Backcheck
Recap · TOR at MTL · Preseason

Canadiens edge the Maple Leafs in overtime

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

By the ModelSep 19, 10:03 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
TOR
Toronto Maple Leafs
3
Home
MTL
Montreal Canadiens
4
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

2.83Expected goals4.09
59% share for the better side
21Shot attempts (SOG)30
2High-danger chances4
37Corsi (all attempts)72
Score-adjusted: 36% / 64%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Montreal's 4-3 overtime win came with expected-goal backing: they controlled 59% of 5v5 xG (4.09–2.83). But Toronto had the more efficient looks—0.076 xG/shot to Montreal's 0.057—which means Montreal simply had more attempts and better volume.

The Canadiens' win was built on rush dominance. They converted 4 goals from 29 rush chances; Toronto converted 3 from 24. That asymmetry on the transition mattered. Montreal also capitalized on special teams, while Toronto's power play was dominant (2 goals on 14 shots, 1.35 xG), a rare bright spot in an otherwise poor evening.

What undid Toronto was transition defense. They surrendered 29 rush shots worth 3.18 expected goals and allowed 4 goals on them—a historically bad differential for the backline. Montreal's defense was equally suspect (C- on the card), but the Canadiens were lethal on their chances.

Goaltending was a study in variance. S. Hlavaj and A. Akhtyamov both stopped 13 of 15 (0.867 SV%), each saving 2.1 goals above expected. J. Fowler (0.900 SV%, 9 of 10) saved 1.8 above expected; J. Dobes (0.818, 9 of 11) was -0.52 vs. expected. Cole Caufield won it at 04:22 of overtime from the doorstep.

Why the Canadiens won
  1. 01Dangerous off the rush
  2. 02Power play cashed in
  3. 03Won on the merits
  4. 04L. Hutson led the way
  5. 05The moment it turned
Why the Maple Leafs lost
  1. 01Rush defense leaked all night
  2. 02Paraded to the penalty box
  3. 03Rebound control was shaky
  4. 04Allowed 4.09 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 4 high-danger shots (1.00 xG) and 29 rush shots (3.18 xG).
  5. 05Took 7 penalties for 28 PIM vs 8 for 22 on the other side.
Graded vs a league-average game

Report card

DimensionTORMTL
Offense
Basis

TOR Created 2.83 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 2 high-danger shots (0.46 xG) and 24 rush shots (2.39 xG).

MTL Created 4.09 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 4 high-danger shots (1.00 xG) and 29 rush shots (3.18 xG).

B-
80
A+
98
Defense
Basis

TOR Allowed 4.09 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 4 high-danger shots (1.00 xG) and 29 rush shots (3.18 xG).

MTL Allowed 2.83 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 2 high-danger shots (0.46 xG) and 24 rush shots (2.39 xG).

F
52
C-
70
Transition
Basis

TOR Rush shots 24–29, rush xG 2.39–3.18 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

MTL Rush shots 29–24, rush xG 3.18–2.39 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

D
65
B
85
Special teams
Basis

TOR 2-for-4 on the power play (50%; league ≈21%) with 1.35 PP xG.

MTL 1-for-2 on the power play (50%; league ≈21%) with 0.66 PP xG.

A+
100
A+
100
Goaltending
Basis

TOR +0.09 goals saved above expected on 30 shots against.

MTL -0.17 goals saved above expected on 21 shots against.

C
76
C
73
Discipline
Basis

TOR Took 7 penalties for 28 PIM vs 8 for 22 on the other side.

MTL Took 8 penalties for 22 PIM vs 7 for 28 on the other side.

D-
60
A-
90
Luck

Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

Basis

TOR Finishing +0.17 goals vs xG plus +0.09 GSAx of save luck = +0.26 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

MTL Finishing -0.09 goals vs xG plus -0.17 GSAx of save luck = -0.26 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

C+
77
C
73
Source · NHL play-by-play · xG engine · luck graded separately
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
TOR1 / 2 · 0.46 xG
MTL1 / 4 · 1.00 xG
Medium dangermid-range
TOR2 / 18 · 2.10 xG
MTL3 / 22 · 2.49 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
TOR0 / 17 · 0.27 xG
MTL0 / 46 · 0.60 xG

MTL went 0-for-46 from low danger on 0.60 expected goals — 0.6 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
TOR
3 G · 2.83 xG · +0.2
MTL
4 G · 4.09 xG · -0.1
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
S. HlavajTOR
+0.0
A. AkhtyamovTOR
+0.0
J. FowlerMTL
+0.3
J. DobesMTL
-0.5

TOR finished +0.2 against expected, MTL -0.1 — J. Dobes (MTL) allowed 0.5 more goals than expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
TOR
SNAP2/18
TIP IN1/5
BACKHAND0/4
SLAP0/2
WRIST0/1
DEFLECTED0/1
BAT0/0
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/6
MTL
SNAP2/29
TIP IN1/5
BACKHAND0/3
SLAP1/4
WRIST0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
BAT0/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
OTHER0/26
TOR
MTL
Off the rush
3 G on 24 · 2.39 xG
4 G on 29 · 3.18 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 2 · 0.28 xG
0 G on 5 · 0.50 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: TOR went 2-for-18, MTL 2-for-29. MTL scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
L. Hutson
#48 · D · MTL
1 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 24:50 TOI · +2
H. Rybinski
#54 · R · TOR
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 11:14 TOI
O. Ekman-Larsson
#95 · D · TOR
0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 23:53 TOI · -1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
Intelligence · ranked by importance
WARNINGTORfancoach

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 29 rush shots worth 3.18 xG (4 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.

100
IMP
STRENGTHMTLfancoach

Dangerous off the rush

4 goals on 29 rush shots worth 3.18 xG.

95
IMP
WARNINGMTLfancoach

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 24 rush shots worth 2.39 xG (3 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.

84
IMP
STRENGTHTORfancoach

Dangerous off the rush

3 goals on 24 rush shots worth 2.39 xG.

80
IMP
STRENGTHTORfancoach

Power play cashed in

2-for-4 on the power play (50%) on 1.35 PP xG.

66
IMP
WARNINGTORfancoachgm

Paraded to the penalty box

Took 7 penalties for 28 minutes (opponent: 8 for 22).

Cut the stick infractions — the penalty differential is a controllable.

57
IMP
What the model flagged
  • TOR had the higher quality looks — 0.076 xG/shot vs 0.057.
  • MTL was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 29 rush chances.
  • TOR was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 24 rush chances.
  • MTL created 5 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • S. Hlavaj (TOR) saved 2.1 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • A. Akhtyamov (TOR) saved 2.1 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • J. Fowler (MTL) saved 1.8 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • TOR power play was dominant — 2 PPG on 14 PP shots (1.35 xG).
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · TOR at MTL · 7:00 PM ET · Preseason

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

By the ModelSep 19, 9:34 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

57%
MTL
Model favorite
43%
57%
TOR50MTL

MTL by 14 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score TOR 3.13.6 MTL; 16% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

TOR← edge
edge →MTL
45.3%5v5 xG%49.7%
45.5%Corsi%48.2%
2.91xGF / 603.28
3.51xGA / 603.32
3.07Goals for / gm3.40
3.60Goals against / gm3.06
1.003PDO — luck, not skill1.019

MTL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.003 vs 1.019) says MTL has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5
Keys to the game
TACTICALMTLcoach

Shutdown Assignment: Canadiens

Key matchup: Neutralize Auston Matthews (17G, 1.10 xG/60, 1 HD goals)

Key matchup: Neutralize Auston Matthews (17G, 1.10 xG/60, 1 HD goals)

51
IMP
TACTICALTORcoach

Shutdown Assignment: Maple Leafs

Key matchup: Neutralize Cole Caufield (33G, 0.97 xG/60, 1 HD goals)

Key matchup: Neutralize Cole Caufield (33G, 0.97 xG/60, 1 HD goals)

51
IMP
STRENGTHTORfancoach

Auston Matthews drives the Maple Leafs offense

Auston Matthews: 17G 13A, 1.10 xG/60, 1 high-danger goals.

48
IMP
WARNINGTORcoachgm

Exploitable minutes: Bo Groulx

Bo Groulx is on ice for 4.00 xGA/60 and 11 high-danger shots against this season.

Hunt matchups against Bo Groulx's shifts with the top line.

48
IMP

The model projects Montreal to win with 57% probability, setting the expected goal line at 3.1–3.6 for Toronto. Montreal's edge comes from superior underlying play, not luck—a trajectory worth watching for mean reversion.

Montreal dominates the 5v5 shot process. They generate 49.7% expected goals against Toronto's 45.3%, a gap that compounds over a season. Corsi backs this: 48.2% for Montreal, 45.5% for Toronto. This is the model's foundation.

But the Canadiens are running hot. PDO of 1.019 means they're converting at a two-percentage-point premium to their shooting luck; Toronto sits at 1.003, nearly flat. That gap will likely compress. Monitor this game as a case study in when process edges meet unsustainable finishes.

Players to Watch

Toronto starts with Auston Matthews: 1.10 expected goals per 60, 17 goals, 13 assists, shooting 10.6% (well above norms). John Tavares adds 0.91 xG/60 with 15 goals, 24 assists, 3 high-danger chances, and 12.4% shooting.

Montreal counters Cole Caufield at 0.97 xG/60, 33 goals, 16 assists, riding a 20.0% shooting rate. Oliver Kapanen contributes 0.83 xG/60, 19 goals, 12 assists, 4 high-danger looks, and 17.8% shooting.

Key Matchups

Toronto must contain Caufield—his conversion is the hidden engine of Montreal's hot streak. Montreal will need to neutralize Matthews, whose combo of volume and elite shooting can undo process advantages.

Data: NHL API, Backcheck xG model

Season rates in this preview are from 2025-26 — this season's sample isn't live yet.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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
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