Motion-blurred skater in a Ottawa Senators sweater

Breakdown · SEA at OTT

Senators steal one from the Kraken against the run of play

Final / OTThu, Oct 16

The verdict · stolen

The Senators stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.65–2.65 and won anyway.

SEA 3 · OTT 4

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:03 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

The Senators won 4-3 in a shootout despite being battered in expected goals, 2.65 to 4.65—a 36–64 split that made them heavily the underdog. This was a heist.

The Kraken controlled 64% of expected goals at 5v5, a margin so decisive that it usually predicts the scoreboard. The Senators held 41% of shot attempts (23–33) and absorbed sustained pressure. Yet they converted their chances while Seattle couldn't, a variance that defines a steal.

L. Ullmark (OTT) stole this one. He stopped 1.65 goals above expected on 30 of 33 shots (0.909 SV%), including a perfect record on high-danger chances: 6 for 6. P. Grubauer (SEA) couldn't match him despite a solid 0.870 SV% on 20 of 23 shots—he faced the higher quality looks (0.069 xG per shot vs 0.038) and still surrendered the deciding moment.

The Kraken squandered 1.65 goals' worth of xG, generating six high-danger chances but scoring just twice. The Senators' power play was lethal: 2 goals on 11 shots despite just 0.43 xG. Off the rush, Ottawa scored 2 goals on 26 chances—a separate edge that compounded Seattle's misery.

Shane Pinto's snap shot from the slot ended it in the shootout.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · SO · Oct 16

SEA

OTT

Senators steal one from the Kraken against the run of play

Chances 4.7 – 2.6Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Kraken deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

SEA

4.65

OTT

2.65

64% of the chances36%

The board read SEA 3, OTT 4. The chances read SEA 4.7, OTT 2.6.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations

Luck check

OTT

+1.4

goals above expected

OTT2.65 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

SEA4.65 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

The Kraken left 1.6 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season

Every goal, in order

P1 04:57SEAS. Wright1–0
P1 07:42OTTS. Pinto1–1
P1 09:35OTTD. PerronPP1–2
P2 04:40SEAC. Stephenson2–2
P3 02:15SEAC. StephensonPP3–2
P3 18:14OTTD. CozensPP3–3
SO 00:00OTTT. StützlePP3–3

+1 more on the full breakdown

NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model

Where the shots came from

SEA

50 shots

Final

99 shots

OTT

49 shots

SEA OTT GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

shots · 3 in

shots · 5 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

SEAOTT

0 / 6

1.33 xG

High danger

0 / 2

0.51 xG

2 / 24

2.74 xG

Medium

2 / 14

1.35 xG

1 / 37

0.58 xG

Low

1 / 54

0.79 xG

The Kraken went 0 for 6 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance

In the net

L. Ullmark

+1.6

OTT · 30/33

P. Grubauer

−0.3

SEA · 20/23

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Senators steal one from the Kraken against the run of play

A model, not a newsroom. Every number on these frames comes from the NHL's play-by-play and our own models. Nothing was watched, guessed or heard from anyone.

Read the full breakdown

backcheckreport.com

01 / 08 · Final

Every goal, in order

How it happened

NHL play-by-play

1stshots 8–8

04:57SEAS. Wright(B. Montour, M. Marchment)1–0
07:42OTTS. Pinto(L. Eller, C. Giroux)1–1
09:35OTTD. Perronpower play(C. Giroux, T. Chabot)1–2

2ndshots 11–8

04:40SEAC. Stephenson(J. Schwartz)2–2

3rdshots 9–6

02:15SEAC. Stephensonpower play(J. Eberle, B. Montour)3–2
18:14OTTD. Cozenspower play(D. Batherson, J. Spence)3–3

OTshots 5–1no goals

00:00OTTT. Stützlepower play3–3
00:00OTTS. Pintopower play3–3

score reads SEA–OTT

Source · NHL play-by-play (api-web.nhle.com)

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

2.65

OTT chances

Goals their shots were worth

+1.4

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

0.998

OTT puck luck

About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces

51.1%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.65Expected goals2.65

SEA 64% of the chance quality

33Shots on goal23

6High-danger chances2

67All attempts (Corsi)70

Adjusted for score: SEA 48% · OTT 52%

Faceoffs · OTT won50%off35%neu82%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

SEA0 / 6 · 1.33 xG

OTT0 / 2 · 0.51 xG

Medium dangermid-range

SEA2 / 24 · 2.74 xG

OTT2 / 14 · 1.35 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

SEA1 / 37 · 0.58 xG

OTT1 / 54 · 0.79 xG

SEA went 0-for-6 from high danger on 1.33 expected goals — 1.3 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

SEA

3 G · 4.65 xG · -1.6

OTT

4 G · 2.65 xG · +1.4

012345

SEA finished -1.6 against expected, OTT +1.4.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

SEA

WRIST2/21

SNAP0/8

SLAP0/7

BACKHAND1/6

TIP IN0/6

DEFLECTED0/0

OTHER0/19

OTT

WRIST1/22

SNAP2/13

SLAP0/7

BACKHAND0/2

TIP IN0/1

DEFLECTED0/1

OTHER0/24

SEA

OTT

Off the rush

1 G on 33

3.23 xG

2 G on 26

1.93 xG

Off rebounds

2 G on 5

0.69 xG

0 G on 1

0.10 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: SEA went 2-for-21, OTT 1-for-22. OTT scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types

New to these numbers?

Two things happened in this game: who created the better chances, and who put the puck in the net. They are not the same thing, and this page separates them on purpose.

The one to watch is expected goals— the best single read on who deserved to win. When it disagrees with the scoreboard, that disagreement is usually the story. Nothing here is a projection; every figure is computed from this game's play-by-play. Full glossary →

xG: Expected goals. Every shot scored by how often that exact look goes in. 2.5 xG means the chances were worth about two and a half goals.
HD: High-danger chances — shots from the slot and the crease, where shots actually become goals.
Corsi: Every shot attempt, including the ones that missed or got blocked. A rough read on who had the puck.
Adj.: Score-adjusted. Teams that trail shoot more and teams that lead sit back, so this corrects the attempt count for the scoreboard.
GSAx: Goals saved above expected. A positive number means the goalie stopped more than an average goalie would have on those shots.
PDO: Shooting % plus save % — a luck gauge. It sits near 1.000 over a season, so a game far from it usually means the bounces decided it.

Shot by shot

In the net

Graded on goals saved above expected

P. Grubauer

SEA · 20/23 · .870

-0.3

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/20.5+0.5

Medium2/141.4-0.7

Low1/540.8-0.2

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

L. Ullmark

OTT · 30/33 · .909

+1.6

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/61.3+1.3

Medium2/242.7+0.7

Low1/370.6-0.4

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

99 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

SEA

50 shots

Final

99 shots

OTT

49 shots

SEA OTT GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

Each club shoots toward its own end — SEA left, OTT right — the way you would watch it. A dot's size is how dangerous the look was, from distance and angle; it is a proxy for shot quality, not the xG model the article is written from. Hover a dot for the shooter and the clock.

Ranked from the box score

Three stars

Points first

Three stars · computed, not voted

B. Montour

#62 · D · SEA

0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 23:24 on ice · +1

C. Stephenson

#9 · C · SEA

2 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 21:34 on ice

C. Giroux

#28 · R · OTT

0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 16:14 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Thu, Oct 16

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelSep 22, 3:31 AMEdited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

The model projects Ottawa to win with 61% probability, forecasting a 2.8-3.5 game in the Senators' favor. The projection reflects control: Ottawa generates expected goals at 54.8%, Seattle at 45.7%. The Corsi split (52.6% Ottawa, 46.0% Seattle) confirms the Senators dictate tempo and territory.

That advantage crystallizes around individual players. Brady Tkachuk drives Ottawa's attack at 1.19 xG/60, banking 11 goals and 20 assists with 2 high-danger goals. Shane Wright anchors Seattle's offense at 0.77 xG/60 on 8 goals and 10 assists, shooting 10.4%. Dylan Cozens provides the Senators secondary scoring at 1.00 xG/60 on 13 goals and 15 assists. Berkly Catton generates chances for Seattle at 0.68 xG/60 with 6 goals and 8 assists but hasn't yet clicked at the rate his shot profile suggests.

The model sees what the stats show: a team in control facing one that struggles to dictate play.

Players to Watch

Brady Tkachuk (OTT) — 1.19 xG/60, 11G 20A, 2 HD goals, 7.5% shooting
Shane Wright (SEA) — 0.77 xG/60, 8G 10A, 4 HD goals, 10.4% shooting
Dylan Cozens (OTT) — 1.00 xG/60, 13G 15A, 1 HD goal, 9.5% shooting
Berkly Catton (SEA) — 0.68 xG/60, 6G 8A, 5 HD goals, 8.8% shooting

Data: NHL API, Backcheck xG model

Season rates in this preview are from 2025-26 — this season's sample isn't live yet.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

OTT 61%

61%

OTT

Model favorite

39%

61%

SEA50OTT

OTT by 22 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score SEA 2.8–3.5 OTT; 16% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates

Season rates · 5v5

Tale of the tape

NHL stats API · our xG

SEA← edge

edge →OTT

45.7%54.8%

46.0%52.6%

2.783.34

3.292.75

2.733.35

3.132.99

1.0110.993

OTT holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.011 vs 0.993) says SEA has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · No games yet

SEA

0-0-0

+0 GD · 0d rest

OTT

0-0-0

+0 GD · 0d rest

1.011

SEA PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.993

OTT PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

TACTICALOTT

Shutdown Assignment: Senators

Key matchup: Neutralize Shane Wright (8G, 0.77 xG/60, 4 HD goals)

TACTICALSEA

Shutdown Assignment: Kraken

Key matchup: Neutralize Brady Tkachuk (11G, 1.19 xG/60, 2 HD goals)

STRENGTHOTT

Brady Tkachuk drives the Senators offense

Brady Tkachuk: 11G 20A, 1.19 xG/60, 2 high-danger goals.

WARNINGSEA

Exploitable minutes: Chandler Stephenson

Chandler Stephenson is on ice for 3.05 xGA/60 and 52 high-danger shots against this season.

Hunt matchups against Chandler Stephenson's shifts with the top line.

Where the edges live

The Senators own the underlying play — 54.8% 5v5 xG vs 45.7%.
The Senators drive Corsi at 52.6% — expect territorial tilt.

Things to watch

The Senators own the underlying play — 54.8% 5v5 xG vs 45.7%.
The Senators drive Corsi at 52.6% — expect territorial tilt.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG

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

OTT

Brady Tkachuk11G 20A

1.19 xG/60 · 2 HD · 7.5% sh

Dylan Cozens13G 15A

1.00 xG/60 · 1 HD · 9.5% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page