Motion-blurred skater in a Buffalo Sabres sweater
Breakdown · BUF at MIN

Sabres edge the Wild in a shootout

The verdict · earned

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

BUF 3 · MIN 2
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 6:22 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

Buffalo's shot selection nearly proved their undoing. The Sabres controlled 60% of expected goals (3.81–2.57) and out-attempted Minnesota 33–24, yet went scoreless on all six high-danger chances—an inefficiency that would bury most teams.

F. Gustavsson was the difference. Buffalo's underlying dominance should have produced a blowout, but Minnesota's goaltender stopped 1.81 more goals than expected, his 0.939 save percentage keeping the Wild viable when they had no right to be.

Minnesota's offense arrived from improbable places. Both goals came from low-danger territory—the kind of play where a goaltender is expected to deliver. The Wild also capitalized on transition: two goals on 27 rush chances, a conversion rate that won't repeat, but it did on this night.

C. Ellis, Buffalo's goaltender, was competent (0.917 SV%, +0.57 vs expected), handling Minnesota's limited volume without drama. But Ellis was never asked to be spectacular.

The Sabres underperformed their xG by 0.81 goals in regulation, wasting quality chances that should have closed this out. Instead, the game went to a shootout, where Noah Ostlund's wrist shot from the doorstep ended it.

Buffalo's underlying dominance ultimately held, even if the path was messier than their numbers suggested.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · SO · Nov 29
BUF
3
MIN
2

Sabres edge the Wild in a shootout

Chances 3.8 – 2.6Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Sabres earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
BUF
3.81
MIN
2.57
60% of the chances40%

The board read BUF 3, MIN 2. The chances read BUF 3.8, MIN 2.6.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
BUF
−0.8
goals above expected
BUF3.81 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
MIN2.57 expected · 2 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
  1. P1 09:37MINK. Kaprizov0–1
  2. P1 12:42BUFB. Malenstyn1–1
  3. P1 14:05MINM. Boldy1–2
  4. P3 06:01BUFJ. Doan2–2
  5. SO 00:00BUFT. ThompsonPP2–2
  6. SO 00:00MINM. BoldyPP2–2
  7. SO 00:00BUFJ. QuinnPP2–2
+2 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
BUF
49 shots
5
Final
89 shots
MIN
40 shots
4
BUF attackMIN attack
BUF MIN Goal

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

49
shots · 5 in
40
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
BUFMIN
0 / 6
1.68 xG
High danger
0 / 3
0.77 xG
1 / 15
1.69 xG
Medium
0 / 14
1.28 xG
1 / 38
0.44 xG
Low
2 / 29
0.53 xG

The Wild went 0 for 3 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
F. Gustavsson
+1.8
MIN · 31/33
B
C. Ellis
+0.6
BUF · 22/24
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Sabres edge the Wild in a shootout

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 11–11
  1. 09:37MINK. Kaprizov(M. Zuccarello, D. Yurov)0–1
  2. 12:42BUFB. Malenstyn(P. Krebs, J. Dunne)1–1
  3. 14:05MINM. Boldy1–2
2ndshots 12–8no goals
    3rdshots 8–3
    1. 06:01BUFJ. Doan(A. Tuch, N. Ostlund)2–2
    OTshots 2–2no goals
      SO
      1. 00:00BUFT. Thompsonpower play2–2
      2. 00:00MINM. Boldypower play2–2
      3. 00:00BUFJ. Quinnpower play2–2
      4. 00:00MINK. Kaprizovpower play2–2
      5. 00:00BUFN. Ostlundpower play2–2

      score reads BUF–MIN

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

      The numbers

      XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
      3.81
      BUF chances
      Goals their shots were worth
      −0.8
      Finishing
      Goals below what those chances were worth
      0.990
      BUF puck luck
      About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
      56.2%
      Shot attempts
      Over half — they had the puck more
      Split by club

      Who controlled the game

      3.81Expected goals2.57
      BUF 60% of the chance quality
      33Shots on goal24
      6High-danger chances3
      59All attempts (Corsi)46
      Adjusted for score: BUF 59% · MIN 41%
      Faceoffs · MIN won41%off56%neu64%def
      Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
      How the game was won

      The danger ladder

      shotsgoalsexpected
      High dangerslot & crease
      BUF0 / 6 · 1.68 xG
      MIN0 / 3 · 0.77 xG
      Medium dangermid-range
      BUF1 / 15 · 1.69 xG
      MIN0 / 14 · 1.28 xG
      Low dangerperimeter & point
      BUF1 / 38 · 0.44 xG
      MIN2 / 29 · 0.53 xG

      BUF went 0-for-6 from high danger on 1.68 expected goals — 1.7 left on the table.

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

      Finishing vs expected

      expectedactual
      BUF
      3 G · 3.81 xG · -0.8
      MIN
      2 G · 2.57 xG · -0.6
      012345

      BUF finished -0.8 against expected, MIN -0.6.

      Source · Backcheck xG model
      Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +
      What they shot — and what went in

      Shot diet

      goalsshots
      BUF
      WRIST1/28
      SNAP0/5
      TIP IN0/7
      BACKHAND0/2
      WRAP AROUND0/1
      DEFLECTED1/2
      SLAP0/0
      OTHER0/14
      MIN
      WRIST1/24
      SNAP1/4
      TIP IN0/1
      BACKHAND0/4
      WRAP AROUND0/2
      DEFLECTED0/0
      SLAP0/1
      OTHER0/10
      BUF
      MIN
      Off the rush
      1 G on 31
      3.24 xG
      2 G on 27
      2.21 xG
      Off rebounds
      1 G on 2
      0.43 xG
      0 G on 0
      0.00 xG

      Wrist shots carried the volume: BUF went 1-for-28, MIN 1-for-24. MIN 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
      C. Ellis
      BUF · 22/24 · .917
      +0.6
      saved above expected
      B
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger0/30.8+0.8
      Medium0/141.3+1.3
      Low2/290.5-1.5

      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

      F. Gustavsson
      MIN · 31/33 · .939
      +1.8
      saved above expected
      A
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger0/61.7+1.7
      Medium1/151.7+0.7
      Low1/380.4-0.6

      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

      89 shots · press play to watch the game back

      Where the shots came from

      NHL play-by-play coordinates
      BUF
      49 shots
      5
      Final
      89 shots
      MIN
      40 shots
      4
      BUF attackMIN attack
      BUF MIN Goal

      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 — BUF left, MIN 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
      K. Kaprizov
      #97 · L · MIN
      1 G · 0 A · 6 SOG · 25:01 on ice · -1
      M. Boldy
      #12 · L · MIN
      1 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 21:52 on ice · +1
      M. Zuccarello
      #36 · R · MIN
      0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 18:49 on ice · -1
      Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
      What the model said beforehand

      Before the game

      Written Sat, Nov 29
      Open the pre-game read
      Written from the numbers

      The read

      Edited for clarity
      ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 6:31 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

      The projection is 2.5–2.7 goals with Minnesota at 54% to win—as close to even as the models get. Buffalo and Minnesota have wildly different recent form, but underlying metrics nearly cancel it out.

      The Wild surged to 9-0-1 in their last 10. The Sabres are underwater at minus-6 goal differential over the same span. Yet on five-on-five, the gap closes: Minnesota leads in expected goals percentage (52.0% to 50.0%), and both squads share nearly identical shot metrics. Buffalo's 1.020 PDO suggests they're running lucky; a correction is likely coming.

      Goaltending carries unusual leverage tonight. J. Wallstedt works a back-to-back for Minnesota; A. Lyon does the same for Buffalo. Either could see a backup start, or either starter could arrive gassed. That uncertainty is already built into the projection.

      Buffalo's scoring load rides on Jason Zucker and Josh Doan. Zucker generates 1.07 expected goals per 60 with 14 goals and 14 assists, running hot at 15.1% shooting and collecting six high-danger chances. Doan matches his pace at 1.01 xG/60 with 15 goals and 18 assists, though only two came from high-danger opportunities; his 11.5% shooting cannot sustain. Minnesota counters with Matt Boldy, who leads this matchup at 0.89 xG/60 and has converted five of his 22 goals from high-danger areas. Robby Fabbri, who would provide secondary depth, is likely out.

      This game tests whether Buffalo's shooting luck persists or collapses, and whether Minnesota's form is real or just variance in a narrow window. The model treats it as a coin flip because it is one.

      What the model said beforehand

      The model's lean

      MIN 54%
      54%
      MIN
      Model favorite
      46%
      54%
      BUF50MIN

      MIN by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score BUF 2.5–2.7 MIN; 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
      BUF← edge
      edge →MIN
      50.0%52.0%
      49.0%48.0%
      2.552.55
      2.552.40
      2.352.04
      1.901.93
      1.0201.007

      The season numbers split 3–3 — no clear process edge — and the luck row (1.020 vs 1.007) says BUF has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

      Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
      Form · Last 10
      BUF
      4-6-0
      -6 GD · 1d rest
      MIN
      9-0-1
      +18 GD · 1d rest
      1.020
      BUF PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      1.007
      MIN PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      What decides it

      Keys to the game

      Regression watch
      • The Sabres' PDO is 1.020 — running hot, expect some regression.
      Things to watch
      • J. Wallstedt is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
      • A. Lyon is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
      • The Wild are the hotter team by points pace (9-0-1 in their last 10).
      • The Sabres are underwater at -6 goal differential over their last 10.
      • The Sabres' PDO is 1.020 — running hot, expect some regression.
      Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

      Lineups

      NHL box score
      BUF
      Expected in goal
      A. Lyon
      back-to-back.783 last start
      Backup Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen · +10.5 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.

      MIN
      Expected in goal
      J. Wallstedt
      back-to-back.951 last start
      Backup Filip Gustavsson · +1.4 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.

      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
      BUF
      Jason Zucker14G 14A
      1.07 xG/60 · 6 HD · 15.1% sh
      Josh Doan15G 18A
      1.01 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.5% sh
      MIN
      Matt Boldy22G 18A
      0.89 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh
      Robby Fabbri2G 3A
      0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.9% sh
      Keep going

      Where to next