Motion-blurred skater in a Philadelphia Flyers sweater
Breakdown · MTL at PHI

Flyers hold off the Canadiens

The verdict · stolen

The Flyers stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 2.66–2.03 and won anyway.

MTL 2 · PHI 4
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 11:40 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 Flyers won 4-2 despite controlling only 43% of expected goals. The Canadiens dominated play at 5v5 with 57% of xG, yet failed to convert. Philadelphia's finish was elite; Montreal's goaltending faltered.

The gap is substantial: a 2.66-to-2.03 xG split should produce a Canadiens win, not a comfortable Flyers victory. But shot quality tells the story. Philadelphia converted 75% of their high-danger chances (3 of 4), while Montreal managed 3 high-danger looks and scored on only one. The Flyers were lethal on the rush, tallying 4 goals on 21 chances—a finishing rate unsustainable over time.

Goaltending amplified the disconnect. Samuel Ersson stopped 27 of 29 shots (0.931 SV%), outperforming expectations by 0.66 goals. Jakub Dobes allowed four on 25 (0.840 SV%), underperforming expectations by 1.97 goals.

The turning point came in period three at 12:00 when Alex Bump fired a snap shot from the high slot.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Apr 14
MTL
2
PHI
4

Flyers hold off the Canadiens

Chances 2.7 – 2.0Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Canadiens deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
MTL
2.66
PHI
2.03
57% of the chances43%

The board read MTL 2, PHI 4. The chances read MTL 2.7, PHI 2.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
PHI
+2.0
goals above expected
PHI2.03 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
MTL2.66 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

The Flyers scored 2.0 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 08:08PHIP. MartonePP0–1
  2. P1 14:42PHIO. Bonk0–2
  3. P2 06:50MTLB. Gallagher1–2
  4. P2 13:52PHIM. Michkov1–3
  5. P2 19:49MTLJ. Evans2–3
  6. P3 12:00PHIA. Bump2–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
MTL
42 shots
2
Final
71 shots
PHI
29 shots
4
MTL attackPHI attack
MTL PHI Goal
42
shots · 2 in
29
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
MTLPHI
0 / 3
0.66 xG
High danger
3 / 4
0.97 xG
2 / 13
1.26 xG
Medium
0 / 4
0.58 xG
0 / 43
0.74 xG
Low
1 / 28
0.49 xG

The Canadiens went 0 for 3 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B
S. Ersson
+0.7
PHI · 27/29
F
J. Dobes
−2.0
MTL · 21/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Flyers hold off the Canadiens

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 12–8
  1. 08:08PHIP. Martonepower play(M. Michkov, O. Bonk)0–1
  2. 14:42PHIO. Bonk(M. Michkov, H. McDonald)0–2
2ndshots 12–12
  1. 06:50MTLB. Gallagher(K. Guhle, A. Texier)1–2
  2. 13:52PHIM. Michkov1–3
  3. 19:49MTLJ. Evans(A. Xhekaj, J. Veleno)2–3
3rdshots 5–5
  1. 12:00PHIA. Bump(P. Martone)2–4

score reads MTL–PHI

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
2.03
PHI chances
Goals their shots were worth
+2.0
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.077
PHI puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
37.9%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.66Expected goals2.03
MTL 57% of the chance quality
29Shots on goal25
3High-danger chances4
59All attempts (Corsi)36
Adjusted for score: MTL 67% · PHI 33%
Faceoffs · PHI won26%off39%neu73%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
MTL0 / 3 · 0.66 xG
PHI3 / 4 · 0.97 xG
Medium dangermid-range
MTL2 / 13 · 1.26 xG
PHI0 / 4 · 0.58 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
MTL0 / 43 · 0.74 xG
PHI1 / 28 · 0.49 xG

PHI went 3-for-4 from high danger on 0.97 expected goals — 2.0 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
MTL
2 G · 2.66 xG · -0.7
PHI
4 G · 2.03 xG · +2.0
012345

MTL finished -0.7 against expected, PHI +2.0.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
MTL
WRIST0/25
SNAP0/7
SLAP0/5
BACKHAND1/4
TIP IN1/1
OTHER0/17
PHI
WRIST2/15
SNAP1/7
SLAP0/3
BACKHAND0/2
TIP IN1/2
OTHER0/7
MTL
PHI
Off the rush
1 G on 28
1.80 xG
4 G on 21
1.96 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 3
0.30 xG
0 G on 0
0.00 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: MTL went 0-for-25, PHI 2-for-15. PHI scored 4 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. Dobes
MTL · 21/25 · .840
-2.0
saved above expected
F
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger3/41.0-2.0
Medium0/40.6+0.6
Low1/280.5-0.5

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

S. Ersson
PHI · 27/29 · .931
+0.7
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/30.7+0.7
Medium2/131.3-0.7
Low0/430.7+0.7

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

71 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
MTL
42 shots
2
Final
71 shots
PHI
29 shots
4
MTL attackPHI attack
MTL PHI Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — MTL left, PHI 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
M. Michkov
#39 · R · PHI
1 G · 2 A · 8 SOG · 16:18 on ice · +2
P. Martone
#94 · R · PHI
1 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 17:37 on ice · +1
O. Bonk
#59 · D · PHI
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 16:28 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Apr 14
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 11:39 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 projection screams equilibrium: Montreal 2.3–2.6 Philadelphia, with the Flyers pegged at 54% win probability. This is a genuine pick'em.

The Flyers own the underlying play. Montreal generates 48.0% 5v5 expected goals; Philadelphia returns 51.0%. That's a meaningful edge—the kind that usually shows up in the score over time. But Montreal's Corsi% of 49.0% against Philadelphia's 48.0% suggests the Canadiens are closer to parity in raw shot volume than in shot quality, a gap that could close.

Montreal's PDO sits at 1.018, running hot. The Flyers register 1.008, essentially neutral. Regression matters here. If Montreal's luck normalizes, their goal differential tightens visibly.

D. Vladar plays on a back-to-back, a detail worth monitoring. Backup duty could materialize, or a tired starter could leak on a weak night.

The Players

Cole Caufield anchors Montreal at 0.97 xG/60 with 33 goals and 16 assists; his 20.0% shooting rate is both an advantage and a target for mean reversion. Oliver Kapanen (0.83 xG/60, 19 goals, 12 assists) adds secondary punch, though his 17.8% shooting rate suggests more regression risk.

Philadelphia counters with Owen Tippett at 0.88 xG/60, 19 goals, and 18 assists. His 12.1% shooting is safer ground. Christian Dvorak (0.81 xG/60, 12 goals, 21 assists) is the set-up man, though his 11.2% shot rate leaves room for downside.

Where It Breaks

Mike Matheson is Montreal's defensive weak link. On Philadelphia, that distinction falls to Christian Dvorak—unlikely for a playmaker, a detail that itself telegraphs roster construction issues.

Both teams sit at 0% on high-danger chances and rebound goals, a statistical curio that won't hold. Variance will bite both sides.

The Flyers' 54% projection is really "pick Philadelphia, but barely." Montreal is live. If Caufield's shooting normalizes down and Vladar plays tired, the Canadiens steal this. If the Flyers capitalize on their xG edge and Tippett's shot selection holds, Philadelphia wins decisively. Neither outcome defies the data.

This is the closest thing hockey offers to a true coin flip—two teams separated by talent but intertwined by luck and circumstance.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

PHI 54%
54%
PHI
Model favorite
46%
54%
MTL50PHI

PHI by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score MTL 2.3–2.6 PHI; 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
MTL← edge
edge →PHI
48.0%51.0%
49.0%48.0%
2.412.26
2.622.20
2.241.96
1.961.82
1.0181.008

The season numbers split 3–3 — no clear process edge — and the luck row (1.018 vs 1.008) says MTL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
MTL
8-2-0
+9 GD · 2d rest
PHI
7-3-0
+11 GD · 1d rest
1.018
MTL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.008
PHI PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Flyers own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
Regression watch
  • The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Flyers own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • D. Vladar is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
MTL
Expected in goal
J. Fowler
2 days rest.970 last start
Backup Jakub Dobes · +17.3 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

PHI
Expected in goal
D. Vladar
back-to-back.923 last start
Backup Dan Vladar · +13.8 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.

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
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
PHI
Owen Tippett19G 18A
0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.1% sh
Christian Dvorak12G 21A
0.81 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.2% sh
Keep going

Where to next