 / 41 · 0.37 xG
CHI0 / 23 · 0.27 xG

CAR went 1-for-25 from medium danger on 2.82 expected goals — 1.8 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
CAR
5 G · 4.38 xG · +0.6
CHI
2 G · 3.06 xG · -1.1
0123456

CAR finished +0.6 against expected, CHI -1.1.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
CAR
WRIST3/33
SLAP1/6
TIP IN0/5
SNAP0/5
BACKHAND1/5
POKE0/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/16
CHI
WRIST2/21
SLAP0/5
TIP IN0/5
SNAP0/3
BACKHAND0/2
POKE0/0
WRAP AROUND0/0
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/11
CAR
CHI
Off the rush
4 G on 29
3.15 xG
2 G on 23
2.12 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 5
0.49 xG
0 G on 7
0.80 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: CAR went 3-for-33, CHI 2-for-21. CAR scored 4 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
B. Bussi
CAR · 24/26 · .923
started · 59:17 · win
+1.1
saved above expected
B+
the night
Attempts faced
36
Avg chance faced
8.5%
Stopped vs expected
0.944 vs 0.915
Rebounds allowed
7
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/20.4+0.4
Medium2/232.4+0.4
Low0/110.3+0.3
Shorthanded0/50.5+0.5
Tips & deflections0/50.3+0.3
The save
20% chance stopped, a wrist from 11 ft · P2 12:37
The one to have back
8% chance went in, a wrist from 10 ft · P3 14:14

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

S. Knight
CHI · 34/39 · .872
started · 57:49 · loss
-0.6
saved above expected
D
the night
Attempts faced
56
Avg chance faced
7.8%
Stopped vs expected
0.911 vs 0.922
Rebounds allowed
5
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger3/61.2-1.8
Medium1/252.8+1.8
Low1/250.4-0.6
Shorthanded0/50.4+0.4
Tips & deflections0/50.2+0.2
The save
23% chance stopped, a snap from 18 ft · P2 00:16
The one to have back
3% chance went in, a backhand from 26 ft · P3 05:00

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. Blake (CAR), 15:54 of ice, 1-1, 69% of the expected goals while he was out.

CAR18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
J. BlakeR15:541-169A+
S. AhoC19:371-071A+
M. ReillyD16:190-287A+
M. JankowskiL13:371-078A
T. HallL14:041-061A
L. StankovenC16:120-167A
J. MartinookL12:521-135A
J. KotkaniemiC14:170-181A
N. EhlersL13:040-198B
K. MillerD21:490-152B
S. GostisbehereD17:170-090B
J. ChatfieldD20:520-065B
E. RobinsonL15:270-155B
A. SvechnikovR15:460-071C
W. CarrierL13:510-063C
J. SlavinD18:570-060C
J. StaalC14:120-036D
S. WalkerD22:360-051D
CHI18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
R. KantserovR15:481-032B
O. MooreC12:571-038B
R. DonatoC12:170-122C
P. KaneR18:170-046C
I. ColeD17:240-052C
N. LardisL15:000-044C
W. KaiserD17:070-112C
J. GreenwayL14:500-040D
A. FrondellC18:060-029D
D. ToninatoC9:380-033D
A. LevshunovD18:120-041D
T. BertuzziL17:160-032D
C. SmithR15:010-033D
B. ByramD25:400-034F
R. GreeneC19:460-028F
T. TeravainenC14:050-033F
A. VlasicD18:040-026F
S. RinzelD18:430-019F

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, CAR: N. Deslauriers, J. Välimäki. Scratched, CHI: E. Del Mastro, K. Korchinski, F. Nazar. Referees Francis Charron and Jordan Samuels Thomas; linesmen Kyle Flemington and Tyson Baker.

Graded against a league-average game

Report card

Seven dimensions · A+ to F
DimensionCARCHI
Offense
▸Basis

CAR Created 4.38 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 6 high-danger shots (1.19 xG) and 29 rush shots (3.15 xG).

CHI Created 3.06 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 2 high-danger shots (0.39 xG) and 23 rush shots (2.12 xG).

A+
100
B-
81
Defense
▸Basis

CAR Allowed 3.06 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 2 high-danger shots (0.39 xG) and 23 rush shots (2.12 xG).

CHI Allowed 4.38 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 6 high-danger shots (1.19 xG) and 29 rush shots (3.15 xG).

D+
69
F
48
Transition
▸Basis

CAR Rush shots 29–23, rush xG 3.15–2.12 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

CHI Rush shots 23–29, rush xG 2.12–3.15 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

B+
88
D-
62
Special teams
▸Basis

CAR 0-for-2 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 0.27 PP xG.

CHI 0-for-2 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 0.21 PP xG.

F
53
F
52
Goaltending
▸Basis

CAR +1.06 goals saved above expected on 26 shots against.

CHI -0.62 goals saved above expected on 39 shots against.

B
86
D+
69
Discipline
▸Basis

CAR Took 2 penalties for 4 PIM vs 2 for 4 on the other side.

CHI Took 2 penalties for 4 PIM vs 2 for 4 on the other side.

C
75
C
75
Luck

Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

▸Basis

CAR Finishing +0.62 goals vs xG plus +1.06 GSAx of save luck = +1.68 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

CHI Finishing -1.06 goals vs xG plus -0.62 GSAx of save luck = -1.68 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

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

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 29 rush shots worth 3.15 xG (4 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

STRENGTHCAR

Dangerous off the rush

4 goals on 29 rush shots worth 3.15 xG.

WARNINGCAR

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 23 rush shots worth 2.12 xG (2 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

STRENGTHCHI

Dangerous off the rush

2 goals on 23 rush shots worth 2.12 xG.

STRENGTHCAR

Clinical in the slot

3 goals on 6 high-danger shots (50% conversion on 1.19 xG).

WARNINGCHI

S. Knight was beaten from the slot

S. Knight stopped only 50% of 6 high-danger shots (3 goals against from the inner slot).

93 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
CAR
56 shots
5
Final
93 shots
CHI
37 shots
2
CAR attackCHI attack
CAR CHI Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — CAR left, CHI 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
M. Reilly
#6 · D · CAR
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 16:19 on ice · +2
J. Blake
#53 · R · CAR
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 15:54 on ice · +2
J. Martinook
#48 · L · CAR
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 12:52 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page