Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Detroit Red Wings sweater
← Thu, Sep 24 · the slate
Breakdown · BUF at DET · Preseason

Red Wings edge the Sabres in overtime

Final / OTThu, Sep 24
BUFBuffalo Sabres2DETDetroit Red Wings3
The verdict · earned

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

BUF 2 · DET 3
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 26, 1:00 PMxG: 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 Red Wings beat the Sabres 3-2 in overtime. A. DeBrincat scored the winner at 00:33 of sudden death on the power play, Detroit's second power-play goal of the night.

The underlying numbers backed the win. Detroit controlled 57% of expected goals. The Red Wings held 58% of shot attempts (26–19). Yet both teams scored equally in transition: two goals each on rush attempts. Detroit's edge came from the power play, where they scored twice on 16 shots.

D. Tarasov made 17 saves on 19 shots (.895 save percentage), a performance about 1.17 goals better than the situation typically produces. Buffalo used two goalies: A. Lyon started with 7 of 8 (.875), and C. Ellis took over with 16 of 18 (.889 save percentage, about 0.92 goals better than typical).

T. Kuntar opened for Buffalo at 10:48 of the first on a snap shot from 18 feet (23% expected chance on the rush). A. Sandin-Pellikka tied it at 16:11 of the first on the power play with a slap shot from 36 feet (14% expected chance). J. Kulich put Buffalo ahead at 00:33 of the second on a wrist shot from 37 feet (8% expected chance on the rush). S. Dries tipped in the tying goal at 07:13 of the third.

Three Stars

  • M. Seider (DET) — 1 assist, 24:21
  • N. Ostlund (BUF) — 1 assist, 23:56
  • L. Raymond (DET) — 1 assist, 21:13

The goals

  • BUF 1–0, 10:48 of the first. T. Kuntar, snap shot from 18 feet, a 23% chance by the model (off the rush), past D. Tarasov. Assists: J. Richard. Win probability moved 16 points.
  • DET 1–1, 16:11 of the first on the power play. A. Sandin-Pellikka, slap shot from 36 feet, a 14% chance by the model (off the rush), past A. Lyon. Assists: A. Johansson, E. Finnie. 5 seconds after a DET faceoff win by E. Finnie. A. Lyon was 971 seconds into his shift for the defending side. Win probability moved 18 points.
  • BUF 2–1, 00:33 of the second. J. Kulich, wrist shot from 37 feet, an 8% chance by the model (off the rush), past D. Tarasov. Assists: N. Ostlund, R. Mrtka. 10 seconds after a DET blocked shot by R. Johnson. Win probability moved 19 points.
  • DET 2–2, 07:13 of the third. S. Dries, tip-in from 29 feet, a 3% chance by the model (off the rush), past C. Ellis. Assists: J. Bryson, W. Skoog. 4 seconds after a DET takeaway by W. Skoog. Win probability moved 31 points.
  • DET 2–3, 00:33 of overtime on the power play. A. DeBrincat, slap shot from 24 feet, a 10% chance by the model, past C. Ellis. Assists: L. Raymond, M. Seider. 7 seconds after a DET shot by A. DeBrincat. Win probability moved 50 points.

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 · OT · Preseason · Sep 24
BUF
2
DET
3

Red Wings edge the Sabres in overtime

Chances 3.2 – 4.2Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Red Wings earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
BUF
3.17
DET
4.22
43% of the chances57%

The board read BUF 2, DET 3. The chances read BUF 3.2, DET 4.2.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
DET
−1.2
goals above expected
DET4.22 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
BUF3.17 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

Both sides finished close to what their chances were worth. This one was earned on the ice.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
The swing
+50
win-probability points
50% → 100% for DET
DET 100%the game, start to finish
BUF 100%P1 · P2 · P3
DETOT 00:33 · PP

A. DeBrincat makes it 2–3.

In-game win model · fitted on 5,248 games
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 10:48BUFT. Kuntar23%1–0
  2. P1 16:11DETA. Sandin-PellikkaPP14%1–1
  3. P2 00:33BUFJ. Kulich8%2–1
  4. P3 07:13DETS. Dries3%2–2
  5. OT 00:33DETA. DeBrincatPP10%2–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
BUF
33 shots
2
Final
77 shots
DET
44 shots
3
BUF attackDET attack
BUF DET Goal
33
shots · 2 in
44
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
BUFDET
1 / 7
1.47 xG
High danger
0 / 6
2.02 xG
1 / 14
1.44 xG
Medium
2 / 18
1.89 xG
0 / 25
0.25 xG
Low
1 / 39
0.32 xG

High-danger looks: BUF 1 of 7, DET 0 of 6.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
D. Tarasov
+1.2
DET · 17/19 · 60:24
Best save · a 24% chance, deflected from 5 ft · P1 07:13
B+
A. Lyon
+0.9
BUF · 7/8 · 18:00
Best save · a 82% chance, slap from 4 ft · P1 02:27
+1 more on the full breakdown
Best skater on the ice
A+
DET
A. DeBrincat
R · impact 2.71
18:37
Ice time
1–0
G – A
0.93
Own xG
84%
xG share
Impact · top 4
A. DeBrincat2.7A+
L. Raymond1.8A+
J.Kulich1.1A+
A. Johansson1.2A
Report card
BUFDET
OffenseB+A+
DefenseFD-
TransitionCC+
Special teamsD-A+
GoaltendingB+B+
DisciplineCC
LuckCC
Seven dimensions, A+ to F · basis on the breakdown
Why it went the way it went
Why DET won
  1. 01Dangerous off the rush
  2. 02Power play cashed in
  3. 03D. Tarasov tilted the crease
Why BUF lost
  1. 01Rush defense leaked all night
  2. 02Cold finishing night
  3. 03Power play came up empty
Our storyline model · reasoning on the breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Red Wings edge the Sabres in overtime

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 7–8
  1. 10:48BUFT. Kuntar(J. Richard)1–0

    Snap shot from 18 feet, a 23% chance (off the rush), past D. Tarasov. Win probability moved 16 points.On the ice: D. Gilbert, A. Lyon, T. Bordeleau, G. McCarthy, J. Polin, L. Valente · against D. Shine, S. Dries, J. Leonard, M. Seider, W. Wallinder

  2. 16:11DETA. Sandin-Pellikkapower play(A. Johansson, E. Finnie)1–1

    Slap shot from 36 feet, a 14% chance (off the rush), past A. Lyon. 5s after a DET faceoff win by E. Finnie. A. Lyon was 971s into his shift for the defending side. Win probability moved 18 points.On the ice: M. Appleton, J. Bernard-Docker, A. Sandin-Pellikka, E. Finnie, M. Brandsegg-Nygård · against M. Peca, A. Lyon, R. Johnson, T. Kuntar, J. Richard, R. Mrtka

2ndshots 6–6
  1. 00:33BUFJ. Kulich(N. Ostlund, R. Mrtka)2–1

    Wrist shot from 37 feet, an 8% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past D. Tarasov. 10s after a DET block. Win probability moved 19 points.On the ice: D. Gilbert, J. Danforth, A. McDonough, T. Kozak, G. McCarthy · against M. Appleton, J. Bryson, A. Johansson, E. Finnie, M. Brandsegg-Nygård

3rdshots 6–10
  1. 07:13DETS. Dries(J. Bryson, W. Skoog)2–2

    Tip-in from 29 feet, a 3% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past C. Ellis. 4s after a DET takeaway by W. Skoog. Win probability moved 31 points.On the ice: M. Appleton, J. Bryson, S. Dries, J. Bernard-Docker, W. Skoog · against M. Peca, T. Kuntar, V. Komarov, J. Richard, Z. Metsa

OTshots 0–2
  1. 00:33DETA. DeBrincatpower play(L. Raymond, M. Seider)2–3

    Slap shot from 24 feet, a 10% chance, past C. Ellis. 7s after a DET shot by A. DeBrincat. Win probability moved 50 points.

score reads BUF–DET

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.22
DET chances
Goals their shots were worth
−1.2
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.004
DET puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
57.8%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.17Expected goals4.22
DET 57% of the chance quality
19Shots on goal26
7High-danger chances6
46All attempts (Corsi)63
Adjusted for score: BUF 40% · DET 60%
Faceoffs · DET won61%off53%neu33%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
BUF1 / 7 · 1.47 xG
DET0 / 6 · 2.02 xG
Medium dangermid-range
BUF1 / 14 · 1.44 xG
DET2 / 18 · 1.89 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
BUF0 / 25 · 0.25 xG
DET1 / 39 · 0.32 xG

DET went 0-for-6 from high danger on 2.02 expected goals — 2.0 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
BUF
2 G · 3.17 xG · -1.2
DET
3 G · 4.22 xG · -1.2
012345

BUF finished -1.2 against expected, DET -1.2.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
BUF
WRIST1/14
TIP IN0/5
SNAP1/5
SLAP0/2
DEFLECTED0/4
BACKHAND0/2
POKE0/1
OTHER0/13
DET
WRIST0/16
TIP IN1/5
SNAP0/5
SLAP2/8
DEFLECTED0/4
BACKHAND0/5
POKE0/1
OTHER0/19
BUF
DET
Off the rush
2 G on 25
2.46 xG
2 G on 28
2.53 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3
0.60 xG
0 G on 3
1.34 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: BUF went 1-for-14, DET 0-for-16. BUF scored 2 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
A. Lyon
BUF · 7/8 · .875
started · 18:00
+0.9
saved above expected
B+
the night
Attempts faced
14
Avg chance faced
13.9%
Stopped vs expected
0.929 vs 0.861
Rebounds allowed
3
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/31.4+1.4
Medium1/40.5-0.6
Low0/70.1+0.1
Shorthanded1/50.8-0.2
Tips & deflections0/20.2+0.2
The save
82% chance stopped, a slap from 4 ft · P1 02:27
The one to have back
14% chance went in, a slap from 36 ft · P1 16:11

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

C. Ellis
BUF · 16/18 · .889
in relief · 41:59 · OT loss
+0.3
saved above expected
B
the night
Attempts faced
29
Avg chance faced
7.9%
Stopped vs expected
0.931 vs 0.921
Rebounds allowed
0
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/30.6+0.6
Medium1/141.4+0.4
Low1/120.2-0.8
Shorthanded1/80.7-0.3
Tips & deflections1/60.5-0.6
The save
22% chance stopped, a snap from 11 ft · P2 13:19
The one to have back
3% chance went in, a tip-in from 29 ft · P3 07:13

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

D. Tarasov
DET · 17/19 · .895
started · 60:24 · win
+1.2
saved above expected
B+
the night
Attempts faced
32
Avg chance faced
9.9%
Stopped vs expected
0.938 vs 0.901
Rebounds allowed
3
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/71.5+0.5
Medium1/141.4+0.4
Low0/110.3+0.3
Shorthanded0/101.2+1.2
Tips & deflections0/80.9+0.9
The save
24% chance stopped, a deflected from 5 ft · P1 07:13
The one to have back
8% chance went in, a wrist from 37 ft · P2 00:33

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: A. DeBrincat (DET), 18:37 of ice, 1-0, 84% of the expected goals while he was out.

BUF18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
J.KulichC10:281-083A+
T. KuntarC10:551-039A
J. DanforthR17:400-079A
J. RichardR14:190-151B
N. OstlundC23:560-148C
K. HeleniusC24:350-063C
R. MrtkaD14:220-136C
A. McDonoughL10:530-067C
T. KozakC16:580-050C
M. PecaC17:470-057C
T. BordeleauC15:400-045D
R. JohnsonD15:010-032D
J. PolinR10:540-040D
D. GilbertD21:550-025F
G. McCarthyD17:340-037F
Z. MetsaD23:170-033F
L. ValenteC11:210-031F
V. KomarovD16:050-035F
DET18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
A. DeBrincatR18:371-084A+
L. RaymondL21:130-179A+
A. JohanssonD17:460-161A
J. BrysonD17:380-165A
A. CoppC21:360-074A
M. SeiderD24:210-159B
D. ShineRin 9 min9:290-054B
W. SkoogC10:000-118B
S. DriesC11:521-07B
A. Sandin-PellikkaD20:331-041B
M. Brandsegg-NygårdR14:140-068B
E. FinnieC15:500-151C
N. DanielsonC17:190-058C
M. AppletonC14:390-055D
J. LeonardL9:280-033D
W. WallinderD15:210-040D
C. MazurL11:300-050D
J. Bernard-DockerD20:550-030D

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, BUF: A. Kriukov, J. Zucker, S. Carrick, M. Geertsen, C. Sheary, B. Warren and 58 more. Scratched, DET: B. Chiarot, J. Faulk, J. Gibson, J. Compher, D. Larkin, W. Lagesson and 50 more. Referees Kendrick Nicholson and Mike Sullivan; linesmen Brandon Grillo and Mark Shewchyk.

Graded against a league-average game

Report card

Seven dimensions · A+ to F
DimensionBUFDET
Offense
▸Basis

BUF Created 3.17 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 7 high-danger shots (1.47 xG) and 25 rush shots (2.46 xG).

DET Created 4.22 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 6 high-danger shots (2.02 xG) and 28 rush shots (2.53 xG).

B+
88
A+
100
Defense
▸Basis

BUF Allowed 4.22 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 6 high-danger shots (2.02 xG) and 28 rush shots (2.53 xG).

DET Allowed 3.17 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 7 high-danger shots (1.47 xG) and 25 rush shots (2.46 xG).

F
49
D-
62
Transition
▸Basis

BUF Rush shots 25–28, rush xG 2.46–2.53 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

DET Rush shots 28–25, rush xG 2.53–2.46 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

C
73
C+
77
Special teams
▸Basis

BUF 0-for-4 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 1.23 PP xG.

DET 2-for-4 on the power play (50%; league ≈21%) with 1.48 PP xG.

D-
60
A+
100
Goaltending
▸Basis

BUF +1.22 goals saved above expected on 26 shots against.

DET +1.17 goals saved above expected on 19 shots against.

B+
87
B+
87
Discipline
▸Basis

BUF Took 7 penalties for 17 PIM vs 7 for 17 on the other side.

DET Took 7 penalties for 17 PIM vs 7 for 17 on the other side.

C
75
C
75
Luck

Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

▸Basis

BUF Finishing -1.17 goals vs xG plus +1.22 GSAx of save luck = +0.05 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

DET Finishing -1.22 goals vs xG plus +1.17 GSAx of save luck = -0.05 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

C
75
C
75
Source · NHL play-by-play · xG engine · luck graded separately
What the model flagged
WARNINGBUF

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 28 rush shots worth 2.53 xG (2 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

WARNINGDET

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 25 rush shots worth 2.46 xG (2 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

STRENGTHDET

Dangerous off the rush

2 goals on 28 rush shots worth 2.53 xG.

STRENGTHBUF

Dangerous off the rush

2 goals on 25 rush shots worth 2.46 xG.

STRENGTHDET

Power play cashed in

2-for-4 on the power play (50%) on 1.48 PP xG.

LUCKDET

Wasted the best looks

0-for-6 on high-danger chances worth 2.02 xG — that conversion rate won't stay at zero.

77 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
BUF
33 shots
2
Final
77 shots
DET
44 shots
3
BUF attackDET attack
BUF DET Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — BUF left, DET 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. Seider
#53 · D · DET
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 24:21 on ice · -1
N. Ostlund
#86 · C · BUF
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 23:56 on ice
L. Raymond
#23 · L · DET
0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 21:13 on ice · -1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page