Backcheck
Recap · PHI at BUF

Sabres hold off the Flyers

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

By the ModelJul 11, 8:56 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
PHI
Philadelphia Flyers
3
Home
BUF
Buffalo Sabres
5
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.22Expected goals4.32
57% share for the better side
27Shot attempts (SOG)28
3High-danger chances7
57Corsi (all attempts)54
Score-adjusted: 53% / 47%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Buffalo's 5–3 win masked a narrow territorial edge. The Sabres held just 51% of shot attempts (28–27), yet controlled the game where it mattered—at the net. They generated 4.32 expected goals to Philadelphia's 3.22, a 57–43 split, and high-danger chances favored them 7–3.

The difference was shot quality. Buffalo's offense created 0.080 expected goals per shot; Philadelphia generated 0.056. That efficiency advantage held up in the rush, where Buffalo scored five times on 29 chances while Philadelphia converted three of 25.

Neither team capitalized on rebounds. Buffalo created three rebound opportunities, Philadelphia six—both proved empty despite effective net-front tactics. A. Lyon saved 24 of 27 for Buffalo (0.889 SV%). S. Ersson made 23 stops for Philadelphia (0.852 SV%).

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
PHI0 / 3 · 0.61 xG
BUF2 / 7 · 2.33 xG
Medium dangermid-range
PHI2 / 18 · 2.03 xG
BUF2 / 14 · 1.39 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
PHI1 / 36 · 0.58 xG
BUF1 / 33 · 0.60 xG

BUF went 2-for-14 from medium danger on 1.39 expected goals — 0.6 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
PHI
3 G · 3.22 xG · -0.2
BUF
5 G · 4.32 xG · +0.7
0123456
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
S. ErssonPHI
+0.3
A. LyonBUF
+0.2

PHI finished -0.2 against expected, BUF +0.7 — S. Ersson (PHI) saved 0.3 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
PHI
WRIST2/21
SNAP1/9
TIP IN0/3
BACKHAND0/5
SLAP0/2
OTHER0/17
BUF
WRIST4/31
SNAP0/4
TIP IN1/5
BACKHAND0/1
SLAP0/2
OTHER0/11
PHI
BUF
Off the rush
3 G on 25 · 2.19 xG
5 G on 29 · 3.28 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 6 · 0.61 xG
0 G on 3 · 0.74 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: PHI went 2-for-21, BUF 4-for-31. BUF scored 5 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
M. Samuelsson
#23 · D · BUF
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 19:43 TOI · +1
Z. Benson
#6 · L · BUF
0 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 17:11 TOI · +1
B. Brink
#10 · R · PHI
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 14:38 TOI · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • BUF generated far more dangerous chances — 0.080 xG/shot vs 0.056. Quality over quantity.
  • BUF was lethal off the rush — 5 goals on 29 rush chances.
  • PHI was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 25 rush chances.
  • BUF created 3 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • PHI created 6 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · PHI at BUF · 7:30 PM ET

Flyers at Sabres: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 9:14 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

52%
BUF
Model favorite
48%
52%
PHI50BUF

BUF by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score PHI 2.42.5 BUF; 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 →BUF
51.0%5v5 xG%50.0%
48.0%Corsi%49.0%
2.26xGF / 602.55
2.20xGA / 602.55
1.96Goals for / gm2.35
1.82Goals against / gm1.90
1.008PDO — luck, not skill1.020

The season numbers split 33 — no clear process edge — and PDO (1.008 vs 1.020) says BUF has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects 2.4 goals for Philadelphia and 2.5 for Buffalo, assigning the Sabres 52% win probability — effectively a pick'em. This matchup lacks a clear favorite.

Buffalo's recent form looks ominous: -7 goal differential over their last 10 games. Yet their underlying metrics suggest the slump is temporary. At 5v5, they rank at 50.0% xG% and 49.0% Corsi%, nearly parallel to Philadelphia's 51.0% xG% and 48.0% Corsi%. The difference lies in Buffalo's 1.020 PDO, a sign they're converting at an unsustainable rate. That hot streak will cool, which makes the -7 skid less alarming.

Philadelphia starts with a rest advantage: one day since their last game, against Buffalo's three. That edge vanishes if D. Vladar starts on a back-to-back. Whether he plays tired or a backup takes over, the equation shifts.

Four forwards will determine the outcome. Owen Tippett leads Philadelphia's attack at 19 goals, generating 0.88 xG per 60 and shooting at 12.1%, a clip that suggests he's finishing chances above volume. Christian Dvorak (0.81 xG/60, 12 goals, 11.2% shooting) follows a similar profile: efficient but not high-volume. Buffalo counters with Jason Zucker, whose 1.07 xG per 60, 14 goals, and six high-danger conversions demand Philadelphia's full attention. Josh Doan offers secondary firepower at 1.01 xG per 60 and 15 goals, backed by 18 assists.

Both teams harbor a defensive vulnerability. Philadelphia's Dvorak and Buffalo's Jack Quinn are listed as weak links. Control of that chaos—converting turnovers into chances—determines the margin.

Buffalo's PDO is primed to regress. Philadelphia's fundamentals suggest parity. Add the Flyers' travel fatigue, and the matchup tilts toward home ice. Yet the model hedges its bet. This is as close as it gets.

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
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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters