Backcheck
Recap · NSH at VGK

Predators hold off the Golden Knights

The Predators stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.17–4.42 and won anyway.

By the ModelJul 11, 10:58 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
NSH
Nashville Predators
4
Home
VGK
Vegas Golden Knights
2
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.17Expected goals4.42
58% share for the better side
19Shot attempts (SOG)31
6High-danger chances6
48Corsi (all attempts)69
Score-adjusted: 37% / 63%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Vegas dominated the expected-goal battle, 4.42–3.17 (58% of the xG), and lost 4–2. That's the whole story.

The margin lay in goaltending. Vegas commanded 62% of shot attempts (31–19) and matched Nashville on high-danger chances (6–6). But J. Annunen saved 2.42 goals above expected while A. Schmid surrendered 0.83—a swing that erased Vegas's advantages.

Michael Bunting's tip-in at 11:52 of the second period was the inflection point. Nashville converted from low-danger areas and thrived on the rush (3 goals on 24 chances), a directness that Vegas couldn't match. Vegas created five rebound opportunities and converted zero.

The power play accelerated Nashville's lead: 2 goals on 11 shots with 0.80 xG. Vegas controlled the volume—possession, shot attempts, expected goals—but J. Annunen's 0.935 save percentage rendered it moot.

A. Schmid was flawless on high-danger attempts (6-for-6) but bled four goals from the perimeter. Vegas dominated on paper yet lost to the goaltender across the line.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NSH0 / 6 · 1.78 xG
VGK1 / 6 · 1.64 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NSH1 / 9 · 0.90 xG
VGK1 / 19 · 2.09 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NSH3 / 33 · 0.50 xG
VGK0 / 44 · 0.69 xG

NSH went 3-for-33 from low danger on 0.50 expected goals — 2.5 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NSH
4 G · 3.17 xG · +0.8
VGK
2 G · 4.42 xG · -2.4
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
J. AnnunenNSH
+2.4
A. SchmidVGK
-0.8

NSH finished +0.8 against expected, VGK -2.4 — J. Annunen (NSH) saved 2.4 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NSH
WRIST2/21
TIP IN1/6
SNAP1/5
BACKHAND0/1
SLAP0/1
BETWEEN LEGS0/1
OTHER0/13
VGK
WRIST0/32
TIP IN2/6
SNAP0/4
BACKHAND0/3
SLAP0/3
BETWEEN LEGS0/0
OTHER0/21
NSH
VGK
Off the rush
3 G on 24 · 1.80 xG
1 G on 27 · 2.54 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 2 · 0.45 xG
0 G on 5 · 0.77 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: NSH went 2-for-21, VGK 0-for-32. NSH scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
P. Dorofeyev
#16 · R · VGK
0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 18:36 TOI · +1
L. Evangelista
#77 · R · NSH
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 17:19 TOI · +1
N. Hanifin
#15 · D · VGK
0 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 29:59 TOI
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • NSH stole this one. VGK owned 58% of the xG and lost.
  • J. Annunen (NSH) stopped 2.4 goals above expected.
  • NSH couldn't convert — 0/6 on high-danger chances. That won't happen often.
  • NSH scored 3 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • NSH was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 24 rush chances.
  • VGK created 5 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • VGK underperformed xG by 2.4 — wasted quality chances.
  • J. Annunen (NSH) saved 2.4 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • A. Schmid was a wall on HD chances — 100% SV on 6 high-danger shots.
  • NSH power play was dominant — 2 PPG on 11 PP shots (0.80 xG).
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · NSH at VGK · 3:00 PM ET

The Golden Knights are the model's lean over the Predators — with PDO regression in play

By the ModelJul 11, 10:30 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

57%
VGK
Model favorite
43%
57%
NSH50VGK

VGK by 14 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NSH 2.32.7 VGK; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

NSH← edge
edge →VGK
49.0%5v5 xG%54.0%
50.0%Corsi%52.0%
2.48xGF / 602.52
2.58xGA / 602.11
1.84Goals for / gm2.12
2.21Goals against / gm2.10
0.992PDO — luck, not skill0.983

VGK holds 6 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.992 vs 0.983) says NSH has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

Vegas holds the structural advantage. The model projects a 2.3-2.7 Golden Knights victory with 57% win probability, anchored on 54.0% 5v5 xG versus Nashville's 49.0%. The 52.0% to 50.0% Corsi edge reinforces the picture: Vegas controls the play at consistent margins.

The complication is PDO. Vegas runs 0.983, sitting cold below Nashville's 0.992. That gap suggests positive regression is due—if underlying play stays stable but luck normalizes, the projected margin tightens considerably.

For Nashville, the dangerous pieces remain clear. Zachary L'Heureux carries 0.85 xG/60 with 4G at 16.0% shooting—a cluster of volatility that suggests upside. Filip Forsberg (0.80 xG/60, 23G 17A) drives elite volume at 13.6% shooting, materially below his expected rate. He's underperforming his chances in a major way.

Vegas counters with two undershooting elite-volume threats. Brandon Saad (0.91 xG/60, 3G 6A) sits at 4.1% shooting; Tomas Hertl (0.88 xG/60, 5G 17A) at 4.3%. Both are efficiency-bound waiting for positive regression—and both carry the volume to hit hard when it comes.

Nashville's defensive weak link is Jonathan Marchessault; Vegas exposes Rasmus Andersson. The Golden Knights project to control this, but PDO regression could tighten the finish.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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
VGK
Brandon Saad3G 6A
0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.1% sh
Tomas Hertl5G 17A
0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.3% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters