Motion-blurred skater in a St. Louis Blues sweater

Breakdown · TOR at STL

Blues run the Maple Leafs off the ice on the underlying numbers

FinalSat, Mar 28

TORToronto Maple Leafs1 STLSt. Louis Blues5

The verdict · earned

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

TOR 1 · STL 5

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 9:36 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

St. Louis beat Toronto 5-1, yet the underlying metrics reveal a more modest advantage: the Blues controlled just 63% of expected goals (3.41–1.97). The scoreline amplified what was a clear but not dominant possession advantage.

The Blues dominated play. They held 74% of shot attempts (38–13) and generated three high-danger chances to Toronto's two. This should predict a comfortable win, yet it doesn't fully explain a five-goal margin.

The gap widened through superior goaltending and execution. J. Binnington stopped 12 of 13 shots at 0.923 save percentage, performing 0.97 goals better than expected. J. Woll posted a 0.868 SV% on 33 saves, surrendering 1.59 more goals than his underlying metrics suggested. When the defending team collapses and the attacking team converts efficiently, a 63-37 xG advantage becomes a 5-1 rout.

Philip Broberg's wrist shot from the top of the circles (third period, 18:24) crystallized the shift. The Blues' rush attack—a weapon Toronto couldn't counter—had already decided the game.

R. Thomas (2A in 19:57), D. Holloway (1G, 1A in 18:17), and J. Neighbours (2A in 14:38) led the charge. The Blues' secondary scoring reflected their depth and pace advantage: multiple threats scoring on limited ice time.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Mar 28

TOR

STL

Blues run the Maple Leafs off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 2.0 – 3.4Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Blues earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

TOR

1.97

STL

3.41

37% of the chances63%

The board read TOR 1, STL 5. The chances read TOR 2.0, STL 3.4.

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

Luck check

STL

+1.6

goals above expected

STL3.41 expected · 5 scored

Expected

Scored

TOR1.97 expected · 1 scored

Expected

Scored

The Blues scored 1.6 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season

Every goal, in order

P2 05:21STLJ. Snuggerud0–1
P2 10:35STLJ. Holl0–2
P3 05:07TORJ. McCabe1–2
P3 06:46STLP. SuterSH1–3
P3 09:10STLD. Holloway1–4
P3 18:24STLP. BrobergPP1–5

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

Where the shots came from

TOR

27 shots

Final

74 shots

STL

47 shots

TOR STL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 1 in

shots · 5 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

TORSTL

0 / 2

0.48 xG

High danger

1 / 3

0.60 xG

0 / 10

1.13 xG

Medium

4 / 20

2.26 xG

1 / 23

0.36 xG

Low

0 / 37

0.55 xG

High-danger looks: TOR 0 of 2, STL 1 of 3.

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

In the net

B+

J. Binnington

+1.0

STL · 12/13

J. Woll

−1.6

TOR · 33/38

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Blues run the Maple Leafs 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 4–10no goals

2ndshots 4–15

05:21STLJ. Snuggerud(C. Fowler, D. Holloway)0–1
10:35STLJ. Holl(J. Kyrou, P. Buchnevich)0–2

3rdshots 5–13

05:07TORJ. McCabe(D. Joshua, J. Quillan)1–2
06:46STLP. Sutershorthanded(R. Thomas)1–3
09:10STLD. Holloway(J. Kyrou, J. Neighbours)1–4
18:24STLP. Brobergpower play(J. Neighbours, R. Thomas)1–5

score reads TOR–STL

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.41

STL chances

Goals their shots were worth

+1.6

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.055

STL puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

63.2%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

1.97Expected goals3.41

STL 63% of the chance quality

13Shots on goal38

2High-danger chances3

35All attempts (Corsi)60

Adjusted for score: TOR 41% · STL 59%

Faceoffs · STL won67%off53%neu44%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

TOR0 / 2 · 0.48 xG

STL1 / 3 · 0.60 xG

Medium dangermid-range

TOR0 / 10 · 1.13 xG

STL4 / 20 · 2.26 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

TOR1 / 23 · 0.36 xG

STL0 / 37 · 0.55 xG

STL went 4-for-20 from medium danger on 2.26 expected goals — 1.7 above expected.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

TOR

1 G · 1.97 xG · -1.0

STL

5 G · 3.41 xG · +1.6

0123456

TOR finished -1.0 against expected, STL +1.6.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

TOR

WRIST1/16

SNAP0/1

TIP IN0/5

SLAP0/2

BACKHAND0/2

DEFLECTED0/1

POKE0/0

WRAP AROUND0/0

OTHER0/8

STL

WRIST2/29

SNAP3/10

TIP IN0/5

SLAP0/1

BACKHAND0/0

DEFLECTED0/0

POKE0/1

WRAP AROUND0/1

OTHER0/13

TOR

STL

Off the rush

1 G on 16

1.48 xG

5 G on 33

3.05 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 1

0.14 xG

0 G on 1

0.18 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: TOR went 1-for-16, STL 2-for-29. STL 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

J. Woll

TOR · 33/38 · .868

-1.6

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/30.6-0.4

Medium4/202.3-1.7

Low0/370.6+0.6

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. Binnington

STL · 12/13 · .923

+1.0

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/20.5+0.5

Medium0/101.1+1.1

Low1/230.4-0.6

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

74 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

TOR

27 shots

Final

74 shots

STL

47 shots

TOR STL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — TOR left, STL 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

R. Thomas

#18 · C · STL

0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 19:57 on ice · +1

D. Holloway

#81 · L · STL

1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 18:17 on ice · +2

J. Neighbours

#63 · L · STL

0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 14:38 on ice · +2

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Mar 28

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 9:18 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 2.6 St. Louis goal margin with the Blues at 56% win probability. Three factors drive the edge: Toronto's rest deficit, St. Louis's superior underlying numbers, and hot recent form.

Toronto comes in on three days' rest; St. Louis on one. That rest edge matters less than it appears—rest mostly tilts close games—but it reinforces a deeper advantage. The Blues own a 49.0% expected goals share at 5v5 against Toronto's 46.0%, and the Corsi split (48.0% to 45.0%) confirms it's not variance. The PDO numbers are nearly identical (St. Louis 1.000, Toronto 1.002), so neither team has banked unsustainable luck.

Toronto's form has been rough. Over their last 10 games, the Maple Leafs sit at minus-5 goal differential. St. Louis enters on a 7-1-2 run.

A wrinkle: J. Hofer, St. Louis's starter, is on a back-to-back. Watch for either a backup appearance or fatigue.

Auston Matthews hasn't played in 16 days and is likely out—that's 1.10 expected goals per 60 minutes, 17 goals, 13 assists, and one high-danger goal off the ice. John Tavares remains Toronto's secondary anchor at 0.91 xG/60, 15 goals, 24 assists, three high-danger goals, and 12.4% shooting.

Jimmy Snuggerud generates 0.86 xG/60 for St. Louis with 15 goals, 22 assists, 2 high-danger goals, and 11.9% shooting. Dylan Holloway trails at 0.82 xG/60, 13 goals, 24 assists, 1 high-danger goal, and 10.8% shooting. Both are shooting above their expected rates—a sign of either genuine elite finishing or unsustainable variance.

Toronto's defense has cracks; Bo Groulx is a weak link. St. Louis's vulnerability is paradoxical: Snuggerud generates so much offense that his defensive liability gets masked.

The model sees it clearly: the Blues are the likeliest winner.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

STL 56%

56%

STL

Model favorite

44%

56%

TOR50STL

STL by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score TOR 2.3–2.6 STL; 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

TOR← edge

edge →STL

46.0%49.0%

45.0%48.0%

2.242.34

2.672.40

2.092.00

2.522.12

1.0021.000

STL holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.002 vs 1.000) says TOR has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

TOR

4-4-2

-5 GD · 3d rest

STL

7-1-2

+11 GD · 1d rest

1.002

TOR PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.000

STL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Things to watch

J. Hofer is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Blues are the hotter team by points pace (7-1-2 in their last 10).
The Maple Leafs are underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10.
The Maple Leafs have 2 more days of rest.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

TOR

Expected in goal

J. Woll

3 days rest.930 last start

Backup Joseph Woll · -6.6 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

STL

Expected in goal

J. Hofer

back-to-back.960 last start

Backup Joel Hofer · +11.7 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

TOR

Auston Matthews17G 13A

1.10 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.6% sh

John Tavares15G 24A

0.91 xG/60 · 3 HD · 12.4% sh

STL

Jimmy Snuggerud15G 22A

0.86 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.9% sh

Dylan Holloway13G 24A

0.82 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.8% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page