Backcheck
Recap · ANA at DET

Red Wings pull away from the Ducks

The Red Wings won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

By the ModelJul 11, 4:11 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
ANA
Anaheim Ducks
3
Home
DET
Detroit Red Wings
6
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.95Expected goals4.13
51% share for the better side
28Shot attempts (SOG)33
7High-danger chances6
65Corsi (all attempts)58
Score-adjusted: 55% / 45%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Detroit's 6–3 win conceals how close the underlying numbers suggest this game was. Anaheim generated more high-danger chances (7 to 6), and expected goals nearly split even (4.13 to 3.95), yet Detroit finished with 1.87 surplus goals—elite finishing or undeserved fortune.

The difference was in the crease. C. Talbot saved 0.55 goals above expected over 11 shots; J. Gibson posted 0.882 save percentage across 17 attempts. L. Dostal, meanwhile, let in 0.87 more goals than his chances predicted, the penalty for facing an efficient offense.

Detroit's efficiency was the story. The Red Wings scored twice from low-danger areas and converted 4 rush attempts from 29 chances. Anaheim managed only 3 goals from 33 rush tries despite that 7–6 high-danger edge.

A. DeBrincat (2G, 1A in 18:26) led the charge. M. Seider (1G, 1A in 25:03) and D. Larkin (1G, 1A in 20:04) provided depth. Detroit's finishing, not dominance, won the night.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
ANA1 / 7 · 1.74 xG
DET1 / 6 · 1.79 xG
Medium dangermid-range
ANA2 / 15 · 1.46 xG
DET3 / 15 · 1.66 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
ANA0 / 43 · 0.76 xG
DET2 / 37 · 0.68 xG

DET went 3-for-15 from medium danger on 1.66 expected goals — 1.3 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
ANA
3 G · 3.95 xG · -0.9
DET
6 G · 4.13 xG · +1.9
01234567
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
L. DostalANA
-0.9
J. GibsonDET
+0.4
C. TalbotDET
+0.6

ANA finished -0.9 against expected, DET +1.9 — L. Dostal (ANA) allowed 0.9 more goals than expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
ANA
SNAP1/12
WRIST1/20
TIP IN1/4
SLAP0/6
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/2
OTHER0/18
DET
SNAP2/22
WRIST2/13
TIP IN1/4
SLAP0/2
BACKHAND1/3
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/14
ANA
DET
Off the rush
3 G on 33 · 2.91 xG
4 G on 29 · 2.47 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 4 · 0.61 xG
0 G on 3 · 0.56 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: ANA went 1-for-12, DET 2-for-22. DET scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
A. DeBrincat
#93 · R · DET
2 G · 1 A · 6 SOG · 18:26 TOI · +1
M. Seider
#53 · D · DET
1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 25:03 TOI
D. Larkin
#71 · C · DET
1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 20:04 TOI · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • DET scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • DET was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 29 rush chances.
  • ANA was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 33 rush chances.
  • DET created 3 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • ANA created 4 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • DET outperformed their expected goals by 1.9 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.
  • J. Gibson (DET) saved 1.9 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • C. Talbot (DET) saved 3.0 goals above expected — stole the show.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · ANA at DET · 7:00 PM ET

Ducks at Red Wings: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 3:50 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

51%
ANA
Model favorite
51%
49%
ANA50DET

ANA by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score ANA 2.62.6 DET; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

ANA← edge
edge →DET
52.0%5v5 xG%49.0%
52.0%Corsi%49.0%
2.80xGF / 602.38
2.59xGA / 602.50
2.09Goals for / gm1.73
2.32Goals against / gm2.07
0.981PDO — luck, not skill0.985

ANA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.981 vs 0.985) says DET has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.6–2.6 final with Anaheim at 51% win probability. This is essentially a pick'em: the closest thing to a coin flip you'll find.

Anaheim owns the underlying play. The Ducks drive 52.0% xG and 52.0% Corsi against Detroit's 49.0% on both fronts. That territorial dominance means expect Anaheim to spend more time in the offensive zone, though control of play doesn't guarantee control of the scoreboard.

The Ducks' PDO sits at 0.981—running cold by the numbers, due for positive regression. Detroit's 0.985 sits closer to neutral. Over their next handful of games, Anaheim should see their unsustainable variance normalize upward. Tonight could be the start.

Detroit counters with a rest edge. The Red Wings arrive on four days of recovery; the Ducks on zero. In a game this tight, that gap compounds in the third period and on special teams.

The offensive battle hinges on Anaheim's dual threats. Cutter Gauthier leads with 25 goals, 16 assists, and 12.9% shooting at 0.99 xG per 60. Beckett Sennecke runs close behind: 20 goals, 19 assists, 1.03 xG per 60, though his 13.5% efficiency suggests he's benefited from variance luck. Detroit's Alex DeBrincat counters with 17 goals and 28 assists at 0.88 xG per 60 and 9.0% shooting—lower volume, more reliable finishing. Marco Kasper fills a secondary role: 7 goals, 8 assists, 0.81 xG per 60.

On defense, Mason McTavish stands out as Anaheim's weak link, while Axel Sandin-Pellikka does the same for Detroit. Watch whether either team exploits these gaps late when the margin tightens.

The only clean edge here is possession. Everything else cuts both ways or favors Anaheim only marginally. This is what 51% looks like: not quite either team's game to lose.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

ANA
Beckett Sennecke20G 19A
1.03 xG/60 · 8 HD · 13.5% sh
Cutter Gauthier25G 16A
0.99 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.9% 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