Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Toronto Maple Leafs sweater
← Wed, Sep 23 · the slate
Breakdown · OTT at TOR · Preseason

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

FinalWed, Sep 23
OTTOttawa Senators1TORToronto Maple Leafs6
The verdict · earned

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

OTT 1 · TOR 6
Preseason · exhibition

Split squads and prospects, not the club that will take the ice in October. The shots and grades below describe this game only: nothing here counts toward season records, form, rankings or player numbers.

◆ By the ModelSep 25, 12:58 AMxG: xgboost-0.765Edited 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 Maple Leafs ran past the Senators 6–1, and the underlying numbers proved it wasn't a blowout by accident. Toronto was dominant from start to finish, dangerous in transition and clinical in the slot. The Senators' defense was porous and their finishing luck ran the wrong way.

The Leafs controlled 66% of expected goals (4.48–2.33). They overperformed their chances by 1.52 goals. Ottawa underperformed by 1.33—a collision of Maple Leafs luck and Senators misfortune that compounded a game already lost.

The Leafs were dangerous off the rush. They converted four times from 37 rush chances and created nine high-danger opportunities to Ottawa's three. Toronto held 72% of shot attempts (36–14).

J. Tavares scored and added two assists. A. Matthews scored and set up two more. J. Roslovic matched them. T. Stützle scored Ottawa's only goal on a 23% chance off the rush early.

Goaltending separated the teams. L. Meriläinen allowed 2.6 goals above expected. S. Bobrovsky stopped 1.33 more than expected, the sharpest contrast on the night.

The turning point: A. Matthews' snap shot from 29 feet in the third, a 20% chance. By then, Ottawa's transition defense had already failed—the Senators gave up 3.41 expected goals on the rush alone, four of which went in.

The goals

  • OTT 1–0, 06:35 of the first. T. Stützle, backhander from 6 feet, a 23% chance by the model (off the rush), past S. Bobrovsky. Assists: A. Burakovsky, C. Kyrou. Win probability moved 15 points.
  • TOR 1–1, 07:45 of the first. J. McCabe, wrist shot from 5 feet, a 32% chance by the model (a rebound), past L. Meriläinen. Assists: J. Tavares, J. Roslovic. 2 seconds after a TOR missed shot by J. Tavares. Win probability moved 16 points.
  • TOR 1–2, 19:09 of the first. J. Tavares, wrist shot from 13 feet, a 14% chance by the model (off the rush), past L. Meriläinen. Assists: W. Nylander, G. McKenna. 7 seconds after an OTT hit by T. Stützle. Win probability moved 18 points.
  • TOR 1–3, 04:49 of the second on the power play. J. Roslovic, wrist shot from 11 feet, a 14% chance by the model (a rebound), past L. Meriläinen. Assists: J. Tavares, A. Matthews. 2 seconds after a TOR shot by J. Tavares. Win probability moved 13 points.
  • TOR 1–4, 16:53 of the second. Z. MacEwen, wrist shot from 6 feet, a 20% chance by the model (off the rush), past L. Meriläinen. Assists: E. Cowan. 7 seconds after an OTT blocked shot by Z. MacEwen. Win probability moved 6 points.
  • TOR 1–5, 19:13 of the second. M. Rielly, snap shot from 23 feet, a 14% chance by the model (off the rush), past L. Meriläinen. Assists: D. Raddysh, A. Matthews.
  • TOR 1–6, 06:10 of the third. A. Matthews, snap shot from 29 feet, a 20% chance by the model (off the rush), past L. Meriläinen. Assists: J. Roslovic, O. Ekman-Larsson. 10 seconds after a TOR blocked shot by O. Ekman-Larsson.

What the numbers can't tell you. Whether the finishing was luck or skill, why the benches were run the way they were, who was hurt, and anything said in the room. That is the beat's story, and it is worth reading.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Preseason · Sep 23
OTT
1
TOR
6

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

Chances 2.3 – 4.5Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Maple Leafs earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
OTT
2.33
TOR
4.48
34% of the chances66%

The board read OTT 1, TOR 6. The chances read OTT 2.3, TOR 4.5.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
TOR
+1.5
goals above expected
TOR4.48 expected · 6 scored
Expected
Scored
OTT2.33 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Maple Leafs scored 1.5 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
The swing
+18
win-probability points
54% → 71% for TOR
TOR 100%the game, start to finish
OTT 100%P1 · P2 · P3
TORP1 19:09

J. Tavares makes it 1–2.

In-game win model · fitted on 5,248 games
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 06:35OTTT. Stützle23%1–0
  2. P1 07:45TORJ. McCabe32%1–1
  3. P1 19:09TORJ. Tavares14%1–2
  4. P2 04:49TORJ. RoslovicPP14%1–3
  5. P2 16:53TORZ. MacEwen20%1–4
  6. P2 19:13TORM. Rielly14%1–5
  7. P3 06:10TORA. Matthews20%1–6
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
OTT
26 shots
1
Final
80 shots
TOR
54 shots
6
OTT attackTOR attack
OTT TOR Goal
26
shots · 1 in
54
shots · 6 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
OTTTOR
1 / 3
0.65 xG
High danger
3 / 9
1.91 xG
0 / 14
1.43 xG
Medium
3 / 19
2.14 xG
0 / 20
0.26 xG
Low
0 / 33
0.43 xG

The Maple Leafs buried 3 of 9 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
S. Bobrovsky
+1.3
TOR · 13/14 · 60:00
Best save · a 22% chance, snap from 15 ft · P3 03:24
B+
J. Parsons
+0.9
OTT · 9/9 · 13:50 · in relief
Best save · a 24% chance, backhand from 7 ft · P3 17:01
+1 more on the full breakdown
Best skater on the ice
A+
TOR
J. Tavares
C · impact 3.91
14:58
Ice time
1–2
G – A
0.93
Own xG
95%
xG share
Impact · top 4
J. Tavares3.9A+
J. Roslovic2.9A+
A. Matthews2.6A+
W. Nylander2.3A
Report card
OTTTOR
OffenseCA+
DefenseFC+
TransitionFA+
Special teamsFB
GoaltendingD-B+
DisciplineB-C-
LuckFA+
Seven dimensions, A+ to F · basis on the breakdown
Why it went the way it went
Why TOR won
  1. 01Dangerous off the rush
  2. 02Won on the merits
  3. 03Clinical in the slot
Why OTT lost
  1. 01Rush defense leaked all night
  2. 02L. Meriläinen couldn't make the stop
  3. 03L. Meriläinen was beaten from the slot
Our storyline model · reasoning on the breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Maple Leafs run the Senators 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 / 12 · Final
Every goal, in order

How it happened

NHL play-by-play
1stshots 4–10
  1. 06:35OTTT. Stützle(A. Burakovsky, C. Kyrou)1–0

    Backhander from 6 feet, a 23% chance (off the rush), past S. Bobrovsky. Win probability moved 15 points.On the ice: M. Amadio, P. Tomasino, S. Pinto, T. Kleven, C. Yakemchuk · against O. Ekman-Larsson, J. Roslovic, A. Matthews, T. Stecher, M. Knies

  2. 07:45TORJ. McCabe(J. Tavares, J. Roslovic)1–1

    Wrist shot from 5 feet, a 32% chance (a rebound), past L. Meriläinen. 2s after a TOR miss by J. Tavares. Win probability moved 16 points.On the ice: J. Tavares, C. Tanev, J. McCabe, W. Nylander, G. McKenna · against H. Hodgson, S. Bolduc, P. Daoust, O. Pettersson, N. Matinpalo

  3. 19:09TORJ. Tavares(W. Nylander, G. McKenna)1–2

    Wrist shot from 13 feet, a 14% chance (off the rush), past L. Meriläinen. 7s after an OTT hit by T. Stützle. Win probability moved 18 points.On the ice: J. Tavares, C. Tanev, J. McCabe, W. Nylander, G. McKenna · against M. Amadio, P. Tomasino, S. Pinto, T. Kleven, C. Yakemchuk

2ndshots 5–15
  1. 04:49TORJ. Roslovicpower play(J. Tavares, A. Matthews)1–3

    Wrist shot from 11 feet, a 14% chance (a rebound), past L. Meriläinen. 2s after a TOR shot by J. Tavares. Win probability moved 13 points.On the ice: O. Ekman-Larsson, C. Sissons, T. Stecher, B. Groulx, E. Cowan · against H. Hodgson, T. Kleven, P. Daoust, O. Pettersson, C. Yakemchuk

  2. 16:53TORZ. MacEwen(E. Cowan)1–4

    Wrist shot from 6 feet, a 20% chance (off the rush), past L. Meriläinen. 7s after an OTT block. Win probability moved 6 points.On the ice: O. Ekman-Larsson, T. Stecher, M. Pezzetta, B. Groulx, M. Knies · against M. Amadio, P. Tomasino, S. Pinto, T. Kleven, C. Yakemchuk

  3. 19:13TORM. Rielly(D. Raddysh, A. Matthews)1–5

    Snap shot from 23 feet, a 14% chance (off the rush), past L. Meriläinen.On the ice: J. Tavares, O. Ekman-Larsson, W. Nylander, T. Stecher, E. Cowan · against A. Burakovsky, D. Batherson, S. Bolduc, T. Stützle, N. Matinpalo

3rdshots 5–11
  1. 06:10TORA. Matthews(J. Roslovic, O. Ekman-Larsson)1–6

    Snap shot from 29 feet, a 20% chance (off the rush), past L. Meriläinen. 10s after a TOR block.On the ice: J. Tavares, M. Rielly, W. Nylander, D. Raddysh, G. McKenna · against S. Harrington, M. Amadio, P. Tomasino, T. Stützle, C. Kyrou, J. Parsons

score reads OTT–TOR

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.48
TOR chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.5
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.071
TOR puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
62.2%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.33Expected goals4.48
TOR 66% of the chance quality
14Shots on goal36
3High-danger chances9
37All attempts (Corsi)61
Adjusted for score: OTT 43% · TOR 57%
Faceoffs · TOR won56%off64%neu53%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
OTT1 / 3 · 0.65 xG
TOR3 / 9 · 1.91 xG
Medium dangermid-range
OTT0 / 14 · 1.43 xG
TOR3 / 19 · 2.14 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
OTT0 / 20 · 0.26 xG
TOR0 / 33 · 0.43 xG

OTT went 0-for-14 from medium danger on 1.43 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
OTT
1 G · 2.33 xG · -1.3
TOR
6 G · 4.48 xG · +1.5
01234567

OTT finished -1.3 against expected, TOR +1.5.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
OTT
WRIST0/12
SLAP0/6
BACKHAND1/2
SNAP0/3
TIP IN0/2
BAT0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/11
TOR
WRIST4/36
SLAP0/2
BACKHAND0/5
SNAP2/4
TIP IN0/3
BAT0/1
WRAP AROUND0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/7
OTT
TOR
Off the rush
1 G on 17
1.64 xG
4 G on 37
3.41 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 2
0.24 xG
2 G on 4
0.80 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: OTT went 0-for-12, TOR 4-for-36. TOR 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
L. Meriläinen
OTT · 21/27 · .778
started · 46:10 · loss
-2.4
saved above expected
F
the night
Attempts faced
42
Avg chance faced
8.5%
Stopped vs expected
0.857 vs 0.915
Rebounds allowed
3 · 2 scored on
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger3/71.5-1.5
Medium3/161.8-1.2
Low0/190.3+0.3
Shorthanded1/20.3-0.7
Tips & deflections0/30.1+0.1
The save
20% chance stopped, a backhand from 4 ft · P1 07:43
The one to have back
14% chance went in, a snap from 23 ft · P2 19:13

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. Parsons
OTT · 9/9 · 1.000
in relief · 13:50
+0.9
saved above expected
B+
the night
Attempts faced
11
Avg chance faced
8.1%
Stopped vs expected
1.000 vs 0.919
Rebounds allowed
1
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/20.4+0.4
Medium0/30.3+0.3
Low0/60.1+0.1
Tips & deflections0/10.0+0.0
The save
24% chance stopped, a backhand from 7 ft · P3 17:01

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. Bobrovsky
TOR · 13/14 · .929
started · 60:00 · win
+1.3
saved above expected
B+
the night
Attempts faced
26
Avg chance faced
9.0%
Stopped vs expected
0.962 vs 0.910
Rebounds allowed
2
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/30.7-0.3
Medium0/141.4+1.4
Low0/90.3+0.3
Shorthanded0/90.9+0.9
Tips & deflections0/20.1+0.1
The save
22% chance stopped, a snap from 15 ft · P3 03:24
The one to have back
23% chance went in, a backhand from 6 ft · P1 06:35

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

Every skater who dressed

Who played

Rated on what they produced and how fast

Best skater on the ice by our rating: J. Tavares (TOR), 14:58 of ice, 1-2, 95% of the expected goals while he was out.

OTT18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
T. StützleC21:291-037B
A. BurakovskyL19:080-139B
S. PintoC15:460-057B
P. TomasinoR18:500-047C
C. KyrouD18:470-130C
K. HalttunenR13:220-041C
N. MatinpaloD15:570-039D
M. AmadioR16:260-039D
E. Bakke OlsenC13:380-033D
C. YakemchukD25:290-035D
D. BathersonR18:510-044D
L. EllinasL8:390-00D
S. BolducD16:460-034D
P. DaoustC15:430-033F
S. HarringtonD17:130-026F
O. PetterssonR12:250-017F
T. KlevenD20:120-016F
H. HodgsonR9:530-016F
TOR18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
J. TavaresC14:581-295A+
J. RoslovicC15:321-277A+
A. MatthewsC17:131-263A+
W. NylanderR17:430-190A
G. McKennaL16:470-191A
M. RiellyD20:081-088A
D. RaddyshD20:510-188A
E. CowanR14:510-155A
J. McCabeD20:321-047B
Z. MacEwenR11:101-014B
O. Ekman-LarssonD19:230-163B
T. StecherD19:010-066B
M. KniesL17:480-070C
C. TanevD19:580-055C
B. GroulxC14:270-053C
N. PaulL4:420-036C
C. SissonsC14:560-043C
M. PezzettaL12:310-070D

xG% = share of expected goals while on the ice · PD/PT = penalties drawn / taken · “in N min” = a per-60 rate far above the raw total. Impact = 0.75 G + 0.7 A1 + 0.55 A2 + 0.075 SOG + 0.05 BLK + 0.15 penalties drawn − 0.15 taken + 0.01 faceoff wins − 0.01 losses + 0.3 individual xG + 0.5 on-ice xG for − 0.5 on-ice xG against. Rating = 65% impact + 35% impact per 60, as a percentile among the skaters in this game.

Scratched, OTT: C. Giroux, N. Cousins, L. Ullmark, B. Hutton, K. MacDermid, W. Foegele and 50 more. Scratched, TOR: L. Shaw, T. Blueger, A. Stolarz, M. Domi, D. Mermis, D. Joshua and 64 more. Referees Garrett Rank and Kendrick Nicholson; linesmen Scott Cherrey and Andrew Smith.

Graded against a league-average game

Report card

Seven dimensions · A+ to F
DimensionOTTTOR
Offense
▸Basis

OTT Created 2.33 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 3 high-danger shots (0.65 xG) and 17 rush shots (1.64 xG).

TOR Created 4.48 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 9 high-danger shots (1.91 xG) and 37 rush shots (3.41 xG).

C
73
A+
100
Defense
▸Basis

OTT Allowed 4.48 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 9 high-danger shots (1.91 xG) and 37 rush shots (3.41 xG).

TOR Allowed 2.33 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 3 high-danger shots (0.65 xG) and 17 rush shots (1.64 xG).

F
43
C+
77
Transition
▸Basis

OTT Rush shots 17–37, rush xG 1.64–3.41 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

TOR Rush shots 37–17, rush xG 3.41–1.64 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

F
47
A+
100
Special teams
▸Basis

OTT 0-for-4 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 0.90 PP xG.

TOR 1-for-3 on the power play (33%; league ≈21%) with 0.34 PP xG.

F
57
B
86
Goaltending
▸Basis

OTT -1.52 goals saved above expected on 36 shots against.

TOR +1.33 goals saved above expected on 14 shots against.

D-
60
B+
88
Discipline
▸Basis

OTT Took 6 penalties for 31 PIM vs 7 for 33 on the other side.

TOR Took 7 penalties for 33 PIM vs 6 for 31 on the other side.

B-
80
C-
70
Luck

Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

▸Basis

OTT Finishing -1.33 goals vs xG plus -1.52 GSAx of save luck = -2.85 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

TOR Finishing +1.52 goals vs xG plus +1.33 GSAx of save luck = +2.85 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

F
52
A+
98
Source · NHL play-by-play · xG engine · luck graded separately
What the model flagged
WARNINGOTT

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 37 rush shots worth 3.41 xG (4 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

STRENGTHTOR

Dangerous off the rush

4 goals on 37 rush shots worth 3.41 xG.

WARNINGOTT

L. Meriläinen couldn't make the stop

L. Meriläinen allowed 6 on 27 shots (0.778) — 2.64 goals worse than expected.

Reassess the crease rotation before the next start.

WARNINGOTT

L. Meriläinen was beaten from the slot

L. Meriläinen stopped only 57% of 7 high-danger shots (3 goals against from the inner slot).

STRENGTHTOR

Won on the merits

The Maple Leafs controlled 66% of expected goals (4.48–2.33) and won 6-1 — result matched process.

WARNINGTOR

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 17 rush shots worth 1.64 xG (1 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

80 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
OTT
26 shots
1
Final
80 shots
TOR
54 shots
6
OTT attackTOR attack
OTT TOR Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — OTT left, TOR 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
A. Matthews
#34 · C · TOR
1 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 17:13 on ice · +1
J. Roslovic
#96 · C · TOR
1 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 15:32 on ice
J. Tavares
#91 · C · TOR
1 G · 2 A · 5 SOG · 14:58 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page