Motion-blurred skater in a Ottawa Senators sweater
Breakdown · OTT at SEA

Senators run the Kraken off the ice on the underlying numbers

The verdict · earned

The Senators earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.

OTT 7 · SEA 4
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 6:28 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 Senators won 7–4 and controlled every underlying metric. They owned 66% of expected goals (4.28–2.19 at 5v5) and held Seattle to 36% of shot attempts.

Both teams beat their expected output significantly. Seattle scored four goals on just 2.19 xG—a 1.81-goal outperformance. The Senators posted a 2.72-goal outperformance, a larger margin that confirms their superior play created a wider scoring advantage.

The shot map reinforced Ottawa's dominance. They generated 37 attempts to Seattle's 21, and quality widened the gap: eight high-danger chances to three. In transition, Ottawa scored five goals on 35 rush chances; Seattle managed three on 24—a speed advantage that proved decisive.

L. Ullmark made 17 saves on 21 shots (0.810 SV%) for the Senators, while J. Daccord saved 30 of 37 (0.811 SV%) for the Kraken. Both posted strong percentages against relentless pressure. Seattle did score two goals from low-danger areas—chances that an opposing goaltender normally stops—but even those gifted tallies could not bridge the gap created by Ottawa's superior volume and quality.

The scoreboard showed a blowout. Every underlying metric confirmed it.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Mar 7
OTT
7
SEA
4

Senators run the Kraken off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 4.3 – 2.2Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Senators earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
OTT
4.28
SEA
2.19
66% of the chances34%

The board read OTT 7, SEA 4. The chances read OTT 4.3, SEA 2.2.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
OTT
+2.7
goals above expected
OTT4.28 expected · 7 scored
Expected
Scored
SEA2.19 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored

The Senators 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 08:45SEAJ. Melanson0–1
  2. P1 09:19OTTT. Kleven1–1
  3. P1 13:35OTTD. Cozens2–1
  4. P2 01:34OTTS. Pinto3–1
  5. P2 10:09OTTM. Amadio4–1
  6. P2 15:00SEAE. Tolvanen4–2
  7. P3 02:42OTTW. Foegele5–2
+4 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
OTT
53 shots
7
Final
87 shots
SEA
34 shots
4
OTT attackSEA attack
OTT SEA Goal
53
shots · 7 in
34
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
OTTSEA
2 / 8
1.85 xG
High danger
1 / 3
0.66 xG
4 / 16
1.61 xG
Medium
1 / 10
0.98 xG
1 / 48
0.82 xG
Low
2 / 30
0.55 xG

The Senators buried 2 of 8 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
F
L. Ullmark
−1.8
OTT · 17/21
F
J. Daccord
−2.7
SEA · 30/37
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Senators run the Kraken off the ice on the underlying numbers

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 13–5
  1. 08:45SEAJ. Melanson(B. Meyers, R. Winterton)0–1
  2. 09:19OTTT. Kleven(S. Pinto, M. Amadio)1–1
  3. 13:35OTTD. Cozens(T. Chabot, N. Jensen)2–1
2ndshots 13–6
  1. 01:34OTTS. Pinto(A. Zub, N. Cousins)3–1
  2. 10:09OTTM. Amadio(S. Pinto, N. Cousins)4–1
  3. 15:00SEAE. Tolvanen4–2
3rdshots 11–10
  1. 02:42OTTW. Foegele(L. Eller)5–2
  2. 03:58OTTT. Stützle(D. Batherson)6–2
  3. 07:24OTTB. Tkachuk(T. Chabot)7–2
  4. 10:16SEAM. Beniers(C. Fleury, J. Eberle)7–3
  5. 17:45SEAB. Montourpower play(V. Dunn, J. Eberle)7–4

score reads OTT–SEA

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.28
OTT chances
Goals their shots were worth
+2.7
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.004
OTT puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
62.6%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.28Expected goals2.19
OTT 66% of the chance quality
37Shots on goal21
8High-danger chances3
72All attempts (Corsi)43
Adjusted for score: OTT 57% · SEA 43%
Faceoffs · SEA won25%off48%neu56%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
OTT2 / 8 · 1.85 xG
SEA1 / 3 · 0.66 xG
Medium dangermid-range
OTT4 / 16 · 1.61 xG
SEA1 / 10 · 0.98 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
OTT1 / 48 · 0.82 xG
SEA2 / 30 · 0.55 xG

OTT went 4-for-16 from medium danger on 1.61 expected goals — 2.4 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
OTT
7 G · 4.28 xG · +2.7
SEA
4 G · 2.19 xG · +1.8
012345678

OTT finished +2.7 against expected, SEA +1.8.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
OTT
WRIST5/34
SNAP1/7
SLAP0/3
TIP IN0/2
BACKHAND0/4
DEFLECTED1/1
POKE0/1
BAT0/1
OTHER0/19
SEA
WRIST1/24
SNAP0/2
SLAP2/4
TIP IN1/3
BACKHAND0/1
DEFLECTED0/0
POKE0/0
BAT0/0
OTHER0/9
OTT
SEA
Off the rush
5 G on 35
2.81 xG
3 G on 24
1.56 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 4
0.77 xG
1 G on 2
0.42 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: OTT went 5-for-34, SEA 1-for-24. OTT scored 5 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
L. Ullmark
OTT · 17/21 · .810
-1.8
saved above expected
F
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/30.7-0.3
Medium1/101.0-0.0
Low2/300.6-1.4

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

J. Daccord
SEA · 30/37 · .811
-2.7
saved above expected
F
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/81.9-0.1
Medium4/161.6-2.4
Low1/480.8-0.2

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

87 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
OTT
53 shots
7
Final
87 shots
SEA
34 shots
4
OTT attackSEA attack
OTT SEA Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — OTT left, SEA 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
S. Pinto
#12 · C · OTT
1 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 18:18 on ice · +2
T. Chabot
#72 · D · OTT
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 26:12 on ice · +1
J. Eberle
#7 · R · SEA
0 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 16:14 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, 6:06 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 2.6–2.2 game favoring Ottawa, giving the Senators 56% win probability. This edge stems from superior underlying play rather than variance luck.

Ottawa is the hotter team, posting a 7-1-2 record in their last 10 games. But the real lean lives in the 5v5 dynamics: the Senators control shot generation at 56.0% expected goals versus Seattle's 46.0%, and they win territory battles decisively with 53.0% Corsi. Seattle's only offsetting advantage is a 1.011 PDO to Ottawa's 0.993, suggesting the Kraken have run somewhat hotter than their underlying play deserves—a dynamic that regresses toward reality.

Brady Tkachuk is Ottawa's engine, averaging 1.19 expected goals per 60 minutes with 11 goals and 20 assists. His 2 high-danger chances and 7.5% shooting rate suggest he's generating clean looks at a sustainable clip. Dylan Cozens is less prolific (13 goals, 15 assists) but efficient, maintaining a 1.00 xG/60 and 9.5% shooting to exploit his opportunities. Nick Jensen presents a defensive vulnerability on the back end.

For Seattle, Shane Wright (0.77 xG/60, 8 goals, 10 assists) carries a secondary scoring load while posting 4 high-danger chances—more volume than his goal total reflects. Berkly Catton (0.68 xG/60, 6 goals, 8 assists) shows similar pressure through 5 high-danger chances, though neither has converted them at Tkachuk's rate. Chandler Stephenson represents Seattle's defensive weak link.

Goaltender L. Ullmark faces a back-to-back situation, creating uncertainty about deployment that could tilt the edge further if a fatigued starter sees the ice.

The gap between Ottawa's underlying dominance and Seattle's PDO advantage sets the board's proper lean. The Senators' xG and Corsi leads are substantial and durable; the Kraken have been fortunate, not superior.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

OTT 56%
56%
OTT
Model favorite
56%
44%
OTT50SEA

OTT by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score OTT 2.6–2.2 SEA; 19% 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
OTT← edge
edge →SEA
56.0%46.0%
53.0%45.0%
2.662.13
2.122.51
2.181.87
1.991.95
0.9931.011

OTT holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.993 vs 1.011) says SEA has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
OTT
7-1-2
+17 GD · 1d rest
SEA
6-4-0
+5 GD · 2d rest
0.993
OTT PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.011
SEA 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 46.0%.
  • The Senators drive Corsi at 53.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Things to watch
  • The Senators own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 46.0%.
  • The Senators drive Corsi at 53.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • L. Ullmark is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Senators are the hotter team by points pace (7-1-2 in their last 10).
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
OTT
Expected in goal
L. Ullmark
back-to-back.950 last start
Backup Linus Ullmark · -12.8 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.

SEA
Expected in goal
P. Grubauer
2 days rest.889 last start
Backup Joey Daccord · -6.2 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
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
SEA
Shane Wright8G 10A
0.77 xG/60 · 4 HD · 10.4% sh
Berkly Catton6G 8A
0.68 xG/60 · 5 HD · 8.8% sh
Keep going

Where to next