Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Montreal Canadiens sweater
← Sat, Jan 17 · the slate
Breakdown · MTL at OTT

Canadiens steal one from the Senators against the run of play

Final / OTSat, Jan 17
MTLMontreal Canadiens6OTTOttawa Senators5
The verdict · stolen

The Canadiens stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.18–5.96 and won anyway.

MTL 6 · OTT 5
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:20 AMxG: 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 won 6-5 in overtime by outwishing their scoreline, not outplaying it. Montreal generated only 3.18 expected goals to Ottawa's 5.96 — a 35–65 split that should have sent the Senators home winners. Instead, Cole Caufield ended it at 00:33 of OT, converting the heist into a result.

Montreal outperformed their xG by 2.82 goals while Ottawa underperformed theirs by 0.96. That margin belongs to goaltending and fortune. S. Montembeault stopped 29 of 34 shots at a 0.853 save percentage, exceeding expectation. L. Meriläinen made 13 of 19 saves at 0.684, well below what the workload demanded.

The game turned on Montreal's rush attack. The Canadiens scored 4 goals on 19 rush chances against Ottawa's 3 on 24 — marginal volumes but decisive efficiency. On high-danger chances, Ottawa dominated 13–5. Montreal converted 0 of 5 high-danger attempts but stole 2 goals from low-danger positions, plays where opposing goalies must earn their keep.

Cole Caufield finished with 2 goals and 1 assist in 19:19, capping his night with the decider. J. Sanderson led the Senators with 1 goal and 3 assists in 25:39. L. Hutson steered Montreal's offense with 3 assists in 26:22.

Montreal's overperformance and Ottawa's underperformance weren't symmetrical — the Senators missed 0.96 goals while the Canadiens banked an extra 2.82. L. Meriläinen was 100% on five high-danger chances, meaning the Canadiens' surplus came from elsewhere: low-danger conversions and outrushing the Senators. That formula does not repeat often.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · OT · Jan 17
MTL
6
OTT
5

Canadiens steal one from the Senators against the run of play

Chances 3.2 – 6.0Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Senators deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
MTL
3.18
OTT
5.96
35% of the chances65%

The board read MTL 6, OTT 5. The chances read MTL 3.2, OTT 6.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
MTL
+2.8
goals above expected
MTL3.18 expected · 6 scored
Expected
Scored
OTT5.96 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored

The Canadiens scored 2.8 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 03:06MTLJ. SlafkovskýPP1–0
  2. P1 17:50MTLC. CaufieldPP2–0
  3. P2 00:42OTTB. TkachukPP2–1
  4. P2 03:07OTTT. Stützle2–2
  5. P2 04:26MTLJ. Anderson3–2
  6. P2 15:31OTTD. CozensPP3–3
  7. P2 18:24OTTD. Perron3–4
+4 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
MTL
33 shots
6
Final
81 shots
OTT
48 shots
5
MTL attackOTT attack
MTL OTT Goal
33
shots · 6 in
48
shots · 5 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
MTLOTT
0 / 5
1.15 xG
High danger
3 / 13
3.83 xG
4 / 15
1.71 xG
Medium
2 / 13
1.48 xG
2 / 29
0.32 xG
Low
0 / 48
0.65 xG

High-danger looks: MTL 0 of 5, OTT 3 of 13.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
S. Montembeault
+1.0
MTL · 29/34
F
L. Meriläinen
−2.8
OTT · 13/19
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Canadiens steal one from the Senators against the run of play

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. 03:06MTLJ. Slafkovskýpower play(C. Caufield, N. Suzuki)1–0
  2. 17:50MTLC. Caufieldpower play(N. Suzuki, L. Hutson)2–0
2ndshots 4–14
  1. 00:42OTTB. Tkachukpower play(C. Giroux, J. Sanderson)2–1
  2. 03:07OTTT. Stützle(N. Cousins, L. Eller)2–2
  3. 04:26MTLJ. Anderson(M. Matheson, N. Dobson)3–2
  4. 15:31OTTD. Cozenspower play(T. Stützle, J. Sanderson)3–3
  5. 18:24OTTD. Perron(A. Zub, J. Sanderson)3–4
3rdshots 6–12
  1. 07:55OTTJ. Sanderson(R. Greig)3–5
  2. 15:36MTLJ. Slafkovskýpower play(L. Hutson, P. Danault)4–5
  3. 16:41MTLA. Carrier(I. Demidov, J. Anderson)5–5
OTshots 3–0
  1. 00:33MTLC. Caufield(L. Hutson)6–5

score reads MTL–OTT

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.18
MTL chances
Goals their shots were worth
+2.8
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.055
MTL puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
39.8%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.18Expected goals5.96
OTT 65% of the chance quality
19Shots on goal34
5High-danger chances13
49All attempts (Corsi)74
Adjusted for score: MTL 39% · OTT 61%
Faceoffs · OTT won53%off48%neu42%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
MTL0 / 5 · 1.15 xG
OTT3 / 13 · 3.83 xG
Medium dangermid-range
MTL4 / 15 · 1.71 xG
OTT2 / 13 · 1.48 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
MTL2 / 29 · 0.32 xG
OTT0 / 48 · 0.65 xG

MTL went 4-for-15 from medium danger on 1.71 expected goals — 2.3 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
MTL
6 G · 3.18 xG · +2.8
OTT
5 G · 5.96 xG · -1.0
01234567

MTL finished +2.8 against expected, OTT -1.0.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
MTL
WRIST2/24
TIP IN1/4
SLAP2/2
SNAP1/3
BACKHAND0/0
DEFLECTED0/0
BETWEEN LEGS0/0
OTHER0/16
OTT
WRIST3/28
TIP IN1/5
SLAP0/6
SNAP0/3
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/2
BETWEEN LEGS1/1
OTHER0/26
MTL
OTT
Off the rush
4 G on 19
2.03 xG
3 G on 24
3.25 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3
0.60 xG
0 G on 7
1.65 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: MTL went 2-for-24, OTT 3-for-28. 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. Montembeault
MTL · 29/34 · .853
+1.0
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger3/133.8+0.8
Medium2/131.5-0.5
Low0/480.7+0.7

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. Meriläinen
OTT · 13/19 · .684
-2.8
saved above expected
F
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/51.1+1.1
Medium4/151.7-2.3
Low2/290.3-1.7

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

81 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
MTL
33 shots
6
Final
81 shots
OTT
48 shots
5
MTL attackOTT attack
MTL OTT Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — MTL left, OTT 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. Sanderson
#85 · D · OTT
1 G · 3 A · 3 SOG · 25:39 on ice
L. Hutson
#48 · D · MTL
0 G · 3 A · 2 SOG · 26:22 on ice · +1
C. Caufield
#13 · R · MTL
2 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 19:19 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Jan 17
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:08 AMEdited 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 2.3 to 2.8 goal game favoring the Senators, who own 59% win probability.

Montreal arrives hotter by points pace, running 6-3-1 over its last 10 games. Ottawa, by contrast, is underwater at minus-8 goal differential in that same stretch. But the underlying numbers tell a different story. Ottawa dominates expected goals at 56.0% to Montreal's 48.0%, and controls shot volume at 53.0% Corsi against 49.0%. The Senators should win this matchup more often than not — the model is simply catching up to reality.

Montreal's PDO sits at 1.018 — running hot, unsustainable. Expect Montreal's conversion and save rates to regress downward. Ottawa's PDO of 0.993 runs cold, meaning the Senators have gotten unlucky on both ends. When you own the underlying play and have room to improve on luck, you have a lean.

Ottawa's edge sharpens when you isolate shot quality. Cole Caufield leads Montreal with 0.97 expected goals per 60 minutes, having scored 33 goals on 16 assists with a 20.0% shooting rate. That's elite. But Oliver Kapanen (0.83 xG/60, 19 goals, 17.8% shooting) sits well behind, leaving Montreal dependent on Caufield's scoring burst to compensate. For Ottawa, Brady Tkachuk generates 1.19 xG/60 — a higher threat rate — and has found balance with 11 goals and 20 assists at just 7.5% efficiency, suggesting room for growth. Dylan Cozens (1.00 xG/60, 13 goals, 15 assists, 9.5% shooting) provides secondary punch.

Defensively, Montreal has a weak link in Mike Matheson. Ottawa's equivalent is Nick Jensen. The matchup advantage here belongs to Ottawa, which can impose its higher-volume attack on Montreal's inferior underlying defense.

The goaltending note: J. Fowler is on a back-to-back. Watch for either a backup start or a tired starter, either of which shifts the edge further toward Ottawa.

This is a model alignment situation — the public may still respect Montreal's recent form, but the underlying metrics have already moved on. The Senators have the play, the luck room, and the favorable matchups. Ottawa wins this one more than it loses.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

OTT 59%
59%
OTT
Model favorite
41%
59%
MTL50OTT

OTT by 18 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score MTL 2.3–2.8 OTT; 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 →OTT
48.0%56.0%
49.0%53.0%
2.412.66
2.622.12
2.242.18
1.961.99
1.0180.993

OTT holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.018 vs 0.993) says MTL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
MTL
6-3-1
+5 GD · 1d rest
OTT
4-6-0
-8 GD · 2d rest
1.018
MTL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.993
OTT PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Senators own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Senators drive Corsi at 53.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Senators own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Senators drive Corsi at 53.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • J. Fowler is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Canadiens are the hotter team by points pace (6-3-1 in their last 10).
  • The Senators are underwater at -8 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. Fowler
back-to-back.846 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.

OTT
Expected in goal
L. Meriläinen
2 days rest.818 last start
Backup Linus Ullmark · -12.8 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
OTT
Brady Tkachuk11G 20A
1.19 xG/60 · 2 HD · 7.5% sh
Dylan Cozens13G 15A
1.00 xG/60 · 1 HD · 9.5% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page