Motion-blurred skater in a Buffalo Sabres sweater

Breakdown · BUF at NJD

U. Luukkonen stands tall as the Sabres edge the Devils

FinalWed, Feb 25

BUFBuffalo Sabres2 NJDNew Jersey Devils1

The verdict · coin flip

The Sabres won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

BUF 2 · NJD 1

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 4:22 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

Buffalo won 2–1 despite New Jersey's superior shot quality. The Devils' expected goals of 3.94 exceeded the Sabres' 3.64; U. Luukkonen's 27 saves on 28 shots (0.964 SV%, stopping 2.94 goals above expected) closed the gap.

The Devils held fewer shot attempts (28 to 30) while maintaining quality. High-danger chances split evenly at 7–7. Yet precision and variance conspired: New Jersey underperformed its expected goals by 2.94, squandering a favorable underlying matchup.

Buffalo's efficiency was surgical. The Sabres generated 28 rush chances and converted 2—a proportion New Jersey's 7 rush attempts couldn't approach. The Devils crashed the net effectively for 3 rebound opportunities and scored once. Buffalo created 4 rebounds with no conversions. Timo Meier's wrist shot from the doorstep at 17:30 of the third captured the quality New Jersey generated, yet it arrived too late.

J. Allen's 28 saves on 30 shots (0.933 SV%, +1.64 above expected) represented excellent goaltending overshadowed by Luukkonen's brilliance. The Devils' inability to convert their xG advantage proved decisive.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Feb 25

BUF

NJD

U. Luukkonen stands tall as the Sabres edge the Devils

Chances 3.6 – 3.9Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Sabres took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value

BUF

3.64

NJD

3.94

48% of the chances52%

The board read BUF 2, NJD 1. The chances read BUF 3.6, NJD 3.9.

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

Luck check

BUF

−1.6

goals above expected

BUF3.64 expected · 2 scored

Expected

Scored

NJD3.94 expected · 1 scored

Expected

Scored

The Devils 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

P2 08:10BUFT. Thompson1–0
P3 10:36BUFP. Krebs2–0
P3 17:30NJDT. MeierPP2–1

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

Where the shots came from

BUF

46 shots

Final

92 shots

NJD

46 shots

BUF NJD GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 2 in

shots · 1 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

BUFNJD

2 / 7

1.66 xG

High danger

1 / 7

1.79 xG

0 / 12

1.26 xG

Medium

0 / 15

1.61 xG

0 / 40

0.72 xG

Low

0 / 35

0.54 xG

The Sabres buried 2 of 7 high-danger looks.

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

In the net

A+

U. Luukkonen

+2.9

BUF · 27/28

J. Allen

+1.6

NJD · 28/30

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

U. Luukkonen stands tall as the Sabres edge the Devils

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 9–12no goals

2ndshots 11–10

08:10BUFT. Thompson(P. Krebs, B. Byram)1–0

3rdshots 10–6

10:36BUFP. Krebs(T. Thompson)2–0
17:30NJDT. Meierpower play(J. Hughes, J. Bratt)2–1

score reads BUF–NJD

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.64

BUF chances

Goals their shots were worth

−1.6

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.016

BUF puck luck

About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces

50.9%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.64Expected goals3.94

NJD 52% of the chance quality

30Shots on goal28

7High-danger chances7

59All attempts (Corsi)57

Adjusted for score: BUF 48% · NJD 52%

Faceoffs · NJD won57%off59%neu48%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

BUF2 / 7 · 1.66 xG

NJD1 / 7 · 1.79 xG

Medium dangermid-range

BUF0 / 12 · 1.26 xG

NJD0 / 15 · 1.61 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

BUF0 / 40 · 0.72 xG

NJD0 / 35 · 0.54 xG

NJD went 0-for-15 from medium danger on 1.61 expected goals — 1.6 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

BUF

2 G · 3.64 xG · -1.6

NJD

1 G · 3.94 xG · -2.9

012345

BUF finished -1.6 against expected, NJD -2.9.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

BUF

WRIST2/27

SLAP0/8

SNAP0/4

BACKHAND0/3

TIP IN0/1

BAT0/1

DEFLECTED0/1

WRAP AROUND0/1

OTHER0/13

NJD

WRIST1/26

SLAP0/3

SNAP0/7

BACKHAND0/4

TIP IN0/4

BAT0/1

DEFLECTED0/1

WRAP AROUND0/0

OTHER0/11

BUF

NJD

Off the rush

2 G on 28

2.63 xG

0 G on 31

3.12 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 4

0.58 xG

1 G on 3

0.43 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: BUF went 2-for-27, NJD 1-for-26. BUF 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

U. Luukkonen

BUF · 27/28 · .964

+2.9

saved above expected

A+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/71.8+0.8

Medium0/151.6+1.6

Low0/350.5+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

J. Allen

NJD · 28/30 · .933

+1.6

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/71.7-0.3

Medium0/121.3+1.3

Low0/400.7+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

92 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

BUF

46 shots

Final

92 shots

NJD

46 shots

BUF NJD GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — BUF left, NJD 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

T. Thompson

#72 · C · BUF

1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 19:19 on ice · +2

P. Krebs

#19 · C · BUF

1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 13:41 on ice · +2

B. Byram

#4 · D · BUF

0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 23:08 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Wed, Feb 25

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 4:21 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 2.5- to 2.6-goal game with the Devils at 52% to win—essentially a coin flip.

Buffalo has the form edge: 6-3-1 in their last ten offers genuine momentum. New Jersey sits at -10 on goal differential over the same stretch, a sign they're bleeding expected value. But neither team dominates at 5v5. Both own 50.0% expected goals share. Corsi is nearly even at 49.0% versus 51.0%. The real story lives in PDO.

Buffalo's 1.020 PDO shows they're running hot—results exceed underlying play. New Jersey's 0.971 signals misfortune: they're unlucky. Both teams gravitate back toward neutral over time. That tension defines this game. Buffalo could regress; New Jersey could explode upward.

Players to Watch

Jason Zucker (BUF) — 1.07 xG/60, 14 goals, 14 assists, six high-danger goals, 15.1% shooting
Josh Doan (BUF) — 1.01 xG/60, 15 goals, 18 assists, two high-danger goals, 11.5% shooting
Timo Meier (NJD) — 1.08 xG/60, 13 goals, 15 assists, three high-danger goals, 6.7% shooting
Jack Hughes (NJD) — 0.88 xG/60, 18 goals, 17 assists, one high-danger goal, 11.5% shooting

The matchup distilled: Buffalo fields two consistent, high-volume threats. New Jersey counters with elite underlying production from Meier and unsustainable goal conversion from Hughes. One team's anomaly ends tonight. Afterward, it will seem inevitable. It isn't.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

NJD 52%

52%

NJD

Model favorite

48%

52%

BUF50NJD

NJD by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score BUF 2.5–2.6 NJD; 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

BUF← edge

edge →NJD

50.0%50.0%

49.0%51.0%

2.552.45

2.552.50

2.351.66

1.902.23

1.0200.971

The season numbers split 3–3 — no clear process edge — and the luck row (1.020 vs 0.971) says BUF has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

BUF

6-3-1

+10 GD · 19d rest

NJD

4-6-0

-10 GD · 19d rest

1.020

BUF PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.971

NJD PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch

The Devils' PDO is 0.971 — running cold, due for positive regression.
The Sabres' PDO is 1.020 — running hot, expect some regression.

Things to watch

The Sabres are the hotter team by points pace (6-3-1 in their last 10).
The Devils are underwater at -10 goal differential over their last 10.
The Devils' PDO is 0.971 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

BUF

Expected in goal

A. Lyon

19 days rest.871 last start

Backup Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen · +10.5 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

NJD

Expected in goal

J. Allen

19 days rest.846 last start

Backup Jacob Markstrom · -11.9 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

BUF

Jason Zucker14G 14A

1.07 xG/60 · 6 HD · 15.1% sh

Josh Doan15G 18A

1.01 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.5% sh

NJD

Timo Meier13G 15A

1.08 xG/60 · 3 HD · 6.7% sh

Jack Hughes18G 17A

0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.5% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page