Motion-blurred skater in a Toronto Maple Leafs sweater

Breakdown · CGY at TOR

Maple Leafs hold off the Flames

FinalTue, Oct 28

CGYCalgary Flames3 TORToronto Maple Leafs4

The verdict · coin flip

The Maple Leafs won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

CGY 3 · TOR 4

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 1:26 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 Maple Leafs won 4–3 despite Calgary's eight high-danger chances to their three—a significant gap in scoring-opportunity quality that complicated a near-even expected-goals result (4.08–4.01). The Leafs' puck control and elite goaltending made the difference.

Toronto held 56% of shot attempts (37–29 on goal), dominance that limited Calgary's access to prime scoring areas. A. Stolarz finished with a 0.897 save percentage, stopping 1.01 goals above expected, and converted the statistical tie into victory.

Both teams scored 3 on the rush, but the Leafs' puck possession meant they generated 30 such attempts to Calgary's 23. That volume, consistently cycled through, eventually found the net.

M. Knies led with 2 goals and an assist in 21:02. M. Domi added 2 in 12:25. R. Andersson recorded 1 assist in 25:48.

The turning point came at 17:56 of the third period: M. Domi's wrist shot from the high slot broke a tie. It crystallized what the shot distribution had promised—that Toronto's possession would translate to a lead Calgary couldn't erase.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Oct 28

CGY

TOR

Maple Leafs hold off the Flames

Chances 4.0 – 4.1Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Maple Leafs took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value

CGY

4.01

TOR

4.08

50% of the chances50%

The board read CGY 3, TOR 4. The chances read CGY 4.0, TOR 4.1.

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

Luck check

TOR

−0.1

goals above expected

TOR4.08 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

CGY4.01 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

Both sides finished close to what their chances were worth. This one was earned on the ice.

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

Every goal, in order

P1 04:33CGYM. Frost1–0
P2 03:13TORM. Domi1–1
P2 17:55CGYJ. Farabee2–1
P2 19:25TORM. Knies2–2
P3 03:45TORM. KniesPP2–3
P3 14:49CGYS. Honzek3–3
P3 17:56TORM. Domi3–4

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

Where the shots came from

CGY

39 shots

Final

90 shots

TOR

51 shots

CGY TOR GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 3 in

shots · 4 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

CGYTOR

1 / 8

1.86 xG

High danger

1 / 3

1.10 xG

2 / 16

1.81 xG

Medium

2 / 19

2.23 xG

0 / 31

0.35 xG

Low

1 / 40

0.75 xG

High-danger looks: CGY 1 of 8, TOR 1 of 3.

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

In the net

B+

A. Stolarz

+1.0

TOR · 26/29

D. Wolf

+0.1

CGY · 33/37

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Maple Leafs hold off the Flames

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 9–11

04:33CGYM. Frost(J. Huberdeau, N. Kadri)1–0

2ndshots 8–16

03:13TORM. Domi(S. Lorentz, M. Maccelli)1–1
17:55CGYJ. Farabee(J. Kirkland, R. Andersson)2–1
19:25TORM. Knies(W. Nylander)2–2

3rdshots 12–10

03:45TORM. Kniespower play2–3
14:49CGYS. Honzek(M. Backlund)3–3
17:56TORM. Domi(M. Knies, J. Tavares)3–4

score reads CGY–TOR

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

4.08

TOR chances

Goals their shots were worth

−0.1

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.010

TOR puck luck

About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces

53.0%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.01Expected goals4.08

TOR 50% of the chance quality

29Shots on goal37

8High-danger chances3

55All attempts (Corsi)62

Adjusted for score: CGY 47% · TOR 54%

Faceoffs · TOR won72%off36%neu40%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

CGY1 / 8 · 1.86 xG

TOR1 / 3 · 1.10 xG

Medium dangermid-range

CGY2 / 16 · 1.81 xG

TOR2 / 19 · 2.23 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

CGY0 / 31 · 0.35 xG

TOR1 / 40 · 0.75 xG

CGY went 1-for-8 from high danger on 1.86 expected goals — 0.9 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

CGY

3 G · 4.01 xG · -1.0

TOR

4 G · 4.08 xG · -0.1

012345

CGY finished -1.0 against expected, TOR -0.1.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

CGY

WRIST3/22

BACKHAND0/4

TIP IN0/4

SLAP0/5

SNAP0/3

BETWEEN LEGS0/1

DEFLECTED0/0

WRAP AROUND0/0

OTHER0/16

TOR

WRIST4/34

BACKHAND0/5

TIP IN0/4

SLAP0/3

SNAP0/3

BETWEEN LEGS0/0

DEFLECTED0/1

WRAP AROUND0/1

OTHER0/11

CGY

TOR

Off the rush

3 G on 23

2.50 xG

3 G on 30

2.48 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 6

1.08 xG

1 G on 5

0.59 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: CGY went 3-for-22, TOR 4-for-34. CGY scored 3 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

D. Wolf

CGY · 33/37 · .892

+0.1

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/31.1+0.1

Medium2/192.2+0.2

Low1/400.8-0.3

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

A. Stolarz

TOR · 26/29 · .897

+1.0

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/81.9+0.9

Medium2/161.8-0.2

Low0/310.3+0.3

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

90 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

CGY

39 shots

Final

90 shots

TOR

51 shots

CGY TOR GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — CGY left, TOR 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

M. Knies

#23 · L · TOR

2 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 21:02 on ice · +2

M. Domi

#11 · C · TOR

2 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 12:25 on ice

R. Andersson

#4 · D · CGY

0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 25:48 on ice

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Oct 28

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 1:24 PMEdited 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

This is essentially a coin flip. The model projects a 2.5-2.6 goal game with Toronto at 51% win probability — the thinnest of edges.

The Maple Leafs look fresher. They've posted a 4-4-2 record in their last 10, outpacing Calgary's -14 goal differential over the same stretch.

The underlying numbers close the gap. Calgary's 49.0% Corsi rate indicates territorial superiority — they should spend significant time in Toronto's end. The Maple Leafs trail at 46.0%, but their expected goals sit nearly level: 46.0% to Calgary's 47.0%, which suggests the Flames' advantage doesn't translate to clear shot quality. Calgary's real vulnerability is their 0.985 PDO. That rate means they're converting below league average and catching fewer favorable bounces than normal — a recipe for positive regression.

Rest tilts toward Toronto. The Maple Leafs enter on three days' rest; Calgary on one. With D. Wolf on a back-to-back, watch for either a backup appearance or a starter who might fade.

Blake Coleman drives Calgary's offense: 0.89 expected goals per 60 minutes, 16 goals, 12 assists, 2 high-danger goals, 11.4% shooting. Matt Coronato pairs alongside him at 0.80 xG/60, 10 goals, 16 assists, and 6.6% conversion. Both are producing below their underlying volume, again suggesting regression is coming.

Toronto counters with Auston Matthews at 1.10 xG/60, 17 goals, 13 assists, and 1 high-danger goal. John Tavares follows at 0.91 xG/60, 15 goals, 24 assists, capitalizing on high-danger chances at 12.4% — an efficiency rate that tends to stick around.

Both teams sit at 0% conversion on high-danger situations and 0% on rebounds, suggesting neither has developed secondary scoring yet. The defensive distinction: Matt Coronato represents Calgary's back-check vulnerability, while Bo Groulx is Toronto's.

The model and underlying numbers align. This is close, a true coin flip, with no clear leverage unless you believe Calgary's PDO regression narrative paired with their Corsi dominance.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

TOR 51%

51%

TOR

Model favorite

49%

51%

CGY50TOR

TOR by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score CGY 2.5–2.6 TOR; 18% 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

CGY← edge

edge →TOR

47.0%46.0%

49.0%45.0%

2.362.24

2.662.67

1.762.09

2.152.52

0.9851.002

CGY holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.985 vs 1.002) says TOR has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

CGY

2-7-1

-14 GD · 1d rest

TOR

4-4-2

-3 GD · 3d rest

0.985

CGY PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.002

TOR PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Flames drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.

Regression watch

The Flames' PDO is 0.985 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Things to watch

The Flames drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.
D. Wolf is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Maple Leafs are the hotter team by points pace (4-4-2 in their last 10).
The Flames are underwater at -14 goal differential over their last 10.
The Flames' PDO is 0.985 — running cold, due for positive regression.
The Maple Leafs have 2 more days of rest.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

CGY

Expected in goal

D. Wolf

back-to-back.968 last start

Backup Dustin Wolf · -1.8 GSAx this season

Back-to-back: the backup often gets this one. Treat the starter as unconfirmed.

No completed game on file for this club yet.

TOR

Expected in goal

C. Primeau

3 days rest.885 last start

Backup Joseph Woll · -6.6 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

Lineups are the players who dressed in each club's last game, with their minutes; clubs confirm tonight's at warm-up. Every player this preview names was in that lineup.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG

CGY

Blake Coleman16G 12A

0.89 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.4% sh

Matt Coronato10G 16A

0.80 xG/60 · 0 HD · 6.6% sh

TOR

Auston Matthews17G 13A

1.10 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.6% sh

John Tavares15G 24A

0.91 xG/60 · 3 HD · 12.4% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page