Motion-blurred skater in a Washington Capitals sweater
Breakdown · TOR at WSH

Capitals shut out the Maple Leafs, 4-0

The verdict · earned

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

TOR 0 · WSH 4
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 8:54 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

Washington's 4–0 victory was starker than the underlying play deserved: Toronto generated 2.88 expected goals and scored zero. A 2.88-goal offensive drought is the night's harshest truth—quality chances, zero conversions.

The Capitals dominated across the underlying metrics. They controlled 59% of 5v5 expected goals (4.10–2.88), held 57% of shot attempts (29–22), and led 3–2 in high-danger chances.

Thompson stopped all 22 shots (1.000 SV%) and saved 2.88 above expected. Hildeby faced 29 Toronto shots, stopping 25 for a 0.862 SV%.

Washington's efficiency was surgical. On 33 rush chances, they scored twice. On rebounding, they created seven rebound opportunities and converted one; Toronto created four and converted zero. Both teams crashed the net. Only one team finished.

John Carlson's slap shot from the wing (third period, 08:57) was the turning point—though Washington's dominance had already decided it.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Dec 18
TOR
0
WSH
4

Capitals shut out the Maple Leafs, 4-0

Chances 2.9 – 4.1Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Capitals earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
TOR
2.88
WSH
4.10
41% of the chances59%

The board read TOR 0, WSH 4. The chances read TOR 2.9, WSH 4.1.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
WSH
−0.1
goals above expected
WSH4.10 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
TOR2.88 expected · 0 scored
Expected
Scored

The Maple Leafs left 2.9 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 13:53WSHA. Protas0–1
  2. P1 16:16WSHJ. Chychrun0–2
  3. P3 04:02WSHJ. Chychrun0–3
  4. P3 08:57WSHJ. Carlson0–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
TOR
34 shots
0
Final
86 shots
WSH
52 shots
4
TOR attackWSH attack
TOR WSH Goal
34
shots · 0 in
52
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
TORWSH
0 / 2
0.40 xG
High danger
0 / 3
0.65 xG
0 / 18
2.06 xG
Medium
3 / 25
2.79 xG
0 / 27
0.41 xG
Low
1 / 38
0.66 xG

High-danger looks: TOR 0 of 2, WSH 0 of 3.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
L. Thompson
+2.9
WSH · 22/22
C
D. Hildeby
+0.1
TOR · 25/29
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Capitals shut out the Maple Leafs, 4-0

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 4–8
  1. 13:53WSHA. Protas(J. Sourdif, J. Carlson)0–1
  2. 16:16WSHJ. Chychrun(E. Frank, C. McMichael)0–2
2ndshots 8–13no goals
    3rdshots 10–8
    1. 04:02WSHJ. Chychrun(J. Carlson, N. Dowd)0–3
    2. 08:57WSHJ. Carlson(J. Sourdif, T. Wilson)0–4

    score reads TOR–WSH

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    4.10
    WSH chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    −0.1
    Finishing
    Goals below what those chances were worth
    1.061
    WSH puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    58.4%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    2.88Expected goals4.10
    WSH 59% of the chance quality
    22Shots on goal29
    2High-danger chances3
    47All attempts (Corsi)66
    Adjusted for score: TOR 47% · WSH 53%
    Faceoffs · WSH won42%off53%neu43%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    TOR0 / 2 · 0.40 xG
    WSH0 / 3 · 0.65 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    TOR0 / 18 · 2.06 xG
    WSH3 / 25 · 2.79 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    TOR0 / 27 · 0.41 xG
    WSH1 / 38 · 0.66 xG

    TOR went 0-for-18 from medium danger on 2.06 expected goals — 2.1 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    TOR
    0 G · 2.88 xG · -2.9
    WSH
    4 G · 4.10 xG · -0.1
    012345

    TOR finished -2.9 against expected, WSH -0.1.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    TOR
    SNAP0/18
    SLAP0/6
    TIP IN0/3
    BACKHAND0/6
    WRIST0/0
    POKE0/1
    OTHER0/13
    WSH
    SNAP2/23
    SLAP1/12
    TIP IN0/6
    BACKHAND0/3
    WRIST1/8
    POKE0/0
    OTHER0/14
    TOR
    WSH
    Off the rush
    0 G on 21
    2.12 xG
    2 G on 33
    2.84 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 4
    0.44 xG
    1 G on 7
    0.75 xG

    Snap shots carried the volume: TOR went 0-for-18, WSH 2-for-23. WSH 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
    D. Hildeby
    TOR · 25/29 · .862
    +0.1
    saved above expected
    C
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/30.7+0.7
    Medium3/252.8-0.2
    Low1/380.7-0.3

    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

    L. Thompson
    WSH · 22/22 · 1.000
    +2.9
    saved above expected
    A+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/20.4+0.4
    Medium0/182.1+2.1
    Low0/270.4+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

    86 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    TOR
    34 shots
    0
    Final
    86 shots
    WSH
    52 shots
    4
    TOR attackWSH attack
    TOR WSH Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — TOR left, WSH 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
    J. Carlson
    #74 · D · WSH
    1 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 21:52 on ice · +3
    J. Chychrun
    #6 · D · WSH
    2 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 24:11 on ice · +2
    J. Sourdif
    #34 · C · WSH
    0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 14:04 on ice · +2
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Thu, Dec 18
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 8:52 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 model projects a TOR 2.4–2.8 WSH game with the Capitals at 56% win probability. Washington's edge lives in the underlying play: 50.0% 5v5 xG% against Toronto's 46.0%, reinforced by a 49.0% Corsi rate that signals territorial control and fewer chances against.

    Better chances and more of them should translate to wins. The risk is PDO regression. Washington's PDO sits at 1.018—well above neutral—while Toronto's 1.002 runs nearly even. When shooting percentage and save percentage regress to the mean, Washington's goal advantage compresses, shrinking the 56% projection with it.

    Goaltending adds uncertainty. Both C. Lindgren and J. Woll are on back-to-backs, meaning either will play tired or a backup starts. Either way, fatigue or a fresh net reshuffles both teams' ability to execute.

    The forwards tell a different story. Alex Ovechkin leads with 19 goals at 0.97 xG/60 and a 13.8% shooting percentage—a rate suggesting the volume will hold. Auston Matthews counters with 17 goals and 1.10 xG/60, generating the cleanest chances per minute of anyone on the ice. John Tavares adds 15 goals at 0.91 xG/60 with 12.4% shooting, secondary scoring that punishes over a full game. Anthony Beauvillier gives Washington a third threat at 0.89 xG/60 with 14 goals.

    The model leans Washington because the structure supports it—better play generation, better shot location, more dangerous finishers. PDO regression is the real caveat: if the Capitals' shooting normalizes, the gap closes. Until then, the underlying edge is there, and the 56% figure is earned.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    WSH 56%
    56%
    WSH
    Model favorite
    44%
    56%
    TOR50WSH

    WSH by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score TOR 2.4–2.8 WSH; 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
    TOR← edge
    edge →WSH
    46.0%50.0%
    45.0%49.0%
    2.242.62
    2.672.62
    2.092.18
    2.521.79
    1.0021.018

    WSH holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.002 vs 1.018) says WSH has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    TOR
    6-2-2
    +9 GD · 1d rest
    WSH
    6-2-2
    +5 GD · 1d rest
    1.002
    TOR PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    1.018
    WSH PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Where the edges live
    • The Capitals own the underlying play — 50.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.
    • The Capitals drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    Regression watch
    • The Capitals' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Things to watch
    • The Capitals own the underlying play — 50.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.
    • The Capitals drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    • C. Lindgren is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • J. Woll is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • The Capitals' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    TOR
    Expected in goal
    J. Woll
    back-to-back.920 last start
    Backup Joseph Woll · -6.6 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.

    WSH
    Expected in goal
    C. Lindgren
    back-to-back.844 last start
    Backup Logan Thompson · +29.3 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
    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
    WSH
    Alex Ovechkin19G 17A
    0.97 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.8% sh
    Anthony Beauvillier14G 9A
    0.89 xG/60 · 2 HD · 10.4% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next