xJawn NHL expected goals

← Games

Save a card: Summary · Full card · Game flow · BUF skaters · TOR skaters · BUF lines · TOR lines · Matchups

BUF 5 – 4 TOR

Buffalo Sabres at Toronto Maple Leafs

Final / OT · Oct 15, 2026
2026-27 · regular season
The call
BUF 53.4% ✓
expected 3.29–3.11 · BUF won 5–4 in OT
actual xG
3.19–2.72
xG share, predicted → actual
BUF 51% → 54%49% → 46% TOR
Today's puzzle Remember Some Guys — name the skater from the shape of his career. Three clues, one guess a day. Play →
Adjusts with rink filters

Strength and score are read from BUF's side, the same minutes at both ends: PP = BUF power play · PK = TOR power play · Leading = BUF ahead · ST = each club's own power play.

BUF attacks◀ all strengths
TOR attacksall strengths ▶
× goal• on net ◦ missed· blocked hover any attempt for the shooter, its xG and everything the model saw
How to read this map

One rink, both teams: BUF attacks the left net, TOR the right. Every attempt is a Gaussian bump of height = its model xG. The controls switch the surface (xG heatmap ↔ vs league) and the markers; vs league compares this game against a typical NHL team-game under the same filter (2026-27 regular season, 117 games), so a 5v5 view is measured against league 5v5.

A strength or score filter is read from BUF's side and mirrored for TOR: “BUF PP” shows BUF's power-play attempts on the left and TOR's shorthanded attempts on the right — the same minutes of the game at both ends. Empty-net attempts are excluded unless you include them. The Player control narrows the map and the rows beneath it to the attempts by either club while one player was on the ice (for a goalie, while he was in net); his own attempts wear a blue ring. vs league switches off while a player is picked — the league baseline is a whole team-game, which one player's slice is not. Hover any attempt for the shooter, the result, its xG, and the inputs behind it: clock, strength, score, shot type, distance, angle, handedness, rush/rebound, what happened just before, and the goalie or the blocker.

What each side produced

all strengths · regular season
BUF TOR
bars share a scale within each row · the longer bar is the row's leader
Goalson the map
5 4
Expected goals
3.19 2.72
xG%share of xG
54% 46%
High-dangerattempts ≥ 0.20 xG
2 3
Shots on goal
34 30
Attempts
61 47
xG by period · whole game 1st0.8–1.32nd1.2–1.23rd0.5–0.2OT0.7–0.1

The Sabres beat the Maple Leafs 5–4 in overtime on the road in a game the chances called about even, BUF 3.2 to TOR 2.7 in expected goals. At 5v5: BUF 1.9, TOR 2.1.

Counts come from the shot table behind the map: empty-net attempts and the shootout are excluded, so the goals here can trail the official final by an empty-netter or the shootout's deciding goal. Same numbers as the post-game cards.

As the game went

cumulative BUF − TOR xG · bands = power plays · lines = goals
1ST2ND3RDOT+0.5−0.5+1−1BUF AHEAD ▲TOR AHEAD ▼
How to read this

One line: cumulative BUF minus TOR expected goals. Above zero BUF is ahead on chances, below zero TOR is. Shaded bands are power plays in the side's colour; vertical lines are goals.

Skaters

on-ice xG · sorted by net · one game
How to read this

Every skater, sorted by net on-ice expected goals: on-ice xG against to the left of zero, for to the right, his own attempts as the solid bar, a hash at the net. The slim track under the name is ice time.

BUF
against for own net ice time
0.50.5111.51.5220Noah OstlundF21:39+1.50Owen PowerD28:01+0.90Jack QuinnF18:04+0.87Zach BensonF21:18+0.77Dennis GilbertD10:37+0.69Tage ThompsonF21:11+0.44Louis CrevierD16:26+0.20Josh NorrisF14:50+0.05Konsta HeleniusF15:11-0.14Ryan McLeodF18:38-0.17Sam CarrickF5:46-0.18Justin DanforthF6:08-0.24Beck MalenstynF8:03-0.31Zach MetsaD12:36-0.34Peyton KrebsF16:22-0.55Olen ZellwegerD24:28-0.66Josh DoanF17:22-0.66Mattias SamuelssonD28:24-0.71
TOR
against for own net ice time
0.50.5111.51.5220William NylanderF22:18+0.59Auston MatthewsF22:14+0.55Darren RaddyshD27:09+0.51Oliver Ekman-LarssonD19:35+0.48Easton CowanF16:39+0.38Nick BlankenburgD15:37+0.29Brandon DuhaimeF11:42+0.25Zack MacEwenF5:27+0.06Gavin McKennaF6:36+0.02Teddy BluegerF14:43-0.24Colton SissonsF17:49-0.25Jake McCabeD23:30-0.27John TavaresF11:47-0.30Jack RoslovicF19:04-0.36Nick PaulF17:13-0.37Kirill MarchenkoF18:36-0.62Morgan RiellyD18:35-0.77Troy StecherD17:08-0.80

Lines & pairs

most-used 5v5 units · when they played · on-ice xG
How to read this

The forward lines and defence pairs that actually played together most at 5v5, each with when it was on the ice across the game clock (period and power-play bands behind the strip) and on-ice xG against/for while the whole unit was out.

BUF
on ice power play penalty kill xGA xGF
FORWARD LINESL1Jack QuinnNoah OstlundZach Benson14:55+0.57L2Tage ThompsonRyan McLeodJosh Doan8:32+0.04L3Josh NorrisPeyton KrebsKonsta Helenius8:00+0.00L4Sam CarrickBeck MalenstynJustin Danforth4:36-0.18DEFENCE PAIRSD1Mattias SamuelssonOlen Zellweger14:39-0.64D2Owen PowerZach Metsa10:32-0.23D3Dennis GilbertLouis Crevier6:22+0.501ST2ND3RDOT01.251.25
TOR
on ice power play penalty kill xGA xGF
FORWARD LINESL1William NylanderJack RoslovicAuston Matthews15:26+0.15L2John TavaresNick PaulKirill Marchenko9:15-0.56L3Colton SissonsEaston CowanGavin McKenna5:39+0.11L4Teddy BluegerBrandon DuhaimeZack MacEwen4:56+0.15DEFENCE PAIRSD1Jake McCabeDarren Raddysh18:12+0.25D2Oliver Ekman-LarssonNick Blankenburg10:11+0.20D3Morgan RiellyTroy Stecher9:51-0.341ST2ND3RDOT011

Matchups

5v5 · every skater against every skater, goalies first · hover a cell
BUF won the chances TOR won them full colour = a margin of 0.75 xG or more taller = more time together (full height at 12:00) on together, dead even never on together G = goalie: his row or column is each skater against the whole other team
LuukkonenQuinnOstlundBensonThompsonMcLeodDoanNorrisKrebsHeleniusCarrickMalenstynDanforthSamuelssonZellwegerPowerMetsaGilbertCrevierBobrovskyNylanderRoslovicMatthewsTavaresPaulMarchenkoSissonsCowanMcKennaBluegerDuhaimeMacEwenMcCabeRaddyshEkman-LarssonBlankenburgRiellyStecherGL1L2L3L4D1D2D3GL1L2L3L4D1D2D3
How to read this

Rows are BUF's skaters, columns TOR's, grouped the way they played: forward lines (L1 = the line that played together most), then defence pairs. Each cell covers the five-on-five time those two players shared the ice. Its colour is the club that out-chanced the other in that time — expected goals for minus against — and the stronger the colour, the bigger the margin. Each cell is also raised: the taller the block, the longer the two shared the ice, up to full height at 12:00 of five-on-five time. A grey cell means they met and it came out even; an open, flat one means they never met at five-on-five.

The first row and column are the goalies. A goalie is in net for every five-on-five second, so a skater's cell against the other side's goalie is all of that skater's five-on-five time against that team — the rest of his row or column added up — and the corner where the two goalies meet is the game's five-on-five. Those cells cover far more time than any pair, so they reach full colour sooner and stand at full height, a wall along each edge of the grid. A goalie change adds a second goalie row or column, each covering his own time.

Linemates share the ice, so a line against a line reads as a block. The margin is a total, not a rate: a long matchup has room to build a big gap and a thirty-second one does not — which is what the height is there to show: a tall, strong cell is the game's story; a short, strong one is a moment. Hover (or tap) any cell for the exact time together, the xG each way, attempts and goals. One game — a strong cell is what happened, not what would happen again.

Goals

xG = the chance, before it went in
TeamScorerPeriodTimexG
BUFJack Quinn 1st3:35 0.17
BUFJack Quinn 2nd2:41 0.09
BUFDennis Gilbert 3rd10:05 0.02
BUFMattias Samuelsson 3rd12:16 0.06
BUFOwen Power OT3:14 0.21
TORAuston Matthews 1st2:24 0.24
TORKirill Marchenko 1st13:10 PP 0.16
TORKirill Marchenko 2nd11:13 0.05
TORKirill Marchenko 2nd16:51 0.21

The prediction, scored

Before puck drop the engine made BUF a 53.4% favorite, expecting a 3.29–3.11 game — BUF won 5–4, so the call landed. Every number in this section was issued before the game and is never re-graded.

pred. xGactual xG pred. 5v5actual 5v5 pred. STactual PP
BUF 3.293.19 2.131.92 0.740.43
TOR 3.112.72 1.852.13 0.870.27

Predicted 5v5 / special-teams portions come from the predicted map's strength splits (one shared scale per team pins the all-strengths total to its expected goals), so they don't sum exactly — the remainder is 4v4, 3v3, and other mixed states. The actual columns are the card's own counts (empty-net attempts excluded); the actual PP column is power-play xG only, the same bucket the predicted map's special-teams view draws.

The pregame score grid

The likeliest finals the engine saw before the game, with what actually happened marked — ■ BUF · ■ TOR.

Likeliest finals (BUF–TOR)probability
3–3 7.0% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
2–2 6.2% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
4–4 4.5% what happened — regulation ended tied; BUF won in OT
4–2 4.1%
2–4 3.7%
3.8%4.6%012.3%14.0%120.1%21.5%221.9%22.1%318.1%17.2%412.0%10.8%56.7%5.7%63.2%2.6%72.0%1.5%8+

Scoreline odds are the engine's own grid: each team's goals as a Poisson count, with the fitted adjustment for how often games end tied after regulation (ρ = 0.35), so these odds and the headline win probability come from the same numbers. The OT/SO layer is a separate fitted model and is already inside the headline win probability.

The pregame read

The engine made BUF a 53.4% favorite — TOR controls 48.6% of the predicted xG. Of BUF's 3.29 expected goals, 2.13 should come at 5v5 and 0.74 on the power play; TOR projects 1.85 at 5v5 and 0.87 on the power play. The logistic challenger put the home side at 42.9%, Elo at 50.4%.

Where the engine expected the goals

The predicted surface, issued before puck drop — not this game's shots (those are the card's map above). BUF attacks the left net, TOR the right; each end multiplies where the attacking team generates xG this season by where its opponent concedes it, scaled so each end totals the engine's expected goals. Actual shots lays the game's unblocked attempts on top: × goals, • on net, ◦ missed.

Tale of the tape

How each team fares on its own, season to date: per-game xG rates with league rank (of 32). Rank 1 is best on every row — orange ranks sit in the top third of the league, gray in the bottom third.

BUFTOR
2.97 (13th) Offense
xG for / game
2.80 (18th)
2.90 (18th) Defense
xG against / game
3.73 (32nd)
0.58 (26th) Power play
PP xG / game
0.81 (9th)
0.77 (18th) Penalty kill
PP xG conceded / game
1.01 (30th)

Season-to-date form as of the site's latest build, shown for context — the ratings the engine actually used were its own as-of-game-day state. Replay this matchup in the lab →