Backcheck
Recap · PHI at STL

Flyers edge the Blues in a shootout

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

By the ModelJul 11, 4:00 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
PHI
Philadelphia Flyers
6
Home
STL
St. Louis Blues
5
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.25Expected goals2.45
57% share for the better side
31Shot attempts (SOG)17
6High-danger chances3
52Corsi (all attempts)47
Score-adjusted: 56% / 44%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

The Flyers' 6-5 shootout victory masks their superiority in the danger zone—they generated six high-danger chances to St. Louis's three, a 2-to-1 edge that rarely resolves by a single goal. Both teams caught breaks: the Blues overperformed their expected goals by 2.55 and the Flyers by 2.75, with variance pulling both ways.

The shot profile reinforced the imbalance. Philadelphia out-attempted St. Louis 31–17 and controlled 57% of expected goals (3.25–2.45), a 14-percentage-point edge that typically forecasts a multi-goal margin. One shootout settled it.

Goaltending underperformed on both sides. S. Ersson stopped 12 of 17 shots (0.706 SV%), underperforming his expected performance by 2.55 goals. J. Binnington made 26 of 31 saves (0.839 SV%), underperforming by 1.75 goals. Trevor Zegras's backhander from the slot decided the game—a moment of freezeframe drama that transcended what the metrics predicted.

Three Stars

  • #74 O. Tippett (PHI) — 1G, 3A in 15:57
  • #46 T. Zegras (PHI) — 2G, 1A in 20:02
  • #22 C. Dvorak (PHI) — 2G, 1A in 16:14
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
PHI1 / 6 · 1.44 xG
STL0 / 3 · 0.82 xG
Medium dangermid-range
PHI3 / 12 · 1.36 xG
STL3 / 11 · 1.14 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
PHI1 / 34 · 0.45 xG
STL2 / 33 · 0.49 xG

STL went 3-for-11 from medium danger on 1.14 expected goals — 1.9 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
PHI
6 G · 3.25 xG · +2.8
STL
5 G · 2.45 xG · +2.5
01234567
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
S. ErssonPHI
-2.5
J. BinningtonSTL
-1.8

PHI finished +2.8 against expected, STL +2.5 — S. Ersson (PHI) allowed 2.5 more goals than expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
PHI
WRIST2/26
SNAP1/3
SLAP0/3
BACKHAND1/4
TIP IN1/3
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/12
STL
WRIST3/17
SNAP1/5
SLAP1/4
BACKHAND0/1
TIP IN0/2
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/18
PHI
STL
Off the rush
4 G on 23 · 2.07 xG
4 G on 21 · 1.87 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3 · 0.62 xG
0 G on 2 · 0.32 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: PHI went 2-for-26, STL 3-for-17. PHI scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
O. Tippett
#74 · R · PHI
1 G · 3 A · 4 SOG · 15:57 TOI · +4
T. Zegras
#46 · C · PHI
2 G · 1 A · 7 SOG · 20:02 TOI · +1
C. Dvorak
#22 · C · PHI
2 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 16:14 TOI · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • S. Ersson (PHI) gave up 2.5 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
  • STL scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • STL was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 21 rush chances.
  • PHI was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 23 rush chances.
  • PHI created 3 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • STL outperformed their expected goals by 2.5 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.
  • PHI outperformed their expected goals by 1.8 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · PHI at STL · 8:00 PM ET

Flyers at Blues: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 4:12 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

51%
STL
Model favorite
49%
51%
PHI50STL

STL by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score PHI 2.32.4 STL; 19% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

PHI← edge
edge →STL
51.0%5v5 xG%49.0%
48.0%Corsi%48.0%
2.26xGF / 602.34
2.20xGA / 602.40
1.96Goals for / gm2.00
1.82Goals against / gm2.12
1.008PDO — luck, not skill1.000

The season numbers split 33 — no clear process edge — and PDO (1.008 vs 1.000) says PHI has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.3–2.4 goal spread with the Blues at 51% win probability. This is as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

St. Louis arrives struggling. Over their last 10, they're minus-11 in goal differential—not insignificant for a single evening. But the 5v5 picture is tighter. Philadelphia's expected goals percentage is 51.0% to St. Louis's 49.0%, yet their Corsi% is locked at 48.0% for both teams. The only daylight: Philadelphia's PDO sits at 1.008 versus St. Louis's 1.000—marginal separation born of variance, not dominance.

D. Vladar enters on a back-to-back. A backup appearance or a spent starter could reshape a game this even.

Philadelphia leans on Owen Tippett, who generates 0.88 expected goals per 60 minutes while posting 19 goals and 18 assists. Two of those are high-danger chances; his 12.1% shooting rate is elite. Christian Dvorak trails marginally at 0.81 xG/60 but offsets with 12 goals, 21 assists, and three high-danger tallies at 11.2% shooting.

St. Louis counters with Jimmy Snuggerud at 0.86 xG/60, 15 goals, 22 assists, and two high-danger goals on 11.9% shooting. Dylan Holloway mirrors the profile: 0.82 xG/60, 13 goals, 24 assists, one high-danger goal, 10.8% shooting. Both wings are high-volume creators converting at top rates.

Underlying structure is present for both attacks. Whether it translates through goaltending uncertainty and St. Louis's recent funk is the test. At 51%, the model is genuinely split.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

PHI
Owen Tippett19G 18A
0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.1% sh
Christian Dvorak12G 21A
0.81 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.2% sh
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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters