Backcheck
Recap · OTT at EDM

Oilers run the Senators off the ice on the underlying numbers

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

By the ModelJul 12, 5:21 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
OTT
Ottawa Senators
4
Home
EDM
Edmonton Oilers
5
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

2.18Expected goals5.42
71% share for the better side
21Shot attempts (SOG)37
1High-danger chances11
48Corsi (all attempts)68
Score-adjusted: 38% / 62%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Edmonton's 5–4 overtime victory glossed over a rout. The Oilers generated 11 high-danger chances to Ottawa's 1—a gap that made the scoreline a lie.

That margin wasn't an outlier. Edmonton controlled 71% of expected goals (5.42–2.18), converting their chances with ruthless efficiency. Their shot quality was elite: 0.080 xG per attempt versus Ottawa's 0.046. The power play was surgical—3 goals on 11 shots (1.47 xG). On the rush, they buried 3 of 33 chances.

L. Ullmark (Ottawa) posted a 0.865 save percentage on 32 saves, an impressive performance against relentless offensive pressure. C. Ingram (Edmonton) allowed 17 goals on 21 shots (0.810 SV%), underperforming expected by 1.82 goals. Ottawa, meanwhile, overperformed their xG by 1.8 goals—elite finishing or fortune, depending on your read of variance.

E. Bouchard's slap shot from the high slot at 01:50 of overtime decided the game.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
OTT1 / 1 · 0.32 xG
EDM1 / 11 · 2.57 xG
Medium dangermid-range
OTT3 / 13 · 1.30 xG
EDM3 / 17 · 2.06 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
OTT0 / 34 · 0.57 xG
EDM1 / 40 · 0.79 xG

OTT went 3-for-13 from medium danger on 1.30 expected goals — 1.7 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
OTT
4 G · 2.18 xG · +1.8
EDM
5 G · 5.42 xG · -0.4
0123456
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
L. UllmarkOTT
+0.4
C. IngramEDM
-1.8

OTT finished +1.8 against expected, EDM -0.4 — C. Ingram (EDM) allowed 1.8 more goals than expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
OTT
WRIST2/16
SNAP2/9
BACKHAND0/3
SLAP0/5
TIP IN0/0
DEFLECTED0/1
BAT0/0
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/14
EDM
WRIST3/30
SNAP0/11
BACKHAND0/6
SLAP1/2
TIP IN0/6
DEFLECTED1/1
BAT0/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
OTHER0/10
OTT
EDM
Off the rush
3 G on 24 · 1.62 xG
3 G on 33 · 3.23 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 1 · 0.12 xG
0 G on 5 · 0.84 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: OTT went 2-for-16, EDM 3-for-30. OTT scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
L. Draisaitl
#29 · C · EDM
2 G · 3 A · 4 SOG · 23:08 TOI · +2
E. Bouchard
#2 · D · EDM
1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 28:37 TOI · -1
C. McDavid
#97 · C · EDM
0 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 27:37 TOI
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • C. Ingram (EDM) gave up 1.8 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
  • EDM generated far more dangerous chances — 0.080 xG/shot vs 0.046. Quality over quantity.
  • EDM was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 33 rush chances.
  • OTT was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 24 rush chances.
  • EDM created 5 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • OTT outperformed their expected goals by 1.8 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.
  • L. Ullmark was a wall on HD chances — 91% SV on 11 high-danger shots.
  • EDM power play was dominant — 3 PPG on 11 PP shots (1.47 xG).
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · OTT at EDM · 9:00 PM ET

Senators at Oilers: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 12, 5:19 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

51%
OTT
Model favorite
51%
49%
OTT50EDM

OTT by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score OTT 2.62.5 EDM; 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 →EDM
56.0%5v5 xG%52.0%
53.0%Corsi%50.0%
2.66xGF / 602.64
2.12xGA / 602.47
2.18Goals for / gm2.13
1.99Goals against / gm2.29
0.993PDO — luck, not skill0.982

OTT holds 6 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.993 vs 0.982) says OTT has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.6–2.5 edge to Ottawa, which translates to 51% win probability: a pick'em. Ottawa has earned this status through genuine advantages in the underlying play, though Edmonton's poor luck creates a counterweight worth monitoring.

Ottawa's form backs the projection. The Senators have gone 6–3–1 in their last 10 games, outpacing Edmonton. More significant is their territorial control: they own 56.0% of expected goals at 5-on-5 and drive 53.0% Corsi, meaning they should finish this game in Edmonton's end.

Edmonton isn't playing poorly — they're playing worse than their record suggests. At 0.982 PDO, they're running significantly cold on luck. Regression should flip Edmonton's results toward their underlying performance, which creates a built-in correction factor for a team that's been underperforming.

The gap narrows when you line up their best talent. Brady Tkachuk leads Ottawa at 1.19 expected goals per 60 minutes and has scored 11 times on a 7.5% shooting rate, suggesting more upside. Zach Hyman matches that at 1.23 xG/60 and has converted 14 times at 13.0%, with little room left to improve. Connor McDavid remains the wildcard: 25 goals and 33 assists on just 0.92 xG/60 is the definition of outscoring your chances.

Dylan Cozens (13 goals at 9.5% shooting) adds another scoring weapon Ottawa can deploy. But Ottawa can't activate their best line in every situation, and their own cold shooting — Tkachuk at 7.5% — means they're not running away with puck luck either.

Key Players

  • Brady Tkachuk (OTT) — 1.19 xG/60, 11 goals
  • Zach Hyman (EDM) — 1.23 xG/60, 14 goals
  • Connor McDavid (EDM) — 25 goals, 0.92 xG/60
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
EDM
Zach Hyman14G 13A
1.23 xG/60 · 1 HD · 13.0% sh
Connor McDavid25G 33A
0.92 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters