Recap · SEA at ANA

Ducks hold off the Kraken

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

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 3:56 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity

Away

SEA

Seattle Kraken

Home

ANA

Anaheim Ducks

FINAL

Process vs result

The underlying story

3.97Expected goals4.46

53% share for the better side

28Shot attempts (SOG)31

8High-danger chances6

57Corsi (all attempts)73

Score-adjusted: 47% / 53%

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Expected goals suggested a tight contest, but Anaheim's 4-2 victory masked how thoroughly Seattle wasted its opportunities. The Kraken underperformed their xG by 1.97 goals while L. Dostal (0.929 SV%, +1.97 saved) stole the game.

The metrics were close (4.46 xG favoring Anaheim, 3.97 for Seattle, a 53-47 split). Yet the Kraken generated higher-danger chances: 8 to Anaheim's 6. P. Grubauer allowed 27 of 31, underperforming by the same 1.97-goal margin. Seattle crashed the net effectively (4 rebound opportunities) but converted none. The Ducks did the same (3 rebounds) but capitalized on low-danger spots — two of four goals came from chances opposing goalies shouldn't lose.

Anaheim's efficiency came off the rush: three goals on 34 chances. Tye Kartye's wrist shot from a sharp angle (P3, 17:29) captured the game's texture — marginal space, decisive moments. Dostal's save percentage transformed a coin-flip game into a convincing win.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

SEA1 / 8 · 2.01 xG

ANA1 / 6 · 1.73 xG

Medium dangermid-range

SEA1 / 12 · 1.20 xG

ANA1 / 20 · 2.15 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

SEA0 / 37 · 0.75 xG

ANA2 / 47 · 0.57 xG

ANA went 2-for-47 from low danger on 0.57 expected goals — 1.4 above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

SEA

2 G · 3.97 xG · -2.0

ANA

4 G · 4.46 xG · -0.5

012345

Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)

P. GrubauerSEA

+0.5

L. DostalANA

+2.0

SEA finished -2.0 against expected, ANA -0.5 — L. Dostal (ANA) saved 2.0 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

SEA

SNAP0/16

WRIST1/13

SLAP0/7

TIP IN1/6

BACKHAND0/1

DEFLECTED0/0

OTHER0/14

ANA

SNAP3/20

WRIST0/9

SLAP1/7

TIP IN0/6

BACKHAND0/5

DEFLECTED0/3

OTHER0/23

SEA

ANA

Off the rush

1 G on 30 · 2.78 xG

3 G on 34 · 2.96 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 4 · 0.72 xG

0 G on 3 · 0.31 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: SEA went 0-for-16, ANA 3-for-20. ANA scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types

Three stars · computed, not voted

J. LaCombe

#2 · D · ANA

0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 23:19 TOI · +1

J. Harkins

#24 · C · ANA

0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 11:11 TOI · +1

V. Dunn

#29 · D · SEA

0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 21:00 TOI · -1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model flagged

L. Dostal (ANA) stopped 2.0 goals above expected.
ANA scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
ANA was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 34 rush chances.
ANA created 3 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
SEA created 4 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
SEA underperformed xG by 2.0 — wasted quality chances.
L. Dostal (ANA) saved 2.0 goals above expected — stole the show.

Preview · SEA at ANA · 10:00 PM ET

The Ducks are the model's lean over the Kraken — with PDO regression in play

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 4:08 AMEdited for clarity

Win probability

The model's lean

57%

ANA

Model favorite

43%

57%

SEA50ANA

ANA by 14 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score SEA 2.4–2.8 ANA; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates

Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

SEA← edge

edge →ANA

46.0%5v5 xG%52.0%

45.0%Corsi%52.0%

2.13xGF / 602.80

2.51xGA / 602.59

1.87Goals for / gm2.09

1.95Goals against / gm2.32

1.011PDO — luck, not skill0.981

ANA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.011 vs 0.981) says SEA has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a SEA 2.4 - 2.8 ANA game with the Ducks at 57% win probability. Anaheim's edge rests on territorial control and efficiency, though regression cuts both ways.

The Ducks dominate at 5v5, posting 52.0% xG and 52.0% Corsi versus Seattle's 46.0% and 45.0%. That translates to more shot volume and better positioning. That structural advantage anchors the model's lean.

But Anaheim's PDO is 0.981, Seattle's 1.011. The Ducks run cold and are due to regress upward; the Kraken run hot and regress downward. That math favors Anaheim.

Form tilts the same way. Anaheim is 8-2-0 in their last 10. One wrinkle: L. Dostal faces a back-to-back, so expect a backup or tired starter.

Key Players

Shane Wright (0.77 xG/60, 8G 10A, 4 high-danger goals, 10.4% shooting) anchors Seattle. Berkly Catton (0.68 xG/60, 6G 8A, 5 high-danger goals, 8.8% shooting) is steady secondary scoring.

Beckett Sennecke (1.03 xG/60, 20G 19A, 8 high-danger goals, 13.5% shooting) is Anaheim's dual threat. Cutter Gauthier (0.99 xG/60, 25G 16A, 2 high-danger goals, 12.9% shooting) adds scoring depth with 25 goals.

Anaheim's structural edge aligns with favorable regression; Seattle's regression risk is a headwind.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

SEA

Shane Wright8G 10A

0.77 xG/60 · 4 HD · 10.4% sh

Berkly Catton6G 8A

0.68 xG/60 · 5 HD · 8.8% sh

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

Source · MoneyPuck skaters