Recap · MTL at TBL

J. Dobes stands tall as the Canadiens edge the Lightning

The Canadiens stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.28–4.07 and won anyway.

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 9:46 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity

Away

MTL

Montreal Canadiens

Home

TBL

Tampa Bay Lightning

FINAL

Process vs result

The underlying story

3.28Expected goals4.07

55% share for the better side

23Shot attempts (SOG)37

5High-danger chances8

43Corsi (all attempts)64

Score-adjusted: 38% / 62%

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Montreal won 4-1. Tampa Bay dominated—controlling 55% of expected goals and 62% of shot attempts. J. Dobes erased the contradiction.

The Canadiens goaltender saved 36 of 37 shots at a 0.973 percentage, outperforming by 3.07 goals. A. Vasilevskiy managed 19 of 21 saves at 0.905, solid work in a losing cause.

Montreal's precision was the leverage. The Canadiens converted 60% of high-danger chances (3 of 5) and scored twice on 24 rush attempts. Tampa held the better opportunities—8 high-danger chances versus Montreal's 5—but lacked finish. Process without payoff is sterile.

Nick Suzuki's wrist shot from the point (P3, 18:54) marked the game's hinge.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

MTL3 / 5 · 1.56 xG

TBL1 / 8 · 1.90 xG

Medium dangermid-range

MTL1 / 12 · 1.25 xG

TBL0 / 13 · 1.47 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

MTL0 / 26 · 0.47 xG

TBL0 / 43 · 0.70 xG

TBL went 0-for-13 from medium danger on 1.47 expected goals — 1.5 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

MTL

4 G · 3.28 xG · +0.7

TBL

1 G · 4.07 xG · -3.1

012345

Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)

J. DobesMTL

+3.1

A. VasilevskiyTBL

+1.3

MTL finished +0.7 against expected, TBL -3.1 — J. Dobes (MTL) saved 3.1 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

MTL

WRIST2/6

SNAP1/16

SLAP1/7

TIP IN0/3

BACKHAND0/2

BAT0/0

OTHER0/9

TBL

WRIST1/21

SNAP0/4

SLAP0/12

TIP IN0/5

BACKHAND0/3

BAT0/2

OTHER0/17

MTL

TBL

Off the rush

2 G on 24 · 2.31 xG

0 G on 29 · 2.58 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 0 · 0.00 xG

0 G on 4 · 0.83 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: MTL went 2-for-6, TBL 1-for-21. MTL scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types

Three stars · computed, not voted

M. Matheson

#8 · D · MTL

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 23:28 TOI · +2

J. Slafkovský

#20 · L · MTL

1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 19:12 TOI · +2

C. Caufield

#13 · R · MTL

1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 17:05 TOI · +2

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model flagged

MTL stole this one. TBL owned 55% of the xG and lost.
J. Dobes (MTL) stopped 3.1 goals above expected.
MTL was clinical in the high-danger zone — 3/5 on HD chances (60%).
MTL was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 24 rush chances.
TBL created 4 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
TBL underperformed xG by 3.1 — wasted quality chances.
J. Dobes (MTL) saved 3.1 goals above expected — stole the show.

Before the game — the model's pre-game read

Preview · MTL at TBL · 7:00 PM ET

The Lightning are the model's lean over the Canadiens — with PDO regression in play

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 9:44 AMEdited for clarity

Win probability

The model's lean

57%

TBL

Model favorite

43%

57%

MTL50TBL

TBL by 14 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score MTL 2.3–2.8 TBL; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates

Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

MTL← edge

edge →TBL

48.0%5v5 xG%54.0%

49.0%Corsi%53.0%

2.41xGF / 602.67

2.62xGA / 602.28

2.24Goals for / gm2.38

1.96Goals against / gm1.85

1.018PDO — luck, not skill1.019

TBL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.018 vs 1.019) says TBL has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.3–2.8 goal Lightning victory at 57% win probability. That edge runs clean through the underlying numbers.

Tampa dominates 5v5 play. The Lightning's 54.0% expected goals share dwarfs Montreal's 48.0%, a 6-point gap that compounds over 60 minutes. The territorial advantage shows at 53.0% Corsi to Montreal's 49.0% — the Lightning simply control the puck where it matters most. Montreal will be chasing all night.

Both teams are burning PDO luck, though neither by much. Tampa's 1.019 and Montreal's 1.018 place both squads in the fortunate camp. Regression works both directions: the team that falls further will hurt more. Each goal that doesn't fall becomes a compounding problem when you're already behind in shot volume.

The individual matchups explain the depth of Montreal's challenge. Brandon Hagel leads with 1.10 xG/60 and 23 goals at a 15.8% clip — elite finishing on elite volume. Anthony Cirelli provides secondary punch at 0.95 xG/60, driving 15 goals on 5 high-danger markers. Cole Caufield counters for Montreal at 0.97 xG/60 and 33 goals, but his 20.0% shooting rate is unsustainable. Oliver Kapanen contributes at 0.83 xG/60 and 19 goals with 4 high-danger markers, though his 17.8% shooting rate sits below Caufield's elite threshold.

Montreal's problem is structural. It's not that Caufield lacks talent. It's that Caufield must do too much.

Three Stars

Brandon Hagel — 1.10 xG/60, 23 goals
Cole Caufield — 0.97 xG/60, 33 goals
Anthony Cirelli — 0.95 xG/60, 15 goals

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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

TBL

Brandon Hagel23G 26A

1.10 xG/60 · 2 HD · 15.8% sh

Anthony Cirelli15G 18A

0.95 xG/60 · 5 HD · 17.0% sh

Source · MoneyPuck skaters

◆ Back to the front page