Motion-blurred skater in a Pittsburgh Penguins sweater
Breakdown · MTL at PIT

Penguins edge the Canadiens in a shootout

The verdict · earned

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

MTL 3 · PIT 4
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 9:43 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 Penguins won 4-3 in a shootout, surviving Montreal's goaltending masterclass. J. Dobes stopped 28 of 31 shots with a 0.903 SV% and overperformed by 1.68 goals—he nearly stole a game Pittsburgh was built to dominate.

And dominate they did. Pittsburgh controlled 56% of expected goals (4.68–3.61), held 55% of shot attempts (31–25 on goal), and led 8-6 in high-danger chances. By every underlying metric, this should have been a regulation victory. Instead, Dobes kept Montreal alive, turning the contest into a shootout battle that could've gone either way.

Pittsburgh's relentlessness showed on the rush: 2 goals on 27 chances, a conversion rate that, while matched by Montreal's own 2 goals on 27 opportunities, came from a superior position. The Penguins crashed the net effectively, creating 6 rebound chances that somehow stayed out. A. Silovs, Pittsburgh's goaltender, stopped 22 of 25 shots (0.880 SV%, +0.61 vs expected), performing capably but not dramatically.

The irony: Pittsburgh underperformed their 4.68 expected goals by 1.7, meaning they wasted elite chances across regulation. Montreal, conversely, got carried by Dobes's brilliance. Then in the shootout, Rickard Rakell's backhander from the doorstep ended it—a punctuation mark on Pittsburgh's dominance.

This win feels both inevitable and fortunate: inevitable because Pittsburgh's metrics were clearly superior, fortunate because one goaltender's performance nearly altered the outcome. In a game where the expected-goal share so heavily favored one team, the shootout felt like Montreal stealing a point they didn't earn.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · SO · Dec 21
MTL
3
PIT
4

Penguins edge the Canadiens in a shootout

Chances 3.6 – 4.7Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Penguins earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
MTL
3.61
PIT
4.68
44% of the chances56%

The board read MTL 3, PIT 4. The chances read MTL 3.6, PIT 4.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
PIT
−0.7
goals above expected
PIT4.68 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
MTL3.61 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
  1. P1 07:31MTLO. Kapanen1–0
  2. P1 07:58PITS. Crosby1–1
  3. P1 12:40PITR. RakellPP1–2
  4. P2 03:54MTLI. Demidov2–2
  5. P2 11:51PITN. Acciari2–3
  6. P3 04:04MTLN. Dobson3–3
  7. SO 00:00PITK. HayesPP3–3
+2 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
MTL
44 shots
4
Final
98 shots
PIT
54 shots
5
MTL attackPIT attack
MTL PIT Goal

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

44
shots · 4 in
54
shots · 5 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
MTLPIT
1 / 6
1.58 xG
High danger
1 / 8
2.07 xG
1 / 15
1.57 xG
Medium
2 / 18
2.01 xG
1 / 34
0.46 xG
Low
0 / 49
0.59 xG

High-danger looks: MTL 1 of 6, PIT 1 of 8.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
J. Dobes
+1.7
MTL · 28/31
B
A. Silovs
+0.6
PIT · 22/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Penguins edge the Canadiens 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 8–14
  1. 07:31MTLO. Kapanen(J. Slafkovský, I. Demidov)1–0
  2. 07:58PITS. Crosby(E. Karlsson, R. Rakell)1–1
  3. 12:40PITR. Rakellpower play(B. Rust, S. Crosby)1–2
2ndshots 8–14
  1. 03:54MTLI. Demidov(J. Slafkovský, O. Kapanen)2–2
  2. 11:51PITN. Acciari(K. Letang, A. Silovs)2–3
3rdshots 6–2
  1. 04:04MTLN. Dobson(S. Blais, M. Matheson)3–3
OTshots 3–1no goals
    SO
    1. 00:00PITK. Hayespower play3–3
    2. 00:00MTLC. Caufieldpower play3–3
    3. 00:00PITR. Rakellpower play3–3

    score reads MTL–PIT

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    4.68
    PIT chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    −0.7
    Finishing
    Goals below what those chances were worth
    0.986
    PIT puck luck
    About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
    57.7%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    3.61Expected goals4.68
    PIT 56% of the chance quality
    25Shots on goal31
    6High-danger chances8
    55All attempts (Corsi)75
    Adjusted for score: MTL 44% · PIT 56%
    Faceoffs · PIT won56%off62%neu43%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    MTL1 / 6 · 1.58 xG
    PIT1 / 8 · 2.07 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    MTL1 / 15 · 1.57 xG
    PIT2 / 18 · 2.01 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    MTL1 / 34 · 0.46 xG
    PIT0 / 49 · 0.59 xG

    PIT went 1-for-8 from high danger on 2.07 expected goals — 1.1 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    MTL
    3 G · 3.61 xG · -0.6
    PIT
    4 G · 4.68 xG · -0.7
    012345

    MTL finished -0.6 against expected, PIT -0.7.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    MTL
    WRIST2/29
    SLAP0/7
    TIP IN0/2
    SNAP0/1
    BACKHAND1/2
    POKE0/0
    OTHER0/14
    PIT
    WRIST3/30
    SLAP0/5
    TIP IN0/6
    SNAP0/5
    BACKHAND0/4
    POKE0/1
    OTHER0/24
    MTL
    PIT
    Off the rush
    2 G on 27
    2.96 xG
    2 G on 27
    2.43 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 1
    0.02 xG
    0 G on 6
    0.86 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: MTL went 2-for-29, PIT 3-for-30. MTL 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
    J. Dobes
    MTL · 28/31 · .903
    +1.7
    saved above expected
    A
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/82.1+1.1
    Medium2/182.0+0.0
    Low0/490.6+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

    A. Silovs
    PIT · 22/25 · .880
    +0.6
    saved above expected
    B
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/61.6+0.6
    Medium1/151.6+0.6
    Low1/340.5-0.5

    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

    98 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    MTL
    44 shots
    4
    Final
    98 shots
    PIT
    54 shots
    5
    MTL attackPIT attack
    MTL PIT 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 — MTL left, PIT 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
    R. Rakell
    #67 · R · PIT
    1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 21:44 on ice · +1
    J. Slafkovský
    #20 · L · MTL
    0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 21:13 on ice · +2
    S. Crosby
    #87 · C · PIT
    1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 20:53 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Sun, Dec 21
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 9:25 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 models can barely separate these teams. The Penguins project to win this game 2.5 to 2.8 goals with a 55% probability — about as close to a pick'em as Vegas will offer. Neither team has built an obvious edge.

    Pittsburgh owns the underlying play. The Penguins are generating 51.0% of expected goals at 5v5 against Montreal's 48.0%, and their Corsi advantage (50.0% to 49.0%) is real. Yet the Penguins have stumbled lately, sitting at -12 goal differential over their last 10 games. Montreal, meanwhile, is riding an unsustainable PDO of 1.018 — they're converting at rates that won't hold. Regression is coming, and it could arrive tonight.

    Montreal's offensive punch runs through Cole Caufield (33 goals, 0.97 xG/60, 20.0% shooting) and Oliver Kapanen (19 goals, 0.83 xG/60, 17.8% shooting). Pittsburgh's Caleb Jones is the defensive weak link.

    Pittsburgh counters with Rickard Rakell (1.01 xG/60, 13 goals, 12.1% shooting). Filip Hallander, who leads the team in xG/60 at 1.28, is unlikely to play due to an ongoing injury evaluation, removing Pittsburgh's most dangerous underlying scorer. Montreal's Mike Matheson is the defensive liability on its backend.

    Both teams are producing volume in hard chances and rebounds at 0% conversion rates. When volume doesn't convert, slumps follow quickly. This is the kind of tight matchup where goaltending and marginal execution matter most. Pittsburgh's 55% projection offers barely more than a coin flip's advantage.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    PIT 55%
    55%
    PIT
    Model favorite
    45%
    55%
    MTL50PIT

    PIT by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score MTL 2.5–2.8 PIT; 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
    MTL← edge
    edge →PIT
    48.0%51.0%
    49.0%50.0%
    2.412.66
    2.622.55
    2.242.45
    1.962.12
    1.0181.012

    PIT holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.018 vs 1.012) says MTL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    MTL
    5-4-1
    -3 GD · 2d rest
    PIT
    2-4-4
    -12 GD · 2d rest
    1.018
    MTL PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    1.012
    PIT PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Where the edges live
    • The Penguins own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
    Regression watch
    • The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Things to watch
    • The Penguins own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
    • The Penguins are underwater at -12 goal differential over their last 10.
    • The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    MTL
    Expected in goal
    J. Dobes
    2 days rest.933 last start
    Backup Jakub Dobes · +17.3 GSAx this season

    No completed game on file for this club yet.

    PIT
    Expected in goal
    A. Silovs
    2 days rest.846 last start
    Backup Stuart Skinner · +8.3 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
    MTL
    Cole Caufield33G 16A
    0.97 xG/60 · 1 HD · 20.0% sh
    Oliver Kapanen19G 12A
    0.83 xG/60 · 4 HD · 17.8% sh
    PIT
    Filip Hallander0G 3A
    1.28 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% sh
    Rickard Rakell13G 13A
    1.01 xG/60 · 3 HD · 12.1% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next