Backcheck
Recap · TBL at MTL

Canadiens run the Lightning off the ice on the underlying numbers

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

By the ModelJul 12, 11:01 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
TBL
Tampa Bay Lightning
1
Home
MTL
Montreal Canadiens
2
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

2.17Expected goals4.63
68% share for the better side
18Shot attempts (SOG)21
4High-danger chances9
36Corsi (all attempts)59
Score-adjusted: 40% / 60%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Montreal's 2-1 win understates their dominance: they controlled 68% of 5v5 expected goals (4.63–2.17), held 54% of shot attempts on goal (21–18), and landed nine high-danger chances to Tampa's four.

The Canadiens underperformed their xG by 2.63 goals, wasting their underlying dominance. A. Vasilevskiy mitigated that waste: 19 of 21 saves at 0.905 SV%, stopping 2.63 goals above expected. J. Dobes (MTL) was nearly as sharp—17 of 18 at 0.944 SV%, 1.17 above expected.

Tampa generated higher-quality looks than their shot volume suggested, but the gulf in 5v5 possession was vast. Montreal was lethal off the rush: they scored twice on 30 chances.

The pivot came in the third period. Juraj Slafkovský's snap shot from the doorstep at 18:56 gave Montreal breathing room—a clinical finish that reflected the team's sustained control.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
TBL0 / 4 · 0.85 xG
MTL1 / 9 · 2.08 xG
Medium dangermid-range
TBL1 / 11 · 1.07 xG
MTL1 / 16 · 1.93 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
TBL0 / 21 · 0.26 xG
MTL0 / 34 · 0.63 xG

MTL went 1-for-9 from high danger on 2.08 expected goals — 1.1 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
TBL
1 G · 2.17 xG · -1.2
MTL
2 G · 4.63 xG · -2.6
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
A. VasilevskiyTBL
+2.6
J. DobesMTL
+1.2

TBL finished -1.2 against expected, MTL -2.6 — A. Vasilevskiy (TBL) saved 2.6 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
TBL
SNAP1/22
SLAP0/1
TIP IN0/2
BACKHAND0/1
DEFLECTED0/1
WRIST0/0
OTHER0/9
MTL
SNAP2/29
SLAP0/5
TIP IN0/4
BACKHAND0/4
DEFLECTED0/0
WRIST0/1
OTHER0/16
TBL
MTL
Off the rush
0 G on 15 · 1.64 xG
2 G on 30 · 3.51 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 1 · 0.20 xG
0 G on 2 · 0.29 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: TBL went 1-for-22, MTL 2-for-29. MTL scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
N. Suzuki
#14 · C · MTL
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 22:25 TOI · +1
J. Slafkovský
#20 · L · MTL
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 21:23 TOI · +1
N. Kucherov
#86 · R · TBL
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 23:12 TOI
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • TBL generated higher-quality looks than the shot total suggests.
  • A. Vasilevskiy (TBL) stopped 2.6 goals above expected.
  • MTL was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 30 rush chances.
  • MTL underperformed xG by 2.6 — wasted quality chances.
  • A. Vasilevskiy (TBL) saved 2.6 goals above expected — stole the show.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · TBL at MTL · 7:00 PM ET

Lightning at Canadiens: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 12, 11:46 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

53%
TBL
Model favorite
53%
47%
TBL50MTL

TBL by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score TBL 2.62.5 MTL; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

TBL← edge
edge →MTL
54.0%5v5 xG%48.0%
53.0%Corsi%49.0%
2.67xGF / 602.41
2.28xGA / 602.62
2.38Goals for / gm2.24
1.85Goals against / gm1.96
1.019PDO — luck, not skill1.018

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

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects Tampa Bay to win 2.6-2.5, giving the Lightning 53% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

Montreal enters riding a 9-1-0 stretch, the hotter team by points pace. But the underlying data favors Tampa. The Lightning dominate at 5v5 with 54.0% expected goals against Montreal's 48.0%, and control 53.0% of shot attempts to the Canadiens' 49.0%. Expect a territorial tilt firmly in the visitors' favor.

Both teams are running hot by PDO—Tampa at 1.019, Montreal at 1.018—which means regression is lurking for both. That's the real story underneath the streak.

Brandon Hagel carries Tampa's offense at 1.10 expected goals per 60 minutes, backed by 23 goals and 26 assists on a 15.8% shooting rate. Anthony Cirelli operates at 0.95 xG/60 with 15 goals, 18 assists, and a 17.0% clip.

Cole Caufield is Montreal's primary threat. At 0.97 xG/60 with 33 goals and 16 assists on 20.0% shooting, he's the most dangerous player on the ice. Oliver Kapanen runs 0.83 xG/60 with 19 goals and 12 assists at 17.8% shooting.

The structural edge belongs to Tampa: territorial dominance forces Montreal to defend constantly. Victor Hedman becomes the pressure point on Tampa's back end; Montreal will hunt him. Mike Matheson shoulders equivalent burden and will absorb relentless Hagel and Cirelli possession time.

What makes this a genuine coin flip is Montreal's hot streak offsetting Tampa's superior process. Both Caufield and Hagel are shooting unsustainably high. The Canadiens' recency tilt against a fundamentally superior opponent creates genuine uncertainty. The Lightning own the data, but variance runs high enough to justify the pick'em spread.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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
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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters