Backcheck
Recap · PHI at SJS

Flyers run the Sharks off the ice on the underlying numbers

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

By the ModelJul 12, 8:18 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
PHI
Philadelphia Flyers
4
Home
SJS
San Jose Sharks
1
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

6.06Expected goals2.89
68% share for the better side
28Shot attempts (SOG)25
13High-danger chances3
55Corsi (all attempts)57
Score-adjusted: 47% / 53%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Philadelphia's 4-1 victory understates the dominance they imposed. The Flyers' control emerges even starker in high-danger chances: 13 to 3, a margin that extends well beyond their 68-32 advantage in expected goals (6.06-2.89).

The Sharks held 47% of shot attempts yet managed just 19% of high-danger chances. When shot volume and quality diverge this sharply, the superior team's margin expands. San Jose generated low-quality looks despite accumulating decent volume.

A. Nedeljkovic held the line with exceptional performance. He saved 4.06 goals above expected on 24 of 26 stops. D. Vladar faced lighter work: 1.89 saves above expected on 24 of 25 shots. The Flyers' advantage stemmed from chance quality, not goaltending margin.

Flyers' superiority extended to every dimension. Their shot quality was sharp—0.110 xG per attempt versus San Jose's 0.051. Off the rush, they scored 2 goals on 25 chances, converting their pace advantage into scoring.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
PHI2 / 13 · 4.03 xG
SJS1 / 3 · 0.73 xG
Medium dangermid-range
PHI2 / 15 · 1.59 xG
SJS0 / 15 · 1.57 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
PHI0 / 27 · 0.44 xG
SJS0 / 39 · 0.60 xG

PHI went 2-for-13 from high danger on 4.03 expected goals — 2.0 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
PHI
4 G · 6.06 xG · -2.1
SJS
1 G · 2.89 xG · -1.9
01234567
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
D. VladarPHI
+1.9
A. NedeljkovicSJS
+4.1

PHI finished -2.1 against expected, SJS -1.9 — A. Nedeljkovic (SJS) saved 4.1 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
PHI
WRIST4/26
TIP IN0/11
SLAP0/2
BACKHAND0/2
SNAP0/2
OTHER0/12
SJS
WRIST1/21
TIP IN0/4
SLAP0/10
BACKHAND0/3
SNAP0/1
OTHER0/18
PHI
SJS
Off the rush
2 G on 25 · 2.73 xG
1 G on 31 · 2.59 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 5 · 1.20 xG
0 G on 1 · 0.01 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: PHI went 4-for-26, SJS 1-for-21. PHI scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
C. Dvorak
#22 · C · PHI
1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 25:32 TOI · +2
T. Sanheim
#6 · D · PHI
1 G · 0 A · 1 SOG · 28:57 TOI · +1
D. Orlov
#9 · D · SJS
1 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 24:52 TOI · -2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • SJS had the shot volume but the chances weren't dangerous.
  • D. Vladar (PHI) stopped 1.9 goals above expected.
  • Open game — 16 high-danger chances combined (SJS 3, PHI 13).
  • PHI had the higher quality looks — 0.110 xG/shot vs 0.051.
  • PHI was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 25 rush chances.
  • PHI created 5 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • SJS underperformed xG by 1.9 — wasted quality chances.
  • PHI underperformed xG by 2.1 — wasted quality chances.
  • D. Vladar (PHI) saved 1.9 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • A. Nedeljkovic (SJS) saved 4.1 goals above expected — stole the show.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · PHI at SJS · 4:00 PM ET

Flyers at Sharks: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 12, 8:14 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

51%
PHI
Model favorite
51%
49%
PHI50SJS

PHI by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score PHI 2.42.4 SJS; 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 →SJS
51.0%5v5 xG%48.0%
48.0%Corsi%47.0%
2.26xGF / 602.33
2.20xGA / 602.56
1.96Goals for / gm1.99
1.82Goals against / gm2.32
1.008PDO — luck, not skill0.998

PHI holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.008 vs 0.998) says PHI has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model spits out a 2.4–2.4 projection with Philadelphia at 51% win probability. That's a coin flip with a heavier metal on one side, barely.

Philadelphia arrives hot: 7-2-1 over their last ten games. San Jose arrives cold, sitting at minus-8 goal differential in that same stretch. But the underlying picture is the real story. The Flyers control play at 5v5 with 51.0% expected goals against 48.0%, a margin that's held across ten games. Corsi% shows a similar tilt: Flyers 48.0%, Sharks 47.0%. It's not overwhelming dominance, but it's directional.

Both starting goaltenders face a back-to-back. A. Nedeljkovic and S. Ersson are on the second leg of the set. Backup appearances or fatigue on either side becomes a variable in a game this tight.

Owen Tippett carries the Flyers' offensive load. He's generating 0.88 expected goals per 60 at 5v5, with 19 goals and 18 assists on the season, including 2 high-danger chances. His 12.1% shooting rate reads as efficient—he's not riding luck. Christian Dvorak (0.81 xG/60, 12 goals, 21 assists, 3 HD goals, 11.2% shooting) is a secondary creator, though his lower shooting rate suggests tighter margins on conversion.

San Jose counters with Pavol Regenda, who's generating 1.10 expected goals per 60 minutes—the highest rate among these four players. He has 5 goals and 1 assist with 2 high-danger chances, but his 16.1% shooting rate is likely to regress. Igor Chernyshov (0.91 xG/60, 6 goals, 8 assists, 1 HD goal, 15.0% shooting) rounds out the Sharks' attack, similarly running hot by shooting percentage.

On the luck front: Philadelphia's season PDO sits at 1.008, suggesting a touch of overperformance. San Jose's is 0.998, suggesting a touch of underperformance. But the Sharks' minus-8 goal differential is stickier—ten games of being outplayed, not variance. The Flyers have the momentum and the metrics. That's the edge.

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
SJS
Pavol Regenda5G 1A
1.10 xG/60 · 2 HD · 16.1% sh
Igor Chernyshov6G 8A
0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters