Backcheck
Recap · STL at DET

Red Wings hold off the Blues

The Red Wings stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.44–3.51 and won anyway.

By the ModelJul 11, 1:07 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
STL
St. Louis Blues
4
Home
DET
Detroit Red Wings
6
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

4.44Expected goals3.51
56% share for the better side
29Shot attempts (SOG)28
6High-danger chances5
64Corsi (all attempts)57
Score-adjusted: 49% / 51%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Detroit stole this one. The Red Wings' 6–4 victory masked a 4.44–3.51 expected-goals loss—the Blues held 56% at 5v5 yet finished with half the goals.

The Red Wings overperformed their expected goals by 2.49 runs. That margin reflects either elite finishing or St. Louis' inability to execute when it mattered.

J. Binnington bore the brunt. He stopped 22 of 27 shots but gave up 1.49 more goals than his workload suggested—a shortfall that defines the game. J. Gibson, by contrast, posted a 0.862 save percentage and was flawless on high-danger chances, stopping all six.

Detroit was surgical with their chances. They converted 2 of 5 high-danger attempts and scored twice from low-danger areas—finishes that required St. Louis to blink. The Blues managed 0 for 6 on high-danger chances. That conversion rate won't hold.

Simon Edvinsson's wrist shot from a sharp angle (P3, 18:47) epitomized Detroit's clinical edge.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
STL0 / 6 · 1.56 xG
DET2 / 5 · 1.60 xG
Medium dangermid-range
STL3 / 21 · 2.47 xG
DET2 / 13 · 1.59 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
STL1 / 37 · 0.42 xG
DET2 / 39 · 0.31 xG

DET went 2-for-39 from low danger on 0.31 expected goals — 1.7 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
STL
4 G · 4.44 xG · -0.4
DET
6 G · 3.51 xG · +2.5
01234567
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
J. BinningtonSTL
-1.5
J. GibsonDET
+0.4

STL finished -0.4 against expected, DET +2.5 — J. Binnington (STL) allowed 1.5 more goals than expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
STL
WRIST1/14
SNAP1/9
SLAP0/9
TIP IN2/5
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/4
OTHER0/20
DET
WRIST2/23
SNAP3/9
SLAP0/2
TIP IN1/1
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/19
STL
DET
Off the rush
4 G on 29 · 3.21 xG
4 G on 27 · 2.54 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 5 · 1.01 xG
0 G on 2 · 0.19 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: STL went 1-for-14, DET 2-for-23. STL scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
J. Faulk
#72 · D · STL
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 24:55 TOI
S. Edvinsson
#77 · D · DET
2 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 20:17 TOI · +1
J. Compher
#37 · L · DET
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 17:16 TOI · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • DET won despite being outplayed by xG (44%). Goaltending or finishing carried them.
  • J. Binnington (STL) gave up 1.5 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
  • DET was clinical in the high-danger zone — 2/5 on HD chances (40%).
  • STL couldn't convert — 0/6 on high-danger chances. That won't happen often.
  • DET scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • DET was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 27 rush chances.
  • STL was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 29 rush chances.
  • STL created 5 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • DET outperformed their expected goals by 2.5 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.
  • J. Gibson was a wall on HD chances — 100% SV on 6 high-danger shots.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · STL at DET · 7:00 PM ET

Blues at Red Wings: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 1:05 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

52%
DET
Model favorite
48%
52%
STL50DET

DET by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score STL 2.42.5 DET; 19% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

STL← edge
edge →DET
49.0%5v5 xG%49.0%
48.0%Corsi%49.0%
2.34xGF / 602.38
2.40xGA / 602.50
2.00Goals for / gm1.73
2.12Goals against / gm2.07
1.000PDO — luck, not skill0.985

DET holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.000 vs 0.985) says STL has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The Red Wings enter as marginal favorites, with Detroit projected to win 52% of simulations in what the model calls a 2.4–2.5 goal game. That's as close to a pick'em as evenly matched teams get.

Both teams occupy nearly identical territory at 5v5. St. Louis and Detroit carry identical xG% (49.0%), and their Corsi% separates by a single point—Detroit's 49.0% to St. Louis's 48.0%. Detroit's PDO sits at 0.985, suggesting minor regression from the average; St. Louis runs at 1.000, meaning goal luck has been exactly neutral. The convergence across every underlying metric explains the tightness.

St. Louis leans on Jimmy Snuggerud, who generates 0.86 expected goals per 60 minutes and has scored 15 goals with 22 assists while converting at 11.9%—a high-efficiency clip that suggests skill rather than variance. Dylan Holloway operates at a similar level: 0.82 xG/60, 13 goals, 24 assists, and a 10.8% shooting percentage. Both forwards are finishing at rates well above league average, which means St. Louis's offensive production may be sustainable rather than lucky.

Detroit counters with Alex DeBrincat, who leads the offensive charge at 0.88 xG/60 with 17 goals and 28 assists on a 9.0% shooting rate. Marco Kasper provides secondary depth at 0.81 xG/60, though his offensive output (7 goals, 8 assists) lags both his teammate and St. Louis's top forwards in both volume and efficiency.

Neither team has cashed in on high-danger opportunities at abnormal rates—both sit at 0% for high-danger goals and 0% for rebound goals—a sign that variance hasn't yet distorted either's record.

The one variable: J. Binnington faces the back end of a back-to-back. Detroit will confront either a fatigued starter or a backup, depending on St. Louis's call. Binnington on back-to-backs often shows wear in the second period. That slight edge barely tips what the model rightly calls a coin flip.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

STL
Jimmy Snuggerud15G 22A
0.86 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.9% sh
Dylan Holloway13G 24A
0.82 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.8% sh
DET
Alex DeBrincat17G 28A
0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.0% sh
Marco Kasper7G 8A
0.81 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.1% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters