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

MTL

Montréal Canadiens

1-2-1

WSH

Washington Capitals

3-1-0

Has last change

Wednesday, October 14

7:30 PM ET · Capital One Arena

The short version

Before the game

Quality over quantity for the Canadiens

The Capitals have won two in a row. The Canadiens haven’t won in three. Montréal has had more of the chances over recent games and Washington has home ice. Washington can tip it if they get good looks.

The Capitals have won two in a row. The Canadiens haven’t won in three. Montréal has had more of the chances over recent games and Washington has home ice. Montréal can tip it if they get good looks.

The Canadiens make their shots count, and the Capitals allow dangerous ones. The Canadiens and the Capitals sit at opposite ends for forecheck pressure.

Who to watch

  • Haunts themAlex Ovechkin has seven goals in eight games against Montréal since 2023-24.
  • Haunts themNick Suzuki has seven goals in nine games against Washington since 2023-24.
  • MissingIvan Demidov has missed the Canadiens’ last two games.
  • MissingMatt Roy has missed the Capitals’ last two games.

  1. Quality over quantity for the Canadiens

    The Capitals have struggled to prevent dangerous shots, and the Canadiens don’t waste many.

    The call The Canadiens’ average shot has at least their usual 6.9% chance of going in.

    Montréal 2nd for shot quality (a 6.9% chance of scoring on the average shot) · Washington 28th for preventing dangerous shots

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

  2. Forecheck against patience

    The Canadiens are around the middle of the league for forecheck pressure, at the hounding end; the Capitals are near the bottom of the league, at the passive end. Expect that gap to show.

    The call The Canadiens put more forecheck pressure on than the Capitals.

    Forecheck pressure: Montréal 13th, Washington 25th

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

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 Montréal and Washington play, trait by trait, on the same scales.

Montréal CanadiensWashington CapitalsLeague 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 Montréal, 4 for Washington. 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

    • Montréal: 55.7 shot attempts per 6018th of 32

      Montréal: 56.5 shot attempts per 6017th of 32

    • Washington: 57.0 shot attempts per 6014th of 32

      Washington: 56.6 shot attempts per 6016th of 32

  • Shot quality
    HopefulDangerous

    • 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

    • Washington: a 6.7% chance of scoring on the average shot6th of 32

      Washington: a 7.2% chance of scoring on the average shot6th of 32

  • Second chances
    One-and-doneCrashers

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

      Montréal: 15.7% of chances come from rebounds7th of 32

    • Washington: 10.5% of chances come from rebounds5th of 32

      Washington: 13.6% of chances come from rebounds9th of 32

  • Off-turnover offense
    PatientOpportunist

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

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

    • Washington: 7.4% of chances come right after a turnover14th of 32

      Washington: 11.5% of chances come right after a turnover8th of 32

  • Shots from defensemen
    Forward-ledActive D

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

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

    • Washington: 35.4% of shot attempts come from defensemen13th of 32

      Washington: 35.6% of shot attempts come from defensemen13th of 32

  • Shots from in close
    From distanceIn close

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

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

    • Washington: 31.3% of shots come from within 20 feet8th of 32

      Washington: 30.3% of shots come from within 20 feet21st of 32

Defense

  • Shot suppression
    PorousStingy

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

      Montréal: 52.7 shot attempts allowed per 6012th of 32

    • Washington: 57.9 shot attempts allowed per 6020th of 32

      Washington: 57.1 shot attempts allowed per 6022nd of 32

  • Quality allowed
    ExposedSheltered

    • 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

    • Washington: a 6.6% chance of scoring on the average shot against28th of 32

      Washington: a 7.0% chance of scoring on the average shot against28th of 32

  • Breakdowns avoided
    Fire drillComposed

    • Montréal: 0.38 defensive breakdowns per 6010th of 32

      Montréal: 0.00 defensive breakdowns per 601st of 32

    • Washington: 0.52 defensive breakdowns per 6032nd of 32

      Washington: 1.02 defensive breakdowns per 6031st of 32

  • Goaltending
    SieveWall

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

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

    • Washington: +0.24 goals saved above expected per 601st of 32

      Washington: +1.59 goals saved above expected per 601st of 32

Tempo and edge

  • Pace
    SlogTrack meet

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

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

    • Washington: 82.8 shots per 60, both teams combined12th of 32

      Washington: 83.1 shots per 60, both teams combined11th of 32

  • Forecheck pressure
    PassiveHounding

    • 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

    • Washington: forecheck score 88 (100 is league average)25th of 32Washington: 20.5 forecheck plays recorded per 6026th of 32

      Washington: forecheck score 80 (100 is league average)27th of 32Washington: 20.3 forecheck plays recorded per 6025th of 32

  • Physicality
    FinesseBruising

    • 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

    • Washington: hit score 100 (100 is league average)17th of 32Washington: 27.1 hits recorded per 6015th of 32

      Washington: hit score 105 (100 is league average)13th of 32Washington: 31.8 hits recorded per 6011th of 32

  • Depth
    Top-heavyDeep

    • 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

    • Washington: 43.0% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six10th of 32

      Washington: 44.6% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six4th of 32

Special teams

  • Power play
    HarmlessLethal

    • 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

    • Washington: 7.3 expected goals per 60 on the power play18th of 32

      Washington: 6.5 expected goals per 60 on the power play20th of 32

  • Penalty kill
    LeakyAirtight

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

      Montréal: 7.3 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded17th of 32

    • Washington: 8.2 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded27th of 32

      Washington: 9.5 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded28th of 32

  • Power kill
    BunkeredPredatory

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

      Montréal: 0.8 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded15th of 32

    • Washington: 0.8 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded22nd of 32

      Washington: 1.2 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded11th of 32

  • Discipline
    RecklessClean

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

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

    • Washington: 0.13 more penalties taken than drawn per 6027th of 32

      Washington: 1.25 more penalties taken than drawn per 6031st 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

Washington 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.

Montréal Canadiens

Washington Capitals

Worth knowing

  • 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.
  • Washington M. Roy is day to day (lower body injury) and has missed the last 2 games. He is a top-four defenseman. T. Liljegren has taken his spot beside J. Chychrun.

Who Washington is likely to send against whom

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

Montréal’s lines tonightL1 Suzuki · Caufield · SlafkovskýL2 Danault · Texier · BolducL3 Kreider · Anderson · NewhookL4 Evans · Dach · Xhekaj

Washington forward lines against Montréal forward lines

  • L1Wilson · Tuch · DuboisMTL L139%MTL L238%MTL L314%MTL L49%
  • L2Kyrou · Protas · ProtasMTL L122%MTL L230%MTL L324%MTL L423%
  • L3Jenner · Sourdif · LeonardMTL L121%MTL L224%MTL L323%MTL L433%
  • L4Ovechkin · Strome · BeauvillierMTL L124%MTL L223%MTL L320%MTL L432%

Washington defense pairs against Montréal forward lines

  • P1Chychrun · LiljegrenMTL L127%MTL L233%MTL L320%MTL L420%
  • P2Desharnais · FehérváryMTL L131%MTL L229%MTL L316%MTL L424%
  • P3McIlrath · HutsonMTL L112%MTL L28%MTL L341%MTL L439%

Based on 2 Washington 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

Montréal power play against Washington penalty kill

  • Montréal power play

    7.0 expected goals per 60 · 27th of 32

  • Washington penalty kill

    8.2 expected goals allowed per 60 · 27th of 32

Montréal power play

PP170% of the time

Creates 5.7 expected goals per 60

  • L. HutsonQuarterback
  • C. CaufieldTrigger
  • N. SuzukiDistributor
  • J. SlafkovskýNet-front
  • C. Kreiderboth units

PP230% of the time

Creates 6.7 expected goals per 60

  • N. DobsonQuarterback
  • C. Kreiderboth units
  • A. Texier
  • Z. BolducTrigger
  • A. Newhook

 

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

Washington penalty kill

Starts the kill

Second wave

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

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%

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 chancesJ. DobesJ. FowlerL. ThompsonC. Lindgren

L. Thompson60 starts · 1672 shots, this season and last

+42.1 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.976 839 shots
Medium-danger save %
.900 569 shots
High-danger save %
.739 264 shots
Shots faced per 60
27.7
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.55
Quality starts
70%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • J. Dobes: +11.5 goals saved above expected in 45 starts
    • L. Thompson: +42.1 goals saved above expected in 60 starts
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • J. Dobes: 28.4 shots faced per 60
    • L. Thompson: 27.7 shots faced per 60
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • J. Dobes: the average shot he faces has a 7.3% chance of going in
    • L. Thompson: the average shot he faces has a 7.3% chance of going in
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • J. Dobes: 0.36 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
    • L. Thompson: 0.55 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • J. Dobes: a typical wait of 67 seconds between shots
    • L. Thompson: a typical wait of 73 seconds between shots
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • J. Dobes: a quality start 62% of the time
    • L. Thompson: a quality start 70% of the time

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

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

L. Thompson, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

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%

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 chancesJ. DobesJ. FowlerL. ThompsonC. Lindgren

L. Thompson3 starts · 85 shots, this season

+4.7 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.971 35 shots
Medium-danger save %
.917 36 shots
High-danger save %
.857 14 shots
Shots faced per 60
28.4
Defensive breakdowns per 60
1.33
Quality starts
100%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • J. Dobes: −4.0 goals saved above expected in 3 starts
    • L. Thompson: +4.7 goals saved above expected in 3 starts
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • J. Dobes: 30.7 shots faced per 60
    • L. Thompson: 28.4 shots faced per 60
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • J. Dobes: the average shot he faces has a 7.3% chance of going in
    • L. Thompson: the average shot he faces has a 8.3% chance of going in
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • J. Dobes: 0 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
    • L. Thompson: 1.33 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • J. Dobes: a typical wait of 60 seconds between shots
    • L. Thompson: a typical wait of 70 seconds between shots
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • J. Dobes: a quality start 33% of the time
    • L. Thompson: a quality start 100% of the time

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

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

L. Thompson, 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
MontréalWashingtonLeague average
  • Everyday even-strength play56.5%54.5%
  • Power play21%16%
  • Rebound5.5%11.6%
  • Empty net5.2%9.5%
  • Off a turnover4.9%4.4%
  • Goalie pulled3.5%1.8%
  • Shorthanded1.7%1.1%
  • Off a faceoff win1.7%1.1%

347 Montréal goals and 275 Washington goals scored this season and last. Each row has its own scale.

  • Everyday even-strength play42.9%42.9%
  • Power play7.1%14.3%
  • Rebound14.3%7.1%
  • Empty net0%7.1%
  • Off a turnover14.3%28.6%
  • Goalie pulled21.4%0%
  • Shorthanded0%0%
  • Off a faceoff win0%0%

14 Montréal goals and 14 Washington 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: Montréal Canadiens · Washington Capitals