Backcheck
Recap · LAK at TOR

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

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

By the ModelJul 11, 3:50 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
LAK
Los Angeles Kings
4
Home
TOR
Toronto Maple Leafs
3
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

4.91Expected goals2.30
68% share for the better side
37Shot attempts (SOG)15
7High-danger chances6
87Corsi (all attempts)33
Score-adjusted: 75% / 25%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

The Kings won 4-3 in overtime, but the scoreboard tells a gentler story than the underlying numbers. Los Angeles controlled 68% of 5v5 expected goals (4.91–2.30), and the gap in shot attempts was even wider: Toronto managed just 15 to the Kings' 37.

What kept it close was goaltending. D. Hildeby (TOR) turned in 33 of 37 saves for a 0.892 save percentage that outperformed expectation by 0.91 goals. At the other end, D. Kuemper (LAK) posted 0.800 (12 of 15) and underperformed by 0.70. Together, those performances explain why a dominant Kings team needed overtime to finish.

Toronto was sharp on the rush: 2 goals on 16 chances. Los Angeles was less precise but higher volume: 3 goals on 40 rush attempts. High-danger chances finished 7–6 in Los Angeles's favor, reflecting the structural advantage they built over sixty minutes.

Quinton Byfield settled it at 00:35 of overtime with a slap shot from the top of the circles.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
LAK1 / 7 · 1.64 xG
TOR2 / 6 · 1.43 xG
Medium dangermid-range
LAK2 / 23 · 2.56 xG
TOR1 / 5 · 0.51 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
LAK1 / 57 · 0.71 xG
TOR0 / 22 · 0.37 xG

LAK went 1-for-7 from high danger on 1.64 expected goals — 0.6 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
LAK
4 G · 4.91 xG · -0.9
TOR
3 G · 2.30 xG · +0.7
0123456
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
D. KuemperLAK
-0.7
D. HildebyTOR
+0.9

LAK finished -0.9 against expected, TOR +0.7 — D. Hildeby (TOR) saved 0.9 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
LAK
WRIST2/32
SLAP1/11
TIP IN1/10
BACKHAND0/4
SNAP0/3
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/26
TOR
WRIST2/18
SLAP0/2
TIP IN0/2
BACKHAND1/4
SNAP0/0
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/7
LAK
TOR
Off the rush
3 G on 40 · 3.07 xG
2 G on 16 · 1.61 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 9 · 1.55 xG
0 G on 1 · 0.21 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: LAK went 2-for-32, TOR 2-for-18. LAK scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
M. Knies
#23 · L · TOR
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 23:50 TOI
J. Tavares
#91 · C · TOR
2 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 21:59 TOI · +2
D. Doughty
#8 · D · LAK
0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 21:22 TOI · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • TOR was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 16 rush chances.
  • LAK was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 40 rush chances.
  • LAK created 9 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · LAK at TOR · 7:00 PM ET

Kings at Maple Leafs: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 3:49 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

54%
LAK
Model favorite
54%
46%
LAK50TOR

LAK by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score LAK 2.52.3 TOR; 19% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

LAK← edge
edge →TOR
52.0%5v5 xG%46.0%
52.0%Corsi%45.0%
2.42xGF / 602.24
2.20xGA / 602.67
1.85Goals for / gm2.09
1.71Goals against / gm2.52
1.002PDO — luck, not skill1.002

LAK holds 5 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.002 vs 1.002) says TOR has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.5–2.3 Kings victory with Los Angeles at 54% win probability. This is as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

The Kings own the underlying play: 52.0% 5v5 xG against Toronto's 46.0%, and drive territorial possession at 52.0% Corsi — well ahead of Toronto's 45.0%. Both teams carry a 1.002 PDO, so neither is inflated by shooting luck.

A back-to-back scenario looms for both goaltenders. D. Hildeby and D. Kuemper face consecutive nights — watch for either a backup appearance or a fatigued starter.

Offensively, the matchup hinges on conversion. Alex Laferriere leads Los Angeles at 0.87 xG/60 with 16 goals and 18 assists. His 9.9% shooting rate sits below elite territory, and he has only 2 high-danger goals. The gap between volume and finishing suggests upside for Los Angeles. Jared Wright (0.83 xG/60, 0G, 4A) has zero goals on a 0.0% shooting clip — an extreme outlier worth monitoring.

Toronto counters with Auston Matthews (1.10 xG/60, 17G, 13A, 1 HD goal) at 10.6% shooting — approaching elite rates — and John Tavares (0.91 xG/60, 15G, 24A, 3 HD goals) at 12.4% shooting, well above league average. Matthews is the sniper; Tavares is the accumulator.

Defensively, Adrian Kempe is Los Angeles's weak link, while Bo Groulx carries that burden for Toronto. Both teams show 0% high-danger goal rate and 0% rebound goal rate, suggesting either strong defensive discipline or a limited sample in those categories.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

LAK
Alex Laferriere16G 18A
0.87 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.9% sh
Jared Wright0G 4A
0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% sh
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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters