Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Montreal Canadiens sweater
← Thu, Jan 8 · the slate
Breakdown · FLA at MTL

S. Montembeault stands tall as the Canadiens edge the Panthers

FinalThu, Jan 8
FLAFlorida Panthers2MTLMontreal Canadiens6
The verdict · stolen

The Canadiens stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.64–3.27 and won anyway.

FLA 2 · MTL 6
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 11:46 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 Canadiens beat the Panthers 6–2 by playing worse hockey for sixty minutes. Montreal held just 41% of expected goals while Florida generated 59% — yet went home with a three-goal win.

This is what happens when an elite goalie meets clinical finishing.

S. Montembeault stopped 25 of 27 shots (0.926 SV%), exceeding his expectation by 2.64 goals and transforming a game that by the numbers should have been close into a rout. S. Bobrovsky posted a 0.737 save percentage, surrendering 1.73 more goals than expected.

Montreal converted 3 of 5 high-danger chances (60%). Florida generated 9 high-danger opportunities but couldn't overcome the disparity in goaltending. The Canadiens overperformed their xG by 2.73 goals; the Panthers underperformed theirs by 2.64. It was a complete inversion of play and result.

Alexandre Texier batted one home from the doorstep in the third — the moment that crystallized Montreal's ruthlessness in tight spaces. Texier finished with three goals. O. Kapanen added a goal and two assists, and M. Matheson contributed two assists.

Montreal was lethal on the rush (4 goals on 21 chances) and precise in the slot. They didn't need volume; they needed only accuracy. Florida crashed the net hard enough to generate five rebound chances but converted just one. Montembeault denied the rest.

This was a heist. Montreal stole two points by converting the few chances they created while Montembeault locked the door on the ones they shouldn't have allowed.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Jan 8
FLA
2
MTL
6

S. Montembeault stands tall as the Canadiens edge the Panthers

Chances 4.6 – 3.3Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Panthers deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
FLA
4.64
MTL
3.27
59% of the chances41%

The board read FLA 2, MTL 6. The chances read FLA 4.6, MTL 3.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
MTL
+2.7
goals above expected
MTL3.27 expected · 6 scored
Expected
Scored
FLA4.64 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

The Canadiens scored 2.7 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 02:59MTLN. Dobson0–1
  2. P1 17:35MTLO. Kapanen0–2
  3. P2 05:33FLAS. Bennett1–2
  4. P2 13:41MTLA. Texier1–3
  5. P3 07:26MTLA. Texier1–4
  6. P3 11:23FLAS. Bennett2–4
  7. P3 17:59MTLJ. SlafkovskýEN2–5
+1 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
FLA
43 shots
2
Final
76 shots
MTL
33 shots
6
FLA attackMTL attack
FLA MTL Goal
43
shots · 2 in
33
shots · 6 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
FLAMTL
1 / 9
2.38 xG
High danger
3 / 5
1.57 xG
1 / 18
1.82 xG
Medium
2 / 11
1.25 xG
0 / 36
0.44 xG
Low
1 / 29
0.45 xG

The Canadiens buried 3 of 5 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
S. Montembeault
+2.6
MTL · 25/27
F
S. Bobrovsky
−1.7
FLA · 14/19
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

S. Montembeault stands tall as the Canadiens edge the Panthers

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
  1. 02:59MTLN. Dobson(M. Matheson, O. Kapanen)0–1
  2. 17:35MTLO. Kapanen(J. Slafkovský)0–2
2ndshots 10–4
  1. 05:33FLAS. Bennett1–2
  2. 13:41MTLA. Texier(A. Carrier, N. Suzuki)1–3
3rdshots 11–8
  1. 07:26MTLA. Texier(M. Matheson)1–4
  2. 11:23FLAS. Bennett(E. Rodrigues, N. Mikkola)2–4
  3. 17:59MTLJ. Slafkovskýempty net(O. Kapanen, L. Hutson)2–5
  4. 19:10MTLA. Texier(S. Blais, J. Veleno)2–6

score reads FLA–MTL

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.27
MTL chances
Goals their shots were worth
+2.7
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.102
MTL puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
41.7%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.64Expected goals3.27
FLA 59% of the chance quality
27Shots on goal20
9High-danger chances5
63All attempts (Corsi)45
Adjusted for score: FLA 64% · MTL 36%
Faceoffs · MTL won39%off40%neu46%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
FLA1 / 9 · 2.38 xG
MTL3 / 5 · 1.57 xG
Medium dangermid-range
FLA1 / 18 · 1.82 xG
MTL2 / 11 · 1.25 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
FLA0 / 36 · 0.44 xG
MTL1 / 29 · 0.45 xG

MTL went 3-for-5 from high danger on 1.57 expected goals — 1.4 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
FLA
2 G · 4.64 xG · -2.6
MTL
6 G · 3.27 xG · +2.7
01234567

FLA finished -2.6 against expected, MTL +2.7.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
FLA
SNAP2/32
BACKHAND0/3
TIP IN0/3
SLAP0/0
WRIST0/2
WRAP AROUND0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
BAT0/0
OTHER0/20
MTL
SNAP1/20
BACKHAND1/3
TIP IN1/2
SLAP1/4
WRIST0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
DEFLECTED0/1
BAT1/1
OTHER1/13
FLA
MTL
Off the rush
1 G on 32
3.31 xG
4 G on 21
2.58 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 5
1.07 xG
1 G on 2
0.42 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: FLA went 2-for-32, MTL 1-for-20. MTL scored 4 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. Bobrovsky
FLA · 14/19 · .737
-1.7
saved above expected
F
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger3/51.6-1.4
Medium2/111.3-0.8
Low1/290.5-0.6

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

S. Montembeault
MTL · 25/27 · .926
+2.6
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/92.4+1.4
Medium1/181.8+0.8
Low0/360.4+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

76 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
FLA
43 shots
2
Final
76 shots
MTL
33 shots
6
FLA attackMTL attack
FLA MTL Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — FLA left, MTL 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
O. Kapanen
#91 · C · MTL
1 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 17:19 on ice · +2
A. Texier
#85 · L · MTL
3 G · 0 A · 6 SOG · 17:15 on ice · +2
M. Matheson
#8 · D · MTL
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 25:50 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Thu, Jan 8
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 11:44 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 sees this as essentially a pick'em. FLA is projected to lose by 2.5 to 2.6 goals, leaving Montreal at 51% win probability—the thinnest of edges in what amounts to a true toss-up.

Florida's season tells a story of underperformance lately. The Panthers are -6 in goal differential over their last 10 games, which explains why the model isn't favoring them despite what their underlying metrics suggest.

The territorial data shows why this matchup is so tight. FLA drives play at 52.0% Corsi and generates 49.0% of expected goals at 5v5. Montreal counters with 49.0% Corsi and 48.0% xG%, essentially even in shot quality and volume. The gap is tiny.

Where Montreal pulls ahead is health and rest. The Canadiens arrive on four days' rest; Florida comes in on one day. That disparity matters. More immediately, S. Bobrovsky faces a back-to-back, which could signal either a backup start or a tired starter—watch for that choice.

The regression wind also blows Montreal's way. The Canadiens are running a 1.018 PDO at 5v5, which is hot. That means their goaltending and shooting percentages are elevated. Expect some normalization. FLA's PDO sits at 0.989, slightly unlucky, so there's room for positive variance, but not enough to overcome the other factors.

On the individual level, the matchup tilts toward Montreal's depth. Sam Bennett leads Florida's attack at 0.97 xG per 60 and has 18 goals on a 13.1% shooting rate—that efficiency is real. Brad Marchand, at 0.93 xG per 60 with 17 goals, provides secondary punch despite shooting at 19.5%, which is unsustainably high.

Montreal's lineup is deeper. Cole Caufield is the headline scorer at 0.97 xG per 60 and 33 goals, shooting 20.0%. He's on pace for an elite finish. Oliver Kapanen offers secondary scoring at 0.83 xG per 60 with 19 goals; at 17.8% shooting, his conversion is more stabilized than Marchand's.

The bet here is on Montreal's situational advantage—rest, PDO regression, goaltending wear on Florida—outweighing Florida's solid territorial control. It's genuinely that close. If this were a playoff series, I'd want the Panthers' puck possession. For a single game with rest disparity and one goaltender running on fumes, Montreal's edge is thin but real at 51%.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

MTL 51%
51%
MTL
Model favorite
49%
51%
FLA50MTL

MTL by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score FLA 2.5–2.6 MTL; 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
FLA← edge
edge →MTL
49.0%48.0%
52.0%49.0%
2.482.41
2.562.62
1.982.24
2.211.96
0.9891.018

FLA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.989 vs 1.018) says MTL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
FLA
5-4-1
-6 GD · 1d rest
MTL
6-2-2
+8 GD · 4d rest
0.989
FLA PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.018
MTL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Panthers drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Panthers drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • S. Bobrovsky is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Panthers are underwater at -6 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
  • The Canadiens have 3 more days of rest.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
FLA
Expected in goal
S. Bobrovsky
back-to-back.864 last start
Backup Sergei Bobrovsky · -12.2 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.

MTL
Expected in goal
S. Montembeault
4 days rest.889 last start
Backup Jakub Dobes · +17.3 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
FLA
Sam Bennett18G 19A
0.97 xG/60 · 6 HD · 13.1% sh
Brad Marchand17G 9A
0.93 xG/60 · 3 HD · 19.5% sh
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
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page