Backcheck
Recap · STL at NSH

Predators run the Blues off the ice on the underlying numbers

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

By the ModelJul 11, 8:01 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
STL
St. Louis Blues
2
Home
NSH
Nashville Predators
7
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

2.09Expected goals4.44
68% share for the better side
26Shot attempts (SOG)32
2High-danger chances6
48Corsi (all attempts)56
Score-adjusted: 53% / 47%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Nashville demolished St. Louis 7-2, yet J. Hofer (STL) saved 3.4 goals above expected in the losing effort—an anomaly amid the Predators' total control.

The dominance was comprehensive. Nashville held 68% of 5v5 expected goals (4.44–2.09) and generated 0.079 xG per shot to St. Louis's 0.043, finishing 6-2 in high-danger chances. S. Stamkos led with 4 goals in 16:42; L. Evangelista contributed 3 assists in 18:32. Michael Bunting's tip-in from the doorstep (P3, 07:36) was the turning point.

The Predators also dominated transition, converting 4 goals on 23 rush chances and creating 9 rebound opportunities (3 converted). St. Louis managed 2 rush goals on 24 chances.

Nashville overperformed their xG by 2.56 goals. J. Binnington (STL) went the opposite direction, giving up 2.53 more than expected on a 0.760 SV%. J. Saros (NSH) stopped 24 of 26 shots (0.923 SV%).

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
STL1 / 2 · 0.45 xG
NSH2 / 6 · 1.80 xG
Medium dangermid-range
STL1 / 11 · 1.12 xG
NSH5 / 19 · 2.15 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
STL0 / 35 · 0.52 xG
NSH0 / 31 · 0.50 xG

NSH went 5-for-19 from medium danger on 2.15 expected goals — 2.9 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
STL
2 G · 2.09 xG · -0.1
NSH
7 G · 4.44 xG · +2.6
012345678
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
J. HoferSTL
-0.0
J. BinningtonSTL
-2.5
J. SarosNSH
+0.1

STL finished -0.1 against expected, NSH +2.6 — J. Binnington (STL) allowed 2.5 more goals than expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
STL
WRIST1/20
SNAP1/6
SLAP0/3
BACKHAND0/2
TIP IN0/1
BAT0/0
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/16
NSH
WRIST4/20
SNAP0/4
SLAP0/7
BACKHAND1/6
TIP IN1/5
BAT1/1
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/12
STL
NSH
Off the rush
2 G on 24 · 1.96 xG
4 G on 23 · 2.60 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 0 · 0.00 xG
3 G on 9 · 1.28 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: STL went 1-for-20, NSH 4-for-20. NSH scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
S. Stamkos
#91 · C · NSH
4 G · 0 A · 9 SOG · 16:42 TOI · +4
L. Evangelista
#77 · R · NSH
0 G · 3 A · 3 SOG · 18:32 TOI · +2
P. Broberg
#6 · D · STL
0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 25:26 TOI
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • STL generated higher-quality looks than the shot total suggests.
  • J. Binnington (STL) gave up 2.5 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
  • NSH generated far more dangerous chances — 0.079 xG/shot vs 0.043. Quality over quantity.
  • NSH was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 23 rush chances.
  • STL was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 24 rush chances.
  • NSH created 9 rebound opportunities (3 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • NSH outperformed their expected goals by 2.6 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.
  • J. Hofer (STL) saved 3.4 goals above expected — stole the show.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · STL at NSH · 8:00 PM ET

Blues at Predators: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 7:59 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

52%
NSH
Model favorite
48%
52%
STL50NSH

NSH by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score STL 2.52.6 NSH; 18% 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 →NSH
49.0%5v5 xG%49.0%
48.0%Corsi%50.0%
2.34xGF / 602.48
2.40xGA / 602.58
2.00Goals for / gm1.84
2.12Goals against / gm2.21
1.000PDO — luck, not skill0.992

The season numbers split 33 — no clear process edge — and PDO (1.000 vs 0.992) says STL has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.5–2.6 goal game with Nashville at 52% win probability—about as close to even money as you'll find. Both teams are stumbling into this contest with identical structural weaknesses.

Over their last 10 games, St. Louis is -6 in goal differential and Nashville is -8. Both are treading water despite season-long underlying play that should sustain them. The two teams are dead-even at 49.0% expected goal share at 5v5, though Nashville edges out the Blues in possession (50.0% Corsi% to 48.0%). The difference: puck luck. Nashville's PDO sits at 0.992—they're running cold—while St. Louis is right at 1.000, meaning every team is converting at the rate its shot quality would predict.

The goaltending wrinkle matters. Both J. Saros and J. Hofer are on back-to-backs, so watch for either side to roll out a backup or lean on a tired starter.

St. Louis rides Jimmy Snuggerud, who produces at 0.86 expected goals per 60 minutes and has scored 15 times on 11.9% conversion, adding 22 assists and two high-danger goals. Dylan Holloway operates at 0.82 xG/60 with 13 goals on 10.8% shooting and 24 assists. Nashville counters with Filip Forsberg, who leads the Predators at 23 goals and 0.80 xG/60, supplemented by Zachary L'Heureux's 0.85 xG/60—though L'Heureux has only four goals and zero assists, suggesting he's overdue. L'Heureux has posted one high-danger goal on 16.0% conversion; Forsberg has four on 13.6%.

The defensive weak point for St. Louis: covering Snuggerud. Nashville's Achilles' heel: Jonathan Marchessault.

Close underlying talent, similar recent results, both searching for an edge. This is a genuine toss-up.

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
NSH
Zachary L'Heureux4G 0A
0.85 xG/60 · 1 HD · 16.0% sh
Filip Forsberg23G 17A
0.80 xG/60 · 4 HD · 13.6% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters