@ MIN (Mar 22, 2025)vs OTT (Mar 25, 2025) ›

March 23, 2025

Canada Life Centre | Winnipeg

BUF 53 WPG

FINAL

Head-to-Head vs WPG all-time
1ST2ND3RDT
BUF1135
WPG0123
Shots on goal BUF 17, WPG 36W J. ReimerL E. Comrie
Summary

WPG had the better expected goals in all situations, but Buffalo won 5-3.

FINISHING
Buffalo 5 goals on 1.62 xG
WPG 3 goals on 3.59 xG
IN NET
Buffalo J. Reimer .917 (+0.6 GSAx)
WPG E. Comrie .750 (-2.8 GSAx)
POWER PLAY
Buffalo 1 of 3
WPG 1 of 3
TURNING POINT
R. Dahlin goal (P2 18:46), Sabres win chance rises from 38% to 67%
WIN DNA
5 of 8 winning traits
Game Leaders
R. McLeod
4 (1G-3A)
POINTS
R. McLeod
2.2
GAME SCORE
Z. Benson
2
SHOTS
R. McLeod
0.50
XG
R. McLeod
21:33
TOI (F)
R. Dahlin
23:53
TOI (D)
J. Reimer
.917 (33/36)
SAVE %
Game Control
BUFWPGBUF shareWPG share
5-on-5
Expected goals0.512.2918.1%81.9%
Shot attempts245132.0%68.0%
Shot attempts, score-adjusted25.748.034.9%65.1%
High-danger chances060.0%100.0%
Power play
Goals, of chances1 of 3 (33%)1 of 3 (33%)
Expected goals0.471.0530.7%69.3%
Shot attempts51229.4%70.6%
High-danger chances2433.3%66.7%
Shorthanded expected goals0.220.0292.2%7.8%
All situations
Expected goals1.623.5931.1%68.9%
Shot attempts327131.1%68.9%
High-danger chances41126.7%73.3%
How this is measured

Shot attempts include missed and blocked shots. Expected goals (xG) weigh each unblocked shot by its chance of going in; high-danger is 0.12 xG or more. Power-play goals and chances are the NHL's line, which counts a double minor as two chances and a 5-on-3 from two penalties as two, so the count can run above the number of penalties in the Full Game Log below. Score-adjusted is the share as if the game were tied at a neutral site.

Stats by Period

All situations, by period.

BUFWPG

Shots on goal are counted from the play-by-play, which on a few games sits one shot off the box score line in the header and Team Stats.

Additional per-period stats
Each cell is BUF-WPG.
 1ST2ND3RDTotal
Faceoffs Won9-910-1411-1230-35
Hits13-95-82-720-24
Takeaways1-20-21-22-6
Giveaways5-37-64-216-11
PDO (5v5): BUF 1.080WPG 0.920. Shooting % plus save %. About 1.000 is neutral.

Game Flow

Running shot attempts for and against, all situations. Shading shows who led.

P3 20:00
+39+200-20-39shot attemptsBUFWPG

Dots are goals, navy for Buffalo.

How this is measured

Score-adjusted weights each attempt by how often teams take one in that score state, home or away, at that point of the game, league-wide (2016-17 to 2025-26): the share as if the game were tied at a neutral site. Score-tied counts only attempts while tied, and needs 15 tied minutes and 30 attempts.

Win Probability

Buffalo's chance of winning, from the score, the time left and the strength state.

Opened at 31%.

P3 20:00
100%75%50%25%0%Buffalo win chanceBUFWPG
BIGGEST SWINGS
  1. P2 18:46R. Dahlin (13) 38% to 67%+29
  2. P2 02:05N. Niederreiter (15), power play 56% to 34%-22
  3. P1 09:15J. Peterka (22) 32% to 51%+19
  4. P3 07:13T. Kozak (2), power play 75% to 93%+18

Dots are goals, diamonds penalties, squares a goalie pull; navy for Buffalo.

How this is measured

Each team is expected to score at the league rate for the season, tilted for home ice and scaled for the strength state. The chance Buffalo ends regulation ahead follows from the score and the time left, with a tie going to 3-on-3 overtime and a shootout. The opening value comes from both teams' goals for and against to that date, regressed toward the league average early in a season, plus home ice.

Expected Goals

Cumulative xG from the game. What is xG?

BUF 1.62xGWPG 3.59
P3 20:00
01234123

Shot Map

Every shot attempt, to scale.

xG range
Replay
P3 19:57
Shot on goal (size = xG)GoalMissed shot×Blocked shot

Win DNA

5 of 8 winning traits showed up tonight. Win rates are over the full 2024–25 regular season (82 games).

Wins (36)Losses (46, 7 in overtime or a shootout)This game
3+ scorersxG share 50%+, allGoalie > xGD combined 3+ ptsScored firstMore HD chances, allShot qualityDepth goal50%100%
Yes
3+ different scorers
Sabres win 64% when yes, 19% when no
No
xG share 50%+ (all situations)
Sabres win 71% when yes, 25% when no
Yes
Goalie beat expected
Sabres win 60% when yes, 29% when no
Yes
Defensemen combined for 3+ points
Sabres win 68% when yes, 27% when no
Yes
Scored first
Sabres win 56% when yes, 30% when no
No
More high-danger chances (all situations)
Sabres win 63% when yes, 32% when no
No
Better shot quality than opponent
Sabres win 61% when yes, 30% when no
Yes
Depth forward scored
Sabres win 59% when yes, 29% when no

Shift Rhythm

Nothing in either team's shifts stood out: pinned time, short rest were all close to a typical game this season.

BUFWPGTypical game, 2024–25
Pinned time (5v5)1:010:110:43
Shot attempts against while pinned301
Short-rest shifts283327
xG against, skaters 40+ seconds into a shift38%46%

When Buffalo was pinned

PeriodClockPinnedSkaters (unbroken play)Attempts againstGA
P118:27 to 18:410:1400
P24:48 to 4:570:0900
P26:10 to 6:140:0400
P29:47 to 10:020:1520
P216:45 to 17:000:1510

When Winnipeg was pinned

PeriodClockPinnedSkaters (unbroken play)Attempts againstGA
P118:57 to 19:020:0500
P24:41 to 4:420:0100
P210:01 to 10:020:0100
P35:12 to 5:130:0100
P316:16 to 16:190:0300
How this is measured

Pinned. A team is pinned when 3 or more of its skaters on the ice are past a minute of unbroken play, at 5v5. A hemmed-in shift is an even-strength shift in which the unit was on for more than 1:00 without a whistle to change on, and stayed at even strength for most of it. A stoppage inside a shift starts the clock over, however it began: what counts is the run of play they could not get off the ice for. Only the time past the minute counts: the first minute of those shifts plays like any other stretch of the game, while past it the play tilts hard toward the end the pinned team is defending (in 2024–25, a pinned team took 22% of the shot attempts; pinned time was 1.6% of all 5v5 play). Pinned time is seconds on the clock, not each skater's seconds added up.

Short rest. An even-strength shift a skater started after less than 45 seconds on the bench, same period only (an intermission is a full rest).

Tired legs. Every shot attempt is tagged by how far into their shifts the defending skaters were, on average, at that moment (goalies left out). The row is the share of xG against that came with them 40 seconds or more in. xG covers goals, shots on goal and misses. Shots are counted from the play-by-play.

Typical game. The middle value across Buffalo games in the 2024–25 regular season, counting both teams (156 team totals), so it stands in for a league-average game. A sentence at the top only appears when a number is among the highest fifth of those, or when a goal went in while a team was pinned.

Shots at an empty net are left out of every row. None of this says why a goal went in: a unit that cannot change is pinned and tiring at the same time, so these rows describe when the danger came, not what caused it.

Shift by shift

Shift length, in order, for one Buffalo skater this game.

29 shifts, averaging 0:44. 1 hemmed-in, 2 after a short rest, 0:04 pinned.

Replay
Shift 29
Hemmed-in shiftShort rest before itGoal forGoal againstPenalty takenPower playPenalty killPeriod average and middle half of shifts (even strength)
P1avg 0:43P2avg 0:38P3avg 0:420:000:301:001:30151015202529Shift Number

Period averages are even strength only. Typical in 2024–25: 0:44, 0:48 (the long change), 0:46.

Line Combinations

Lines and pairs at 5v5, and how they did together.

What do TOI, CF, xG% etc. mean?
GP
Games in which this exact line/pair shared the ice together at 5v5.
TOI
Time on ice together at 5v5, meaning the whole line/pair on the ice at once, not any one player's own total. Only the seconds that exact pair or trio was the unit count, which is why a pair's TOI and xG% here differ slightly from the WOWY table, where together counts every 5v5 second the two share, whoever else is on the ice.
xGF / xGA
Expected goals for/against while this combo was on the ice, from this site's own xG model.
xG%
Share of on-ice expected goals this combo earned: xGF / (xGF + xGA). The single best read on who controlled play.
GF / GA
Actual goals for/against while this combo was on the ice together.
CF / CA (Corsi For / Against, Shot Attempts)
"Corsi" is just the hockey-analytics name for total shot attempts: shots on goal, missed shots, and blocked shots combined, a volume proxy for who had the puck more. CF is this combo's own attempts, CA is the opponent's.
CF%
Share of on-ice shot attempts (Corsi) this combo earned: CF / (CF + CA).
CF% Rel
This combo's CF% minus the team's own CF% in the minutes this exact combo was NOT on the ice. Positive means the combo lifted the team's play; negative means it dragged it down.
xGF% Rel
This combo's xG% minus the team's own xG% in the minutes this exact combo was NOT on the ice. Positive means the combo lifted the team's expected-goals share; negative means it dragged it down.
FF / FA
Unblocked shot attempts (also called Fenwick): shots on goal plus misses, excluding blocks. One layer closer to real scoring chances than CF/CA.
SF / SA
Shots on goal for/against while this combo was on the ice together.
Minimum Ice Time
Drag the slider on each table down to see combos with less shared ice time. Their percentages get noisier the lower you go, since a combo that barely played together can swing to 100% or 0% off a single shot.
STRENGTH
Forward Lines
LineGPTOIxGFxGAxG%GFGACFCACF%CF% RelxGF% RelFFFASFSA
Tuch–Thompson–Benson111:110.120.0666.5%008466.7%37.7%44.9%5342
McLeod–Quinn–Peterka111:100.200.2049.4%2141719.0%-15.1%28.9%41236
Malenstyn–Murray–Kozak14:440.010.0711.8%003730.0%-2.1%-12.7%2613
Zucker–Krebs–Kozak13:260.030.1617.0%001150.0%18.2%-7.6%1111
Zucker–Greenway–Krebs13:020.000.360.0%00070.0%-33.6%-27.3%0505
Pageof 1
Defense Pairs
LineGPTOIxGFxGAxG%GFGACFCACF%CF% RelxGF% RelFFFASFSA
Clifton–Byram113:480.030.1119.7%0051229.4%-2.9%-4.7%31033
Samuelsson–Dahlin113:250.160.4725.7%0071531.8%-0.2%1.9%61248
Bernard-Docker–Power19:490.080.2622.6%1171433.3%1.5%-1.8%41117
Pageof 1

Three Stars

1J. ReimerBUF | G3.00 GAA, .917 SV%
2J. Bernard-DockerBUF | D0G 2A 2P
3N. NiederreiterWPG | RW1G 0A 1P

Box Score

ON-ICE RATES
Player
G
A
P
+/-
PIM
SOG
ixG
iGAx
On-Ice
Game Score
TOI
On-Ice TOIxGF%xGF% RelCF%CF% RelFF%GF%PDOxGSGS
#71 R. McLeod (C)
1
3
4
+3
0
2
0.50
+0.5
13:4044.5%+29.0%22.2%-15.3%23.8%66.7%1.375
1.62.2
21:33
#24 J. Bernard-Docker (D)
0
2
2
0
0
1
0.00
0.0
12:4518.5%-9.8%32.1%+0.2%28.6%50.0%1.467
1.01.1
12:49
#48 T. Kozak (C)
1
0
1
0
0
1
0.15
+0.9
12:1914.0%-12.7%31.6%-0.6%31.3%1.000
-0.20.5
13:12
#77 J. Peterka (RW)
1
0
1
+1
0
1
0.12
+0.9
14:5141.1%+24.5%27.6%-7.2%31.8%66.7%1.524
-0.50.3
18:23
#89 A. Tuch (RW)
1
0
1
+2
0
2
0.24
+0.8
13:2852.6%+33.8%52.6%+27.6%42.9%1.000
0.81.4
21:09
#23 M. Samuelsson (D)
0
1
1
0
2
1
0.04
0.0
17:2523.7%-1.2%30.3%-3.0%34.6%0.0%0.909
0.0-0.1
21:13
#26 R. Dahlin (D)
1
0
1
+1
0
2
0.06
+0.9
17:1027.5%+6.4%34.6%+4.0%36.4%100.0%1.167
-0.20.7
23:53
#75 C. Clifton (D)
0
1
1
+1
2
2
0.01
0.0
17:4232.6%+10.2%28.6%-4.8%25.0%1.000
0.30.3
21:00
#9 Z. Benson (LW)
0
0
0
0
0
2
0.23
-0.2
13:2657.6%+39.2%58.8%+34.7%50.0%1.000
0.50.3
17:39
#12 J. Greenway (LW)
0
0
0
0
0
0
4:110.0%-31.3%0.0%-36.4%0.0%
-0.5-0.4
4:44
#17 J. Zucker (LW)
0
0
0
0
0
1
0.04
0.0
11:146.2%-31.0%22.2%-12.9%28.6%1.000
-0.5-0.4
15:09
#19 P. Krebs (C)
0
0
0
0
0
0
10:264.8%-39.1%17.6%-18.6%21.4%0.0%0.875
-0.6-0.6
13:12
#22 J. Quinn (RW)
0
0
0
+1
0
0
0.04
0.0
13:5349.4%+33.9%29.2%-4.2%33.3%66.7%1.500
-0.5-0.3
16:45
#29 B. Malenstyn (LW)
0
0
0
-1
0
0
8:426.1%-22.2%31.3%-1.0%28.6%0.0%0.833
-0.3-0.5
11:39
#57 B. Murray (LW)
0
0
0
0
0
0
5:3211.8%-12.9%27.3%-5.5%22.2%1.000
-0.3-0.2
6:29
#72 T. Thompson (C)
0
0
0
-1
0
1
0.20
-0.2
14:5731.1%+9.2%52.6%+27.6%42.9%0.0%0.800
0.20.0
18:12
#4 B. Byram (D)
0
0
0
+2
2
0
16:0919.7%-4.9%26.3%-7.6%21.4%1.000
-0.6-0.5
21:19
#25 O. Power (D)
0
0
0
0
0
1
0.01
0.0
11:2523.9%-0.3%39.1%+10.3%35.3%50.0%1.357
-0.2-0.2
15:59
Total
5
7
12
6
17
1.62
3.4

On-ice rates are 5-on-5. Rel compares to the team with that skater off the ice.

GoalieSAGAxGASV%GSAxGSTOIDec
#47 J. Reimer3633.6.917+0.61.160:00W

Team Stats

BUFWPG
17Shots on Goal36
16.7%Shooting % (5v5)8.7%
.913Save % (5v5).833
1.080PDO (5v5)0.920
30 (46%)Faceoffs Won35 (54%)
3Power Play Chances3
33%PP%33%
67%PK%67%
1PPG1
6Penalty Minutes6
20Hits24
13Blocked Shots7
16Giveaways11
2Takeaways6

Full Game Log

1ST
00:00Period start
09:15GOAL (BUF): JJ Peterka (22), assists: Jacob Bernard-Docker, Ryan McLeodxG 0.08
20:00Period end
2ND
00:00Period start
02:05GOAL (WPG): Nino Niederreiter (15), assists: Cole Perfetti, Vladislav Namestnikov(PP)xG 0.21
18:46GOAL (BUF): Rasmus Dahlin (13), assists: Jacob Bernard-Docker, Ryan McLeodxG 0.04
20:00Period end
3RD
00:00Period start
07:13GOAL (BUF): Tyson Kozak (2), assists: Mattias Samuelsson(PP)xG 0.13
07:41GOAL (WPG): Colin Miller (3), assists: Mark Scheifele, Logan StanleyxG 0.16
13:21GOAL (BUF): Alex Tuch (27), assists: Ryan McLeod, Connor Clifton(SH)xG 0.22
16:32GOAL (WPG): Nikolaj Ehlers (23), assists: Logan Stanley, Dylan DeMeloxG 0.02
19:13GOAL (BUF): Ryan McLeod (17), unassisted(EN)xG 0.42
20:00Period end
20:00Game end
@ MIN (Mar 22, 2025)vs OTT (Mar 25, 2025) ›