Motion-blurred skater in a Montreal Canadiens sweater

Breakdown · MTL at DAL

Canadiens edge the Stars in overtime

Final / OTSun, Jan 4

The verdict · stolen

The Canadiens stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.70–4.65 and won anyway.

MTL 4 · DAL 3

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 11:15 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

Montreal beat Dallas 4-3 in overtime despite losing the expected goals battle 4.65–3.70. This was a heist: the Stars controlled 56% of the expected goals at 5v5 and still went home empty.

Dallas dominated the chance-generation game. The Stars generated 0.088 xG per shot versus Montreal's 0.065—higher-quality scoring chances throughout the night. High-danger looks went 10–3 in Dallas's favor. Yet Montreal's goaltending, particularly S. Montembeault's performance between the pipes, flipped the script.

S. Montembeault finished with a 0.889 save percentage on 24 saves—1.65 goals better than expected. He was especially brilliant on high-danger chances, posting a 90% save percentage on 10 such attempts. J. Oettinger, meanwhile, posted a 0.857 save percentage for Dallas, though the real issue wasn't his performance: the Stars underperformed their expected goals by 1.65 goals, wasting a dominant offensive showcase.

Both teams found rhythm on the rush. Dallas scored twice on 30 rush chances; Montreal answered with three goals on 29 attempts. The difference was conversion when it mattered most.

Lane Hutson's snap shot from the high slot at 03:40 of overtime beat Oettinger. It was the punctuation on a night that validated the oldest axiom in hockey: goaltending and depth scoring can overcome pure firepower.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · OT · Jan 4

MTL

DAL

Canadiens edge the Stars in overtime

Chances 3.7 – 4.7Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Stars deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

MTL

3.70

DAL

4.65

44% of the chances56%

The board read MTL 4, DAL 3. The chances read MTL 3.7, DAL 4.7.

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

Luck check

MTL

+0.3

goals above expected

MTL3.70 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

DAL4.65 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

The Stars left 1.6 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

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

Every goal, in order

P1 08:42MTLB. Gallagher1–0
P1 13:53DALM. Bourque1–1
P2 10:14DALW. Johnston1–2
P2 11:59MTLO. Kapanen2–2
P2 18:39MTLJ. SlafkovskýPP3–2
P3 11:07DALW. Johnston3–3
OT 03:40MTLL. Hutson4–3

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

Where the shots came from

MTL

41 shots

Final

79 shots

DAL

38 shots

MTL DAL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 4 in

shots · 3 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

MTLDAL

0 / 3

0.74 xG

High danger

1 / 10

2.63 xG

4 / 25

2.63 xG

Medium

2 / 18

1.76 xG

0 / 29

0.33 xG

Low

0 / 25

0.26 xG

High-danger looks: MTL 0 of 3, DAL 1 of 10.

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

In the net

S. Montembeault

+1.6

MTL · 24/27

J. Oettinger

−0.3

DAL · 24/28

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Canadiens edge the Stars in overtime

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 6–8

08:42MTLB. Gallagher(P. Danault, A. Carrier)1–0
13:53DALM. Bourque(J. Robertson, R. Hintz)1–1

2ndshots 13–8

10:14DALW. Johnston(M. Rantanen, T. Harley)1–2
11:59MTLO. Kapanen(I. Demidov, J. Slafkovský)2–2
18:39MTLJ. Slafkovskýpower play(N. Suzuki, L. Hutson)3–2

3rdshots 5–9

11:07DALW. Johnston(M. Heiskanen, M. Duchene)3–3

OTshots 4–2

03:40MTLL. Hutson(P. Danault)4–3

score reads MTL–DAL

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.70

MTL chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.3

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.014

MTL puck luck

About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces

51.8%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.70Expected goals4.65

DAL 56% of the chance quality

28Shots on goal27

3High-danger chances10

57All attempts (Corsi)53

Adjusted for score: MTL 51% · DAL 49%

Faceoffs · DAL won46%off58%neu67%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

MTL0 / 3 · 0.74 xG

DAL1 / 10 · 2.63 xG

Medium dangermid-range

MTL4 / 25 · 2.63 xG

DAL2 / 18 · 1.76 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

MTL0 / 29 · 0.33 xG

DAL0 / 25 · 0.26 xG

DAL went 1-for-10 from high danger on 2.63 expected goals — 1.6 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

MTL

4 G · 3.70 xG · +0.3

DAL

3 G · 4.65 xG · -1.6

012345

MTL finished +0.3 against expected, DAL -1.6.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

MTL

SNAP1/23

SLAP2/7

TIP IN0/4

BACKHAND0/1

WRIST0/3

DEFLECTED1/1

BAT0/1

WRAP AROUND0/1

OTHER0/16

DAL

SNAP2/25

SLAP0/1

TIP IN0/2

BACKHAND0/5

WRIST0/2

DEFLECTED0/1

BAT0/1

WRAP AROUND1/1

OTHER0/15

MTL

DAL

Off the rush

3 G on 29

2.77 xG

2 G on 30

3.71 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 3

0.47 xG

1 G on 1

0.28 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: MTL went 1-for-23, DAL 2-for-25. MTL 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

S. Montembeault

MTL · 24/27 · .889

+1.6

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/102.6+1.6

Medium2/181.8-0.2

Low0/250.3+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

J. Oettinger

DAL · 24/28 · .857

-0.3

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/30.7+0.7

Medium4/252.6-1.4

Low0/290.3+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

79 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

MTL

41 shots

Final

79 shots

DAL

38 shots

MTL DAL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — MTL left, DAL 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

L. Hutson

#48 · D · MTL

1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 27:58 on ice · +2

W. Johnston

#53 · C · DAL

2 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 22:48 on ice · +1

J. Slafkovský

#20 · L · MTL

1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 20:21 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sun, Jan 4

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 11:31 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

Dallas enters as a modest favorite—the model projects a 2.4–2.6 goal game with the Stars at 55% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

The underlying play belongs to Dallas. The Stars own 51.0% of the 5v5 expected goals against Montreal's 48.0%, a margin that should translate to sustained pressure. Montreal, meanwhile, holds a slight edge in shot volume: 49.0% Corsi against Dallas's 47.0%. That's the fundamental tension—Dallas generates more dangerous chances; Montreal controls the puck more often. One favors Dallas's forwards, the other Montreal's defensemen, and neither is dispositive on its own.

Both teams are running hot and unsustainably so. Dallas sits at 1.024 PDO, Montreal at 1.018—both inflated by shooting luck and goaltending performance that should normalize downward. Expect regression from both.

Cole Caufield is Montreal's engine: 33 goals on 0.97 expected goals per 60 minutes, shooting at 20.0%. That rate performs exactly as five-on-five projections suggest, which means he's neither collapsing nor due for a breakout—just consistent. Oliver Kapanen sits lower in volume (19 goals, 0.83 xG/60) but owns a 17.8% shooting rate, a threshold that typically declines toward league average.

Dallas counters with Jason Robertson (25 goals, 0.96 xG/60) and Michael Bunting (8 goals, 0.83 xG/60). Robertson's expected-goal rate mirrors Caufield's almost exactly. Bunting is simply underproductive at 7.6% shooting—positive regression is coming.

Both Montreal's Mike Matheson and Dallas's Tyler Myers represent defensive liabilities, though the granular data is thin: both teams show 0% high-danger and 0% rebound goals, which suggests sample-size noise in chance categorization rather than structural weakness.

J. Fowler lands on a back-to-back, worth monitoring for either a backup appearance or diminished performance from fatigue.

This is genuinely even. Dallas's expected-goal edge might tip them toward victory, but Montreal's puck possession and Caufield's reliability make an upset entirely plausible. Lean Dallas, but with low conviction.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DAL 55%

54%

DAL

Model favorite

46%

54%

MTL50DAL

DAL by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score MTL 2.4–2.6 DAL; 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 →DAL

48.0%51.0%

49.0%47.0%

2.412.36

2.622.29

2.242.07

1.961.68

1.0181.024

The season numbers split 3–3 — no clear process edge — and the luck row (1.018 vs 1.024) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

MTL

6-2-2

+10 GD · 1d rest

DAL

4-4-2

+1 GD · 2d rest

1.018

MTL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.024

DAL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Stars own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.

Regression watch

The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.

Things to watch

The Stars own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
J. Fowler is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

MTL

Expected in goal

J. Fowler

back-to-back.895 last start

Backup Jakub Dobes · +17.3 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.

DAL

Expected in goal

J. Oettinger

2 days rest.810 last start

Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 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

DAL

Jason Robertson25G 21A

0.96 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.4% sh

Michael Bunting8G 14A

0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 7.6% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page