Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Montreal Canadiens sweater
← Tue, Sep 29 · the slate
Breakdown · MTL at TOR

Canadiens hold off the Maple Leafs

FinalTue, Sep 29
MTLMontreal Canadiens3TORToronto Maple Leafs2
The verdict · earned

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

MTL 3 · TOR 2
◆ By the ModelOct 4, 5:31 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

Montreal beat Toronto 3-2 despite being outshot 28-24. The Canadiens were more efficient with their chances: they generated 3.91 expected goals to the Leafs' 2.99 and dominated high-danger scoring chances 4-1. J. Dobes played solidly in net when needed, keeping the deficit at one goal through two periods.

W. Nylander gave Toronto the lead just 48 seconds into the game with a wrist shot off the rush, but J. Anderson answered 10 minutes later with a rebound at the doorstep. Z. Bolduc's 19-foot wrist shot in the second put Montreal ahead for good. A. Carrier added a third early in the third from 64 feet out—a low-probability finish that held up even after Nylander cut it to one with just over four minutes remaining.

Toronto was lethal in transition and put two goals past J. Dobes from chances that belonged on the scoreboard. The Leafs ceded 26 rush chances and paid for it, despite S. Bobrovsky keeping them in the game with 21 saves on 24 shots. Montreal's advantage was not flashy—it was consistency: scoring on their chances while Toronto couldn't finish despite the volume.

The goals

  • TOR 0–1, 00:48 of the first. W. Nylander, wrist shot from 33 feet, a 4% chance by the model (off the rush), past J. Dobes. Assists: M. Rielly, K. Marchenko. Win probability moved 13 points.
  • MTL 1–1, 10:53 of the first. J. Anderson, batted-in shot from 7 feet, a 10% chance by the model (a rebound), past S. Bobrovsky. Assists: A. Carrier, K. Dach. 3 seconds after a MTL shot by J. Anderson. Win probability moved 16 points.
  • MTL 2–1, 04:52 of the second. Z. Bolduc, wrist shot from 19 feet, a 19% chance by the model (off the rush), past S. Bobrovsky. Assists: M. Matheson, J. Anderson. Win probability moved 20 points.
  • MTL 3–1, 13:12 of the third. A. Carrier, wrist shot from 64 feet, a 1% chance by the model, past S. Bobrovsky. Win probability moved 13 points.
  • TOR 3–2, 15:46 of the third. W. Nylander, wrist shot from 8 feet, a 14% chance by the model (off the rush), past J. Dobes. Assists: E. Cowan, J. Tavares. 7 seconds after a TOR blocked shot by A. Carrier. Win probability moved 11 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 · Sep 29
MTL
3
TOR
2

Canadiens hold off the Maple Leafs

Chances 3.9 – 3.0Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Canadiens earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
MTL
3.91
TOR
2.99
57% of the chances43%

The board read MTL 3, TOR 2. The chances read MTL 3.9, TOR 3.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
MTL
−0.9
goals above expected
MTL3.91 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
TOR2.99 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
+20
win-probability points
47% → 67% for MTL
TOR 100%the game, start to finish
MTL 100%P1 · P2 · P3
MTLP2 04:52

Z. Bolduc makes it 2–1.

In-game win model · fitted on 5,248 games
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 00:48TORW. Nylander4%0–1
  2. P1 10:53MTLJ. Anderson10%1–1
  3. P2 04:52MTLZ. Bolduc19%2–1
  4. P3 13:12MTLA. Carrier1%3–1
  5. P3 15:46TORW. Nylander14%3–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
MTL
39 shots
3
Final
77 shots
TOR
38 shots
2
MTL attackTOR attack
MTL TOR Goal
39
shots · 3 in
38
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
MTLTOR
1 / 4
1.93 xG
High danger
0 / 1
0.31 xG
1 / 15
1.63 xG
Medium
1 / 23
2.38 xG
1 / 36
0.35 xG
Low
1 / 26
0.29 xG

High-danger looks: MTL 1 of 4, TOR 0 of 1.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
J. Dobes
+1.0
MTL · 26/28 · 59:36
Best save · a 32% chance, backhand from 6 ft · P2 10:24
D
S. Bobrovsky
−0.8
TOR · 21/24 · 58:45
Best save · a 20% chance, wrist from 6 ft · P3 06:30
Best skater on the ice
A+
TOR
W. Nylander
R · impact 2.02
18:55
Ice time
2–0
G – A
0.48
Own xG
47%
xG share
Impact · top 4
W. Nylander2.0A+
J. Anderson1.7A+
A. Carrier1.9A+
K. Marchenko1.6A
Report card
MTLTOR
OffenseAB-
DefenseD+F
TransitionCC
Special teamsFF
GoaltendingBB
DisciplineCC
LuckCC
Seven dimensions, A+ to F · basis on the breakdown
Why it went the way it went
Why MTL won
  1. 01Dangerous off the rush
  2. 02J. Dobes tilted the crease
  3. 03Won on the merits
Why TOR 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

Canadiens hold off the Maple Leafs

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 10–11
  1. 00:48TORW. Nylander(M. Rielly, K. Marchenko)0–1

    Wrist shot from 33 feet, a 4% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past J. Dobes. Win probability moved 13 points.On the ice: M. Rielly, C. Sissons, N. Paul, D. Raddysh, E. Cowan · against A. Carrier, A. Newhook, L. Hutson, J. Slafkovský, I. Demidov

  2. 10:53MTLJ. Anderson(A. Carrier, K. Dach)1–1

    Batted in from 7 feet, a 10% chance (a rebound), past S. Bobrovsky. 3s after a MTL shot by J. Anderson. Win probability moved 16 points.On the ice: A. Carrier, A. Newhook, L. Hutson, J. Slafkovský, I. Demidov · against C. Tanev, M. Rielly, J. Roslovic, A. Matthews, K. Marchenko

2ndshots 8–6
  1. 04:52MTLZ. Bolduc(M. Matheson, J. Anderson)2–1

    Wrist shot from 19 feet, a 19% chance (off the rush), past S. Bobrovsky. Win probability moved 20 points.On the ice: P. Danault, M. Matheson, A. Texier, N. Dobson, K. Dach · against C. Tanev, T. Blueger, J. McCabe, B. Duhaime, Z. MacEwen

3rdshots 6–11
  1. 13:12MTLA. Carrier3–1

    Wrist shot from 64 feet, a 1% chance, a shot that rarely goes in, past S. Bobrovsky. Win probability moved 13 points.

  2. 15:46TORW. Nylander(E. Cowan, J. Tavares)3–2

    Wrist shot from 8 feet, a 14% chance (off the rush), past J. Dobes. 7s after a TOR block. Win probability moved 11 points.

score reads MTL–TOR

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.91
MTL chances
Goals their shots were worth
−0.9
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.014
MTL puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
52.4%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.91Expected goals2.99
MTL 57% of the chance quality
24Shots on goal28
4High-danger chances1
55All attempts (Corsi)50
Adjusted for score: MTL 51% · TOR 50%
Faceoffs · TOR won52%off38%neu25%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
MTL1 / 4 · 1.93 xG
TOR0 / 1 · 0.31 xG
Medium dangermid-range
MTL1 / 15 · 1.63 xG
TOR1 / 23 · 2.38 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
MTL1 / 36 · 0.35 xG
TOR1 / 26 · 0.29 xG

TOR went 1-for-23 from medium danger on 2.38 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
MTL
3 G · 3.91 xG · -0.9
TOR
2 G · 2.99 xG · -1.0
012345

MTL finished -0.9 against expected, TOR -1.0.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
MTL
WRIST2/24
TIP IN0/6
SLAP0/3
SNAP0/3
BACKHAND0/2
BAT1/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/16
TOR
WRIST2/21
TIP IN0/4
SLAP0/5
SNAP0/4
BACKHAND0/2
BAT0/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
OTHER0/12
MTL
TOR
Off the rush
1 G on 27
2.08 xG
2 G on 26
2.19 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 1
0.10 xG
0 G on 4
0.40 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: MTL went 2-for-24, TOR 2-for-21. TOR 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
J. Dobes
MTL · 26/28 · .929
started · 59:36 · win
+1.0
saved above expected
B+
the night
Attempts faced
38
Avg chance faced
7.9%
Stopped vs expected
0.947 vs 0.921
Rebounds allowed
4
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/10.3+0.3
Medium1/232.4+1.4
Low1/140.3-0.7
Shorthanded0/70.8+0.8
Tips & deflections0/40.3+0.3
The save
32% chance stopped, a backhand from 6 ft · P2 10:24
The one to have back
4% chance went in, a wrist from 33 ft · P1 00:48

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 · 21/24 · .875
started · 58:45 · loss
-0.8
saved above expected
D
the night
Attempts faced
35
Avg chance faced
6.4%
Stopped vs expected
0.914 vs 0.936
Rebounds allowed
1 · 1 scored on
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/20.4-0.6
Medium1/141.5+0.5
Low1/190.3-0.7
Shorthanded0/50.5+0.5
Tips & deflections0/60.5+0.5
The save
20% chance stopped, a wrist from 6 ft · P3 06:30
The one to have back
1% chance went in, a wrist from 64 ft · P3 13:12

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: W. Nylander (TOR), 18:55 of ice, 2-0, 47% of the expected goals while he was out.

MTL18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
J. AndersonR12:531-157A+
A. CarrierD21:541-157A+
Z. BolducR11:041-067A
M. MathesonD25:070-148B
K. DachC11:070-141B
J. EvansC14:500-066B
J. SlafkovskýL17:530-052B
A. NewhookC16:110-044C
J. StrubleD11:020-039C
I. DemidovR15:110-057C
L. HutsonD24:070-050C
N. DobsonD21:560-029C
C. CaufieldR15:550-037D
N. SuzukiC18:430-032D
C. KreiderL14:210-023D
P. DanaultC15:370-032F
A. XhekajD12:200-024F
A. TexierL12:130-032F
TOR18 skaters
SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
W. NylanderR18:552-047A+
K. MarchenkoR20:080-177A
J. TavaresC16:360-163A
E. CowanR15:580-196A
M. RiellyD21:300-166A
A. MatthewsC22:340-071B
D. RaddyshD23:470-068B
J. RoslovicC18:140-071B
C. SissonsC14:580-046C
J. McCabeD11:380-058C
N. PaulL15:320-042C
T. StecherD19:050-049D
C. TanevD18:390-033D
O. Ekman-LarssonD18:070-045D
G. McKennaL15:190-034D
B. DuhaimeL9:040-012D
T. BluegerC9:460-08F
Z. MacEwenR5:250-00F

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, MTL: O. Kapanen, A. Engstrom, F. Xhekaj. Scratched, TOR: B. Groulx, N. Blankenburg. Referees Jon McIsaac and Francis Charron; linesmen Brandon Gawryletz and Kiel Murchison.

Graded against a league-average game

Report card

Seven dimensions · A+ to F
DimensionMTLTOR
Offense
▸Basis

MTL Created 3.91 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 4 high-danger shots (1.93 xG) and 27 rush shots (2.08 xG).

TOR Created 2.99 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 1 high-danger shots (0.31 xG) and 26 rush shots (2.19 xG).

A
96
B-
81
Defense
▸Basis

MTL Allowed 2.99 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 1 high-danger shots (0.31 xG) and 26 rush shots (2.19 xG).

TOR Allowed 3.91 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 4 high-danger shots (1.93 xG) and 27 rush shots (2.08 xG).

D+
69
F
54
Transition
▸Basis

MTL Rush shots 27–26, rush xG 2.08–2.19 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

TOR Rush shots 26–27, rush xG 2.19–2.08 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).

C
74
C
76
Special teams
▸Basis

MTL 0-for-3 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 0.46 PP xG.

TOR 0-for-3 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 0.50 PP xG.

F
54
F
55
Goaltending
▸Basis

MTL +0.99 goals saved above expected on 28 shots against.

TOR +0.91 goals saved above expected on 24 shots against.

B
85
B
84
Discipline
▸Basis

MTL Took 4 penalties for 8 PIM vs 4 for 8 on the other side.

TOR Took 4 penalties for 8 PIM vs 4 for 8 on the other side.

C
75
C
75
Luck

Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

▸Basis

MTL Finishing -0.91 goals vs xG plus +0.99 GSAx of save luck = +0.08 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

TOR Finishing -0.99 goals vs xG plus +0.91 GSAx of save luck = -0.08 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.

C
76
C
74
Source · NHL play-by-play · xG engine · luck graded separately
What the model flagged
WARNINGMTL

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 26 rush shots worth 2.19 xG (2 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

STRENGTHTOR

Dangerous off the rush

2 goals on 26 rush shots worth 2.19 xG.

WARNINGTOR

Rush defense leaked all night

Gave up 27 rush shots worth 2.08 xG (1 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.

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

STRENGTHMTL

Dangerous off the rush

1 goals on 27 rush shots worth 2.08 xG.

TACTICALMTL

The moment it turned

William Nylander's wrist shot from the doorstep in P3 swung the game.

STRENGTHMTL

A. Carrier led the way

1G 1A in 21:54 — the game's first star.

77 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
MTL
39 shots
3
Final
77 shots
TOR
38 shots
2
MTL attackTOR attack
MTL TOR Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — MTL 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. Carrier
#45 · D · MTL
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 21:54 on ice · +1
W. Nylander
#88 · R · TOR
2 G · 0 A · 5 SOG · 18:55 on ice · -1
J. Anderson
#17 · R · MTL
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 12:53 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Sep 29
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelOct 2, 5:37 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 model projects a 3.4–3.3 game with Montreal at 52% to win—as close to a toss-up as you'll find. The Canadiens own the underlying play but Toronto holds a rest advantage.

Montreal dominates at 5v5, holding 56.7% of expected goals against Toronto's 45.9%. They're also driving territorial play: 50.6% of shot attempts on the night. This is the Canadiens' game to lose on paper.

But Toronto skates in on five days of rest; Montreal on two. That's a measurable edge, and the Leafs have built their season around executing when rested.

Montreal's come in hot (1.071 efficiency), which means they're beating their expected output. Expect some regression—the Canadiens will create chances, but not every one lands.

J. Fowler gets Montreal's net against A. Stolarz for Toronto. In one game played, Stolarz is at +2.1 goals saved above expected and 96.3% save percentage—a small sample, but a strong one.

Both teams prey on the same real estate. Montreal has scored four goals from the slot on 27 attempts (15%); Toronto, six on 33 (18%). Whoever denies that lane wins the game.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

MTL 52%
52%
MTL
Model favorite
52%
48%
MTL50TOR

MTL by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score MTL 3.4–3.3 TOR; 16% 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 →TOR
56.7%45.9%
50.6%45.9%
3.913.06
2.993.60
3.002.00
2.002.00
1.0710.998

MTL holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.071 vs 0.998) says MTL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · No games yet
MTL
0-0-0
+0 GD · 2d rest
TOR
0-0-0
+0 GD · 5d rest
1.071
MTL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.998
TOR PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

TACTICALTOR

Rest edge

The Maple Leafs come in on 5 days of rest; the other side on 2.

Push the pace early against tired legs.

TACTICAL

The Canadiens own the underlying play

The Canadiens own the underlying play — 56.7% 5v5 xG vs 45.9%.

TACTICAL

The Canadiens drive Corsi at 50.6%

The Canadiens drive Corsi at 50.6% — expect territorial tilt.

WARNINGMTL

Regression watch: Canadiens

The Canadiens' PDO is 1.071 — running hot, expect some regression.

Weight the underlying numbers over the recent results.

Where the edges live
  • The Canadiens own the underlying play — 56.7% 5v5 xG vs 45.9%.
  • The Canadiens drive Corsi at 50.6% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Canadiens' PDO is 1.071 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Canadiens own the underlying play — 56.7% 5v5 xG vs 45.9%.
  • The Canadiens drive Corsi at 50.6% — expect territorial tilt.
  • Goalie matchup: J. Fowler vs A. Stolarz (+2.1 GSAx in 1 GP, 96.3% SV).
  • The Canadiens' PDO is 1.071 — running hot, expect some regression.
  • The Maple Leafs have 3 more days of rest.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
MTL
Expected in goal
J. Fowler
2 days rest.889 last start
J. Fowler was relieved by S. Montembeault last game, so the net is genuinely open.
Backup Jakub Dobes · +0.9 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

TOR
Expected in goal
A. Stolarz
5 days rest.905 last start
Backup Sergei Bobrovsky · +0.7 GSAx this season

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.

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page