Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Montreal Canadiens sweater
← Sat, Mar 7 · the slate
Breakdown · MTL at LAK

Canadiens steal one from the Kings against the run of play

FinalSat, Mar 7
MTLMontreal Canadiens4LAKLos Angeles Kings3
The verdict · stolen

The Canadiens stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 2.98–6.48 and won anyway.

MTL 4 · LAK 3
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 6:04 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 Kings owned this game by every measure that mattered — except the scoreboard. Montreal won 4-3 despite losing the xG battle 6.48–2.98, a brutal 68–32 split. The gap was the heist: J. Dobes (MTL) played at another level while D. Kuemper (LAK) couldn't match the quality he faced.

Every underlying metric screamed Kings domination. LAK held 63 percent of shot attempts (39–23). They crushed Montreal 12–5 in high-danger chances. Yet the Canadiens' rush game made the difference. N. Suzuki's slap shot from the top of the circles at 15:27 of the third broke through. Montreal finished with two goals on 23 rush attempts. Los Angeles needed 41 attempts to score twice.

Dobes stopped 36 of 39 shots for a 0.923 save percentage — 3.48 goals better than expected. That's a game stolen. D. Kuemper faced fewer shots (19 of 23) but finished 1.02 below expected, signaling quality chances that went unfinished.

J. Slafkovský (2G, 1A) led the Montreal attack. B. Clarke (LAK, 2A) orchestrated from the back. High-danger chances told the story: Montreal 0/5, LAK generating 12 rebounds but converting only 1. Montreal created 3 rebounds and converted none.

This was variance meeting execution. LAK earned a better fate.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Mar 7
MTL
4
LAK
3

Canadiens steal one from the Kings against the run of play

Chances 3.0 – 6.5Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Kings deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
MTL
2.98
LAK
6.48
31% of the chances69%

The board read MTL 4, LAK 3. The chances read MTL 3.0, LAK 6.5.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
MTL
+1.0
goals above expected
MTL2.98 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
LAK6.48 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored

The Kings left 3.5 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 14:12LAKA. Kopitar0–1
  2. P2 03:09MTLJ. Evans1–1
  3. P2 15:41MTLJ. Slafkovský2–1
  4. P2 17:31LAKS. Laughton2–2
  5. P3 06:44LAKA. Laferriere2–3
  6. P3 14:38MTLJ. SlafkovskýPP3–3
  7. P3 15:27MTLN. Suzuki4–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
MTL
31 shots
4
Final
100 shots
LAK
69 shots
3
MTL attackLAK attack
MTL LAK Goal
31
shots · 4 in
69
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
MTLLAK
0 / 5
1.51 xG
High danger
2 / 12
2.73 xG
2 / 9
0.96 xG
Medium
1 / 24
2.75 xG
2 / 30
0.50 xG
Low
0 / 50
0.99 xG

High-danger looks: MTL 0 of 5, LAK 2 of 12.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
J. Dobes
+3.5
MTL · 36/39
D-
D. Kuemper
−1.0
LAK · 19/23
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Canadiens steal one from the Kings 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 1–16
  1. 14:12LAKA. Kopitar(A. Kempe, A. Panarin)0–1
2ndshots 11–10
  1. 03:09MTLJ. Evans(K. Dach, Z. Bolduc)1–1
  2. 15:41MTLJ. Slafkovský(N. Suzuki, A. Carrier)2–1
  3. 17:31LAKS. Laughton(J. Wright, B. Clarke)2–2
3rdshots 11–13
  1. 06:44LAKA. Laferriere(B. Clarke, T. Moore)2–3
  2. 14:38MTLJ. Slafkovskýpower play(L. Hutson, N. Suzuki)3–3
  3. 15:27MTLN. Suzuki(J. Slafkovský, C. Caufield)4–3

score reads MTL–LAK

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
2.98
MTL chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.0
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.056
MTL puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
33.8%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.98Expected goals6.48
LAK 69% of the chance quality
23Shots on goal39
5High-danger chances12
44All attempts (Corsi)86
Adjusted for score: MTL 35% · LAK 65%
Faceoffs · LAK won65%off46%neu33%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
MTL0 / 5 · 1.51 xG
LAK2 / 12 · 2.73 xG
Medium dangermid-range
MTL2 / 9 · 0.96 xG
LAK1 / 24 · 2.75 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
MTL2 / 30 · 0.50 xG
LAK0 / 50 · 0.99 xG

LAK went 1-for-24 from medium danger on 2.75 expected goals — 1.8 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
MTL
4 G · 2.98 xG · +1.0
LAK
3 G · 6.48 xG · -3.5
01234567

MTL finished +1.0 against expected, LAK -3.5.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
MTL
WRIST1/18
SLAP3/3
BACKHAND0/7
TIP IN0/2
SNAP0/1
DEFLECTED0/0
POKE0/0
OTHER0/13
LAK
WRIST2/41
SLAP0/11
BACKHAND0/4
TIP IN1/9
SNAP0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
POKE0/1
OTHER0/17
MTL
LAK
Off the rush
2 G on 23
1.69 xG
2 G on 41
3.69 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3
0.58 xG
1 G on 12
2.01 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: MTL went 1-for-18, LAK 2-for-41. 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 · 36/39 · .923
+3.5
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/122.7+0.7
Medium1/242.8+1.8
Low0/501.0+1.0

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

D. Kuemper
LAK · 19/23 · .826
-1.0
saved above expected
D-
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/51.5+1.5
Medium2/91.0-1.0
Low2/300.5-1.5

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

100 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
MTL
31 shots
4
Final
100 shots
LAK
69 shots
3
MTL attackLAK attack
MTL LAK Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — MTL left, LAK 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
N. Suzuki
#14 · C · MTL
1 G · 2 A · 5 SOG · 17:14 on ice
J. Slafkovský
#20 · L · MTL
2 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 16:38 on ice · +1
B. Clarke
#92 · D · LAK
0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 24:38 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Mar 7
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 6:24 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 Los Angeles at 56% win probability in a 2.3-2.6 game, favoring the Kings because their underlying play advantage outweighs Montreal's recent hot streak.

Los Angeles controls territory and shot quality. The Kings land at 52.0% xG and 52.0% Corsi versus Montreal's 48.0% and 49.0%—dominance in both volume and efficiency. Montreal's 5-3-2 record over their last 10 disguises a passive underlying game; they're benefiting from variance, not structural superiority.

Los Angeles's -15 goal differential over their last 10 looks damning in isolation. The xG and Corsi numbers indicate the Kings should win that stretch—the negative margin reflects variance and occasional poor luck, not systematic failure.

Montreal carries regression risk. At 1.018, their PDO signals unsustainable luck; shooting percentages and on-ice save rates this high don't hold. Los Angeles at 1.002 sits at expected levels with nothing to lose.

The Kings own a rest edge at 1 day versus Montreal's 3, compounding their advantage. D. Kuemper's back-to-back creates uncertainty: a tired starter or backup appearance would erode Los Angeles's depth cushion.

Cole Caufield (33G, 16A, 0.97 xG/60, 20.0% shooting) and Oliver Kapanen (19G, 12A, 0.83 xG/60, 17.8% shooting) drive Montreal's offense. Los Angeles counters with Alex Laferriere (16G, 18A, 0.87 xG/60) and Jared Wright (0G, 4A, 0.83 xG/60). The Kings' underlying advantage should translate to outproduction.

For Montreal to win, they need to suppress Los Angeles's shot generation or sustain improbable shooting efficiency. Neither is impossible, but neither is favored against a team generating 52.0% xG.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

LAK 56%
56%
LAK
Model favorite
44%
56%
MTL50LAK

LAK by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score MTL 2.3–2.6 LAK; 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 →LAK
48.0%52.0%
49.0%52.0%
2.412.42
2.622.20
2.241.85
1.961.71
1.0181.002

LAK holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.018 vs 1.002) says MTL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
MTL
5-3-2
+8 GD · 3d rest
LAK
3-6-1
-15 GD · 1d rest
1.018
MTL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.002
LAK PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Kings own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Kings 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 Kings own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Kings drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • D. Kuemper is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Canadiens are the hotter team by points pace (5-3-2 in their last 10).
  • The Kings are underwater at -15 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
  • The Canadiens have 2 more days of rest.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
MTL
Expected in goal
J. Dobes
3 days rest.778 last start
Backup Jakub Dobes · +17.3 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

LAK
Expected in goal
D. Kuemper
back-to-back.914 last start
Backup Darcy Kuemper · -5.8 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.

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
LAK
Alex Laferriere16G 18A
0.87 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.9% sh
Jared Wright0G 4A
0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page