Real data. Everything on this page is computed from actual games.
Spare Line Change
Numbers from
Hits and takeaways
at

BUF

Buffalo Sabres

2-2-0

MTL

Montréal Canadiens

1-2-1

Has last change

Tuesday, October 13

6:30 PM ET · Centre Bell

The short version

Before the game

Suzuki’s favourite opponent

The Canadiens haven’t won in three. The Sabres are 2-2-0. Buffalo has controlled the play far better over recent games and Montréal has home ice. Montréal’s best way through is getting good looks.

The Canadiens haven’t won in three. The Sabres are 2-2-0. Buffalo has controlled the play far better over recent games and Montréal has home ice. Montréal’s way back in is getting good looks.

It’s strength against strength: the Canadiens for chance quality, the Sabres at preventing dangerous shots. Don’t read much into Luukkonen’s record against the Canadiens.

Who to watch

  • Owns themNick Suzuki has a point in eight straight games against Buffalo, and 20 points in his last twelve against them.
  • MissingIvan Demidov has missed the Canadiens’ last two games.
  • Still outJason Zucker hasn’t played yet this season.
  • Still outO. Kapanen is day to day (lower body injury) and hasn’t played yet this season.

  1. Strength against strength

    The Canadiens are one of the league’s best for chance quality, and the Sabres are near the top of the league at preventing dangerous shots. Our lean: the Canadiens’ chance quality wins out.

    The call The Canadiens’ chances are more dangerous than the league average (a 6.4% chance of scoring on the average shot) against the Sabres.

    Montréal 2nd for chance quality (a 6.9% chance of scoring on the average shot) · Buffalo 8th for preventing dangerous shots

    Style fingerprint · this season blended with last · 4 and 4 games this season

  2. The Canadiens aren’t Luukkonen’s kryptonite

    Since 2023-24, Luukkonen has been shaky against the Canadiens, well below his usual. Fans love a pattern like this, but we checked three seasons of them and they predicted nothing. Expect the usual Luukkonen.

    The call If Luukkonen starts, his save percentage lands closer to his usual .902 than to his .871 against the Canadiens.

    5 starts against Montréal: .871 save percentage · .902 against everyone else

    Goalie starts since 2023-24 · 5 against Montréal, 3,745 shots against everyone else

These calls are written by fixed rules from the numbers below, and saved as they stand at puck drop. After the game, each one will be checked against what happened.

Style fingerprints

How Buffalo and Montréal play, trait by trait, on the same scales.

Buffalo SabresMontréal CanadiensLeague averageLikely range

Each scale runs from the league’s lowest team on the left to its highest on the right. Numbers blend last season with the 4 and 4 games played so far; traits that take longer to settle lean more on last season.

This season only: 4 games for Buffalo, 4 for Montréal. Expect these to swing a lot, which is why the likely ranges are so wide.

The biggest differences

Show all 18 traitsHide the full set

Offense

  • Shot volume
    SelectiveRelentless

    • Buffalo: 57.0 shot attempts per 6015th of 32

      Buffalo: 57.1 shot attempts per 6012th of 32

    • Montréal: 55.7 shot attempts per 6018th of 32

      Montréal: 56.5 shot attempts per 6017th of 32

  • Shot quality
    HopefulDangerous

    • Buffalo: a 6.5% chance of scoring on the average shot13th of 32

      Buffalo: a 7.0% chance of scoring on the average shot9th of 32

    • Montréal: a 6.9% chance of scoring on the average shot2nd of 32

      Montréal: a 7.2% chance of scoring on the average shot7th of 32

  • Second chances
    One-and-doneCrashers

    • Buffalo: 9.9% of chances come from rebounds30th of 32

      Buffalo: 7.8% of chances come from rebounds21st of 32

    • Montréal: 10.1% of chances come from rebounds20th of 32

      Montréal: 15.7% of chances come from rebounds7th of 32

  • Off-turnover offense
    PatientOpportunist

    • Buffalo: 6.7% of chances come right after a turnover30th of 32

      Buffalo: 4.0% of chances come right after a turnover28th of 32

    • Montréal: 7.2% of chances come right after a turnover20th of 32

      Montréal: 17.0% of chances come right after a turnover1st of 32

  • Shots from defensemen
    Forward-ledActive D

    • Buffalo: 32.5% of shot attempts come from defensemen24th of 32

      Buffalo: 29.1% of shot attempts come from defensemen30th of 32

    • Montréal: 33.8% of shot attempts come from defensemen22nd of 32

      Montréal: 33.3% of shot attempts come from defensemen19th of 32

  • Shots from in close
    From distanceIn close

    • Buffalo: 31.0% of shots come from within 20 feet11th of 32

      Buffalo: 34.0% of shots come from within 20 feet8th of 32

    • Montréal: 31.0% of shots come from within 20 feet10th of 32

      Montréal: 33.6% of shots come from within 20 feet11th of 32

Defense

  • Shot suppression
    PorousStingy

    • Buffalo: 52.3 shot attempts allowed per 606th of 32

      Buffalo: 41.3 shot attempts allowed per 603rd of 32

    • Montréal: 55.9 shot attempts allowed per 6015th of 32

      Montréal: 52.7 shot attempts allowed per 6012th of 32

  • Quality allowed
    ExposedSheltered

    • Buffalo: a 6.2% chance of scoring on the average shot against8th of 32

      Buffalo: a 6.1% chance of scoring on the average shot against10th of 32

    • Montréal: a 6.5% chance of scoring on the average shot against24th of 32

      Montréal: a 5.9% chance of scoring on the average shot against6th of 32

  • Breakdowns avoided
    Fire drillComposed

    • Buffalo: 0.42 defensive breakdowns per 6021st of 32

      Buffalo: 0.00 defensive breakdowns per 601st of 32

    • Montréal: 0.38 defensive breakdowns per 6010th of 32

      Montréal: 0.00 defensive breakdowns per 601st of 32

  • Goaltending
    SieveWall

    • Buffalo: +0.09 goals saved above expected per 6019th of 32

      Buffalo: −1.33 goals saved above expected per 6029th of 32

    • Montréal: +0.11 goals saved above expected per 6014th of 32

      Montréal: −1.30 goals saved above expected per 6028th of 32

Tempo and edge

  • Pace
    SlogTrack meet

    • Buffalo: 81.5 shots per 60, both teams combined19th of 32

      Buffalo: 70.9 shots per 60, both teams combined30th of 32

    • Montréal: 80.2 shots per 60, both teams combined23rd of 32

      Montréal: 81.0 shots per 60, both teams combined13th of 32

  • Forecheck pressure
    PassiveHounding

    • Buffalo: forecheck score 93 (100 is league average)19th of 32Buffalo: 20.8 forecheck plays recorded per 6022nd of 32

      Buffalo: forecheck score 88 (100 is league average)20th of 32Buffalo: 20.8 forecheck plays recorded per 6024th of 32

    • Montréal: forecheck score 103 (100 is league average)13th of 32Montréal: 24.5 forecheck plays recorded per 608th of 32

      Montréal: forecheck score 103 (100 is league average)13th of 32Montréal: 27.0 forecheck plays recorded per 6010th of 32

  • Physicality
    FinesseBruising

    • Buffalo: hit score 91 (100 is league average)22nd of 32Buffalo: 24.5 hits recorded per 6024th of 32

      Buffalo: hit score 88 (100 is league average)22nd of 32Buffalo: 25.7 hits recorded per 6023rd of 32

    • Montréal: hit score 101 (100 is league average)16th of 32Montréal: 27.9 hits recorded per 6012th of 32

      Montréal: hit score 95 (100 is league average)19th of 32Montréal: 29.3 hits recorded per 6016th of 32

  • Depth
    Top-heavyDeep

    • Buffalo: 41.3% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six21st of 32

      Buffalo: 40.5% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six26th of 32

    • Montréal: 42.7% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six12th of 32

      Montréal: 42.7% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six16th of 32

Special teams

  • Power play
    HarmlessLethal

    • Buffalo: 6.9 expected goals per 60 on the power play28th of 32

      Buffalo: 4.3 expected goals per 60 on the power play29th of 32

    • Montréal: 7.0 expected goals per 60 on the power play27th of 32

      Montréal: 3.6 expected goals per 60 on the power play32nd of 32

  • Penalty kill
    LeakyAirtight

    • Buffalo: 7.4 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded15th of 32

      Buffalo: 6.7 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded14th of 32

    • Montréal: 8.1 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded26th of 32

      Montréal: 7.3 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded17th of 32

  • Power kill
    BunkeredPredatory

    • Buffalo: 0.9 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded16th of 32

      Buffalo: 1.4 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded7th of 32

    • Montréal: 0.9 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded14th of 32

      Montréal: 0.8 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded15th of 32

  • Discipline
    RecklessClean

    • Buffalo: 0.10 more penalties drawn than taken per 609th of 32

      Buffalo: 0.25 more penalties drawn than taken per 6013th of 32

    • Montréal: 0.13 more penalties taken than drawn per 6026th of 32

      Montréal: 1.24 more penalties taken than drawn per 6029th of 32

Forecheck pressure and physicality are arena-adjusted scores; switch “Hits and takeaways” to Raw in the settings to see the numbers as recorded. How the arena adjustment works.

Lines and deployment

Montréal is at home, so their coach changes last and chooses who plays against whom.

How good, against the same line or pair on other teamsHow much, low to high (not good or bad)

Lines and pairs are numbered by 5-on-5 ice time together over each team’s last 10 games (4 and 4 so far), with each older game counting half as much as the one after it, so the latest combinations come first. With so few games, each group’s results are pulled toward the average for its line number.

Buffalo Sabres

Montréal Canadiens

Worth knowing

  • Buffalo J. Zucker has not played this season.
  • Buffalo J. Norris has started killing penalties: on the ice for 41% of the team’s shorthanded time in 4 games, up from 1% last season.
  • Buffalo Z. Metsa has started killing penalties: on the ice for 46% of the team’s shorthanded time in 4 games, up from 7% last season.
  • Montréal O. Kapanen is day to day (lower body injury) and has not played this season. J. Slafkovský has taken his spot beside A. Newhook and I. Demidov.
  • Montréal K. Guhle is expected back after missing 4 games. Their recent numbers were built mostly without him.
  • Montréal A. Xhekaj has started killing penalties: on the ice for 27% of the team’s shorthanded time in 4 games, up from 6% last season.

Who Montréal is likely to send against whom

Each strip shows how one Montréal group’s 5-on-5 time at home has been split across opponents’ four forward lines. Tonight those lines are Buffalo’s, named in each box.

Buffalo’s lines tonightL1 Quinn · Ostlund · BensonL2 Thompson · Krebs · KulichL3 Norris · McLeod · HeleniusL4 Malenstyn · Danforth · Doan

Montréal forward lines against Buffalo forward lines

  • L1Suzuki · Caufield · SlafkovskýBUF L114%BUF L251%BUF L328%BUF L47%
  • L2Danault · Texier · BolducBUF L133%BUF L219%BUF L319%BUF L429%
  • L3Kreider · Anderson · NewhookBUF L115%BUF L238%BUF L327%BUF L420%
  • L4Evans · Dach · XhekajBUF L122%BUF L217%BUF L349%BUF L412%

Montréal defense pairs against Buffalo forward lines

  • P1Dobson · HutsonBUF L124%BUF L240%BUF L320%BUF L415%
  • P2Matheson · CarrierBUF L135%BUF L224%BUF L330%BUF L411%
  • P3Xhekaj · EngstromBUF L114%BUF L22%BUF L357%BUF L427%

Based on 2 Montréal home games this season, so treat it as a habit forming, not a certainty. Faded rows have under ten minutes. With no line matching, each group would face an opposing line about as often as that line is on the ice; a number well above that means the coach is sending that group out against it on purpose.

Special teams

Each power play set against the penalty killers it will face.

Show

Buffalo power play against Montréal penalty kill

  • Buffalo power play

    6.9 expected goals per 60 · 28th of 32

  • Montréal penalty kill

    8.1 expected goals allowed per 60 · 26th of 32

Buffalo power play

PP163% of the time

Creates 6.4 expected goals per 60

  • R. DahlinQuarterback
  • J. Quinn
  • Z. BensonNet-front
  • T. ThompsonTrigger
  • N. Ostlund

PP237% of the time

Creates 6.1 expected goals per 60

  • O. PowerQuarterback
  • K. Helenius
  • J. DoanTrigger
  • R. McLeodDistributor
  • J. Norris

 

Where Buffalo’s last 140 power-play shots came from. Bigger dots are more dangerous.

Montréal penalty kill

Starts the kill

Second wave

Spot duty

Units and penalty-kill roles use each team’s last 10 games; power-play role tags use this season and last, counting only games with the player’s current team; the map shows the last 140 power-play shots. Point at a power-play name to see his shots on the map.

Goaltending

Is each goalie stopping more than he should, and what is his team asking him to face?

Showagainst

U. Luukkonen37 starts · 986 shots, this season and last

+5.7 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.976 499 shots
Medium-danger save %
.868 348 shots
High-danger save %
.719 139 shots
Shots faced per 60
26.8
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.38
Quality starts
59%

Helping, or hung out to dry?

System and goalie both goodGoalie bailing them outGoalie giving back what the system earnsTrouble everywhereTeam allows fewer chances ← → more chancesU. LuukkonenC. EllisJ. DobesJ. Fowler

J. Dobes45 starts · 1277 shots, this season and last

+11.5 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.980 649 shots
Medium-danger save %
.861 411 shots
High-danger save %
.724 217 shots
Shots faced per 60
28.4
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.36
Quality starts
62%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • U. Luukkonen: +5.7 goals saved above expected in 37 starts
    • J. Dobes: +11.5 goals saved above expected in 45 starts
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • U. Luukkonen: 26.8 shots faced per 60
    • J. Dobes: 28.4 shots faced per 60
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • U. Luukkonen: the average shot he faces has a 6.8% chance of going in
    • J. Dobes: the average shot he faces has a 7.3% chance of going in
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • U. Luukkonen: 0.38 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
    • J. Dobes: 0.36 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • U. Luukkonen: a typical wait of 75 seconds between shots
    • J. Dobes: a typical wait of 67 seconds between shots
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • U. Luukkonen: a quality start 59% of the time
    • J. Dobes: a quality start 62% of the time

U. Luukkonen, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

J. Dobes, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

U. Luukkonen3 starts · 55 shots, this season

−5.4 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.952 21 shots
Medium-danger save %
.714 21 shots
High-danger save %
.615 13 shots
Shots faced per 60
18.4
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0
Quality starts
0%

Helping, or hung out to dry?

System and goalie both goodGoalie bailing them outGoalie giving back what the system earnsTrouble everywhereTeam allows fewer chances ← → more chancesU. LuukkonenC. EllisJ. DobesJ. Fowler

J. Dobes3 starts · 90 shots, this season

−4.0 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.978 45 shots
Medium-danger save %
.774 31 shots
High-danger save %
.643 14 shots
Shots faced per 60
30.7
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0
Quality starts
33%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • U. Luukkonen: −5.4 goals saved above expected in 3 starts
    • J. Dobes: −4.0 goals saved above expected in 3 starts
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • U. Luukkonen: 18.4 shots faced per 60
    • J. Dobes: 30.7 shots faced per 60
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • U. Luukkonen: the average shot he faces has a 7.3% chance of going in
    • J. Dobes: the average shot he faces has a 7.3% chance of going in
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • U. Luukkonen: 0 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
    • J. Dobes: 0 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • U. Luukkonen: a typical wait of 118 seconds between shots
    • J. Dobes: a typical wait of 60 seconds between shots
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • U. Luukkonen: a quality start 0% of the time
    • J. Dobes: a quality start 33% of the time

U. Luukkonen, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

J. Dobes, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

The menus list every goalie on each team, busiest this season first; the site does not yet know who will start. Expected-goal models can’t see passes before a shot, so a goalie whose team gives up many cross-ice passes looks worse here than he really is.

Where the goals come from

How each team’s goals are scored, or allowed, against the league average.

Show goals
BuffaloMontréalLeague average
  • Everyday even-strength play59.9%56.5%
  • Power play17.1%21%
  • Rebound3.9%5.5%
  • Empty net9.3%5.2%
  • Off a turnover4.5%4.9%
  • Goalie pulled1.5%3.5%
  • Shorthanded2.7%1.7%
  • Off a faceoff win1.2%1.7%

334 Buffalo goals and 347 Montréal goals scored this season and last. Each row has its own scale.

  • Everyday even-strength play80%42.9%
  • Power play0%7.1%
  • Rebound0%14.3%
  • Empty net0%0%
  • Off a turnover10%14.3%
  • Goalie pulled0%21.4%
  • Shorthanded0%0%
  • Off a faceoff win10%0%

10 Buffalo goals and 14 Montréal goals scored this season. Each row has its own scale.

These mixes are mostly luck: over three seasons, teams’ goals came from much the same places, and most of the differences here didn’t last. Each team page shows how much luck alone can move each row.

Data notes

Team pages: Buffalo Sabres · Montréal Canadiens