Backcheck
Recap · BUF at ANA

Ducks run the Sabres off the ice on the underlying numbers

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

By the ModelJul 12, 8:31 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
BUF
Buffalo Sabres
5
Home
ANA
Anaheim Ducks
6
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.63Expected goals5.52
60% share for the better side
29Shot attempts (SOG)33
5High-danger chances12
66Corsi (all attempts)62
Score-adjusted: 53% / 47%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Buffalo scored 5 goals on 3.63 expected goals—nearly 1.4 more than the numbers predicted—and still lost 6-5 in overtime. Anaheim simply controlled the game: 60% of 5v5 expected goals (5.52 to 3.63), 12 high-danger chances to Buffalo's 5, and superior shot quality (0.089 xG per attempt to 0.055).

The margins tell the story. Buffalo's high-danger efficiency was clean—2 of 5 chances (40%)—but Anaheim's volume overwhelmed it. Both teams scored twice from low-danger areas where goalies should make the save. Both scored 4 off the rush, though Buffalo's came from 28 chances and Anaheim's from 36. Husso allowed 1.4 goals beyond expectation, yet Anaheim's depth ensured the win. Troy Terry's backhander at 01:29 of overtime put it away.

Three Stars

  • #26 R. Dahlin (BUF) — 2A in 25:18
  • #2 J. LaCombe (ANA) — 1G, 1A in 23:56
  • #25 O. Power (BUF) — 1G, 1A in 21:01
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
BUF2 / 5 · 1.05 xG
ANA2 / 12 · 3.02 xG
Medium dangermid-range
BUF1 / 18 · 1.82 xG
ANA2 / 18 · 1.88 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
BUF2 / 43 · 0.76 xG
ANA2 / 32 · 0.62 xG

ANA went 2-for-32 from low danger on 0.62 expected goals — 1.4 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
BUF
5 G · 3.63 xG · +1.4
ANA
6 G · 5.52 xG · +0.5
01234567
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
A. LyonBUF
-0.5
V. HussoANA
-1.4

BUF finished +1.4 against expected, ANA +0.5 — V. Husso (ANA) allowed 1.4 more goals than expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
BUF
SNAP4/25
TIP IN0/9
WRIST1/7
SLAP0/9
BACKHAND0/2
DEFLECTED0/0
POKE0/0
OTHER0/14
ANA
SNAP2/24
TIP IN0/7
WRIST2/8
SLAP0/4
BACKHAND2/7
DEFLECTED0/2
POKE0/1
OTHER0/9
BUF
ANA
Off the rush
4 G on 28 · 2.11 xG
4 G on 36 · 4.36 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 4 · 0.69 xG
0 G on 4 · 0.40 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: BUF went 4-for-25, ANA 2-for-24. BUF scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
R. Dahlin
#26 · D · BUF
0 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 25:18 TOI · +1
J. LaCombe
#2 · D · ANA
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 23:56 TOI
O. Power
#25 · D · BUF
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 21:01 TOI · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • V. Husso (ANA) gave up 1.4 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
  • Open game — 17 high-danger chances combined (ANA 12, BUF 5).
  • ANA generated far more dangerous chances — 0.089 xG/shot vs 0.055. Quality over quantity.
  • BUF was clinical in the high-danger zone — 2/5 on HD chances (40%).
  • ANA scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • BUF scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • ANA was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 36 rush chances.
  • BUF was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 28 rush chances.
  • ANA created 4 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • BUF created 4 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · BUF at ANA · 8:00 PM ET

Sabres at Ducks: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 12, 8:29 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

54%
ANA
Model favorite
46%
54%
BUF50ANA

ANA by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score BUF 2.62.8 ANA; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

BUF← edge
edge →ANA
50.0%5v5 xG%52.0%
49.0%Corsi%52.0%
2.55xGF / 602.80
2.55xGA / 602.59
2.35Goals for / gm2.09
1.90Goals against / gm2.32
1.020PDO — luck, not skill0.981

The season numbers split 33 — no clear process edge — and PDO (1.020 vs 0.981) says BUF has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.6 - 2.8 contest with the Ducks favored at 54% win probability—essentially a pick'em.

Buffalo is the hotter team, riding a 9-1-0 streak. That run masks a season-long struggle: the Sabres control only 50.0% of expected goals and 49.0% of shot attempts at five-on-five, both below league average. They're not outplaying their peers. Anaheim, meanwhile, drives 52.0% xG and 52.0% Corsi—a sign they own most puck touches and establish territorial advantage.

The underlying luck index cuts hard against the Ducks: their 0.981 PDO signals that their goal-scoring and save percentages have underperformed their actual play, a gap that typically corrects itself. Buffalo sits at 1.020—essentially the reverse—which means their recent success leans on finishing and goaltending luck the Sabres won't sustain.

Both starters take a back-to-back load: L. Dostal for Anaheim, U. Luukkonen for Buffalo. Either coach might start a backup or lean on a tired starter.

The Ducks must build their game plan around Jason Zucker, whose 1.07 expected goals per 60 minutes and 15.1% shot conversion rate (6 high-danger goals in 14 total) signal finishing prowess from prime chances. Josh Doan is the secondary scoring threat. The Sabres, meanwhile, must contain Beckett Sennecke (1.03 xG/60, 20 goals) and Cutter Gauthier, who has scored 25 goals at a 12.9% rate despite just 2 from high-danger spots—evidence he's lethal from mid-range and on clean looks.

Defensively, Buffalo's weak link is Jack Quinn; for Anaheim, it's Mason McTavish.

Players to Watch

BUF

  • Jason Zucker — 1.07 xG/60, 14G 14A, 6 HD goals, 15.1% shooting
  • Josh Doan — 1.01 xG/60, 15G 18A, 2 HD goals, 11.5% shooting

ANA

  • Beckett Sennecke — 1.03 xG/60, 20G 19A, 8 HD goals, 13.5% shooting
  • Cutter Gauthier — 0.99 xG/60, 25G 16A, 2 HD goals, 12.9% shooting

The game rides on territorial play and finishing execution. Anaheim has the possession edge and the regression-to-mean tailwind in its favor. Buffalo counters with recent run and the momentum of a 9-1-0 pace. The model's near-even call is sound.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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
ANA
Beckett Sennecke20G 19A
1.03 xG/60 · 8 HD · 13.5% sh
Cutter Gauthier25G 16A
0.99 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.9% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters