Backcheck
Recap · OTT at CAR

Hurricanes steal one from the Senators against the run of play

The Hurricanes stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.71–3.26 and won anyway.

By the ModelJul 12, 3:50 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
OTT
Ottawa Senators
3
Home
CAR
Carolina Hurricanes
4
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

4.71Expected goals3.26
59% share for the better side
27Shot attempts (SOG)19
8High-danger chances5
56Corsi (all attempts)50
Score-adjusted: 53% / 47%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

The Senators dominated the Hurricanes 59% to 41% in expected goals at 5v5, yet skated off losers 4-3. This was not a fluke — it was a disciplined heist built on goaltending and efficiency.

B. Bussi saved 1.7 goals above expected, stopping 24 of 27 shots with a 100% mark on eight high-danger chances. J. Reimer, conversely, gave back 0.74 goals; the Senators went 0 for 8 on those same prime scoring areas. Shot quality and finishing split apart from shot volume.

The Hurricanes converted 3 goals off just 16 rush attempts — that's 19% efficiency on the transition, a rate that punishes flat-footed defenses. The Senators, despite owning possession and xG, scattered their firepower: two goals came from low-danger slots, which J. Reimer should have had.

Jordan Staal's snap shot from the high slot — 14:53 of the third period — was when this game tipped. Carolina never surrendered the lead.

S. Aho drove the play with 1G, 2A in 16:50, steering the rush game. J. Sanderson (1G, 1A in 23:15) and D. Cozens (2A in 19:16) led the Senators' push, but volume did not translate to verdict.

Ottawa created 11 rebound opportunities without converting any; Carolina created five and added none either. Both teams clashed at the net, but only the Hurricanes scored when it mattered. This is the xG story in reverse: control without finish, precision without possession.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
OTT0 / 8 · 1.93 xG
CAR1 / 5 · 1.51 xG
Medium dangermid-range
OTT1 / 16 · 2.11 xG
CAR3 / 10 · 1.33 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
OTT2 / 32 · 0.68 xG
CAR0 / 35 · 0.42 xG

OTT went 0-for-8 from high danger on 1.93 expected goals — 1.9 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
OTT
3 G · 4.71 xG · -1.7
CAR
4 G · 3.26 xG · +0.7
0123456
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
J. ReimerOTT
-0.7
B. BussiCAR
+1.7

OTT finished -1.7 against expected, CAR +0.7 — B. Bussi (CAR) saved 1.7 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
OTT
SNAP0/15
WRIST0/15
SLAP2/5
TIP IN1/2
BACKHAND0/5
DEFLECTED0/3
BAT0/0
OTHER0/11
CAR
SNAP1/15
WRIST2/4
SLAP1/8
TIP IN0/4
BACKHAND0/0
DEFLECTED0/0
BAT0/1
OTHER0/18
OTT
CAR
Off the rush
1 G on 20 · 1.95 xG
3 G on 16 · 1.54 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 11 · 1.89 xG
0 G on 5 · 0.54 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: OTT went 0-for-15, CAR 1-for-15. CAR scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
S. Aho
#20 · C · CAR
1 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 16:50 TOI · +2
J. Sanderson
#85 · D · OTT
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 23:15 TOI · -3
D. Cozens
#24 · C · OTT
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 19:16 TOI
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • CAR won despite being outplayed by xG (41%). Goaltending or finishing carried them.
  • B. Bussi (CAR) stopped 1.7 goals above expected.
  • OTT couldn't convert — 0/8 on high-danger chances. That won't happen often.
  • OTT scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • CAR was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 16 rush chances.
  • CAR created 5 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • OTT created 11 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • OTT underperformed xG by 1.7 — wasted quality chances.
  • B. Bussi (CAR) saved 1.7 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • B. Bussi was a wall on HD chances — 100% SV on 8 high-danger shots.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · OTT at CAR · 7:00 PM ET

Senators at Hurricanes: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 12, 3:49 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

53%
CAR
Model favorite
47%
53%
OTT50CAR

CAR by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score OTT 2.52.7 CAR; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

OTT← edge
edge →CAR
56.0%5v5 xG%56.0%
53.0%Corsi%60.0%
2.66xGF / 602.98
2.12xGA / 602.31
2.18Goals for / gm2.26
1.99Goals against / gm1.95
0.993PDO — luck, not skill0.984

CAR holds 5 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.993 vs 0.984) says OTT has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The models can't pick a winner here. The projection is a 2.5 to 2.7 goal spread favoring the Hurricanes, but Carolina carries only 53% win probability—essentially a coin flip with a microscopic tilt.

Both teams are indistinguishable at 56.0% expected goals, generating equivalent scoring chances at even strength. The split appears in how they earn them: the Hurricanes control territory at a 60.0% Corsi clip, while the Senators manage 53.0%. That edge won't always show up in the scoreboard—territorial dominance is a long-term signal, not a nightly guarantee—but expect Carolina to spend more time in Ottawa's zone.

There's a regression watch on Carolina's side. The Hurricanes' PDO sits at 0.984, running cold relative to their underlying play. PDO measures the intersection of shooting accuracy and goaltending save percentage; 0.984 is below neutral, suggesting the Hurricanes are due for positive variance. The Senators' PDO of 0.993 is closer to expectation.

Brady Tkachuk leads Ottawa's attack at 1.19 expected goals per 60 minutes, combining 11 goals and 20 assists while shooting at 7.5%—a rate likely to regress downward. Dylan Cozens generates 1.00 xG/60 with 13 goals and 15 assists, shooting at 9.5%. Carolina counters with Jackson Blake at 1.06 xG/60 and 14 goals, 19 assists. Seth Jarvis carries 0.98 xG/60 and 17 goals on an unsustainable 11.9% shooting rate.

Defensively, Nick Jensen represents Ottawa's vulnerability; Charles Alexis Legault does the same for Carolina. Exploitation of these seams likely decides an otherwise even matchup.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

OTT
Brady Tkachuk11G 20A
1.19 xG/60 · 2 HD · 7.5% sh
Dylan Cozens13G 15A
1.00 xG/60 · 1 HD · 9.5% sh
CAR
Jackson Blake14G 19A
1.06 xG/60 · 2 HD · 10.9% sh
Seth Jarvis17G 12A
0.98 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.9% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters