2025–26 Round 2

Buffalo Sabres vs Montréal Canadiens

The Canadiens defeated the Sabres 4-3.

View 2025–26 team statsView 2025–26 standingsRound 1 vs BOS breakdown
Series Summary

Expected goals were even in all situations; Buffalo lost the series 3-4.

3-4
RECORD
23
GF
27
GA
-4
DIFF
53.9%
xGF% 5v5
53.9%
CF% 5v5
36.0%
PP%
69.2%
PK%
FINISHING
Buffalo 23 goals on 24.98 xG
MTL 27 goals on 24.91 xG
IN NET
Buffalo Lyon .847 (-2.7 GSAx)
Buffalo Luukkonen .897 (+1.1 GSAx)
TOP SKATER
Dahlin, 9.3 series Game Score (3G, 7A)
BEST LINE
Tuch–McLeod–Doan, 91.1% of 5v5 xG and 1-0 on goals
BEST PAIR
Timmins–Dahlin, 63.4% of 5v5 xG and 2-0 on goals
Game Control
BUFMTLBUF shareMTL share
5-on-5
Expected goals18.0315.4253.9%46.1%
Shot attempts34729753.9%46.1%
High-danger chances504552.6%47.4%
Power play
Goals, of chances9 of 25 (36%)8 of 26 (31%)
Expected goals4.975.8445.9%54.1%
Shot attempts597942.8%57.2%
High-danger chances152537.5%62.5%
Shorthanded expected goals0.240.3839.2%60.8%
All situations
Expected goals24.9824.9150.1%49.9%
Shot attempts44641551.8%48.2%
High-danger chances698046.3%53.7%

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. Best line and pair: among units with a winning 5-on-5 xG share, at least 10:00 together and 0.25 xG in those minutes (half that where a goal was scored in them), one that came out ahead on the goals scored and allowed with it out ranks first; the rest is the best mix of that share and those goals, weighted two to one.

Tuch–McLeod–DoanBEST LINE

91.1% of xG (1.76 to 0.17), 1-0 on goals and 38-15 on attempts in 25:20 together.

Timmins–DahlinBEST D PAIR

63.4% of xG (0.62 to 0.36), 2-0 on goals and 17-16 on attempts in 15:05 together. Small sample.

Series xG

Cumulative xG across all 7 games, all situations. What is xG?

BUF 24.98xGMTL 24.91
G7 OT 20:00
0102030Game 1Game 2Game 3Game 4Game 5Game 6Game 7

By Game

All situations, by game.

BUFMTL

Shots on goal are counted from the play-by-play, which on a few games sits one shot off the box score line on the game page.

Win Probability by Game

Buffalo's chance of winning, one game at a time.

Game 1, May 6, 2026: MTL 2 at BUF 4. Game page

WIN PROBABILITY

Opened at 55%.

P3 20:00
100%75%50%25%0%Buffalo win chanceBUFMTL
BIGGEST SWINGS
  1. P1 04:31J. Doan (2) 55% to 72%+17
  2. P2 03:32J. Greenway (1) 75% to 89%+14
  3. P1 13:26R. McLeod (1), power play 74% to 87%+13
  4. P1 19:16N. Suzuki (2), power play 87% to 74%-13

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

Shot Map

Every shot attempt, to scale.

xG range
Replay
Game 7
Shot on goal (size = xG)GoalMissed shot×Blocked shot

Win DNA

Winning traits, game by game. Definitions and season win rates are on Team Stats.

Wins (3)Losses (4, 1 in overtime)
3+ scorersxG share 50%+, allGoalie > xGD combined 3+ ptsScored firstMore HD chances, allShot qualityDepth goal50%100%

7 games: a small sample.

Goal Differential Breakdown

Buffalo finished -4 over 7 games. Biggest pieces: goaltending -2.9, even-strength shot volume +1.9.

Added goalsCost goalsGoal differentialWhisker: one standard deviation of shot-outcome noise.
-50+5Goals0Start+1.9Even-strengthshot volume+0.7Even-strengthshot quality-0.7Penaltydifferential+0.9Power playefficiency-1.2Penalty killefficiency-1.7Finishing-2.9Goaltending-1.0Goaliepulled-4Goaldifferential
ROUND 2 VS MTL, GOALS
COMPONENTGOALSNOISE (ONE SD)REPEATS
Even-strength shot volume+1.9±1.4Usually
Even-strength shot quality+0.7n/aUsually
Penalty differential-0.7n/aSometimes
Power play efficiency+0.9n/aUsually
Penalty kill efficiency-1.2n/aUsually
Finishing-1.7±4.5Sometimes
Goaltending-2.9±4.3Sometimes
Goalie pulled-1.0n/aNot a skill
Unmodeled0.0n/an/a
Goal differential-4n/an/a

Repeats asks whether a team doing this in one half of a season keeps doing it in the other, league-wide.

How this is measured
Even-strength shot volume
Out-attempting opponents at even strength, with every unblocked attempt priced at the league's average even-strength shot for the season.
Even-strength shot quality
Getting better chances than opponents at even strength, beyond the attempt count.
Penalty differential
Discipline plus drawing: minutes up a skater minus minutes down, priced at the league's net xG per power-play minute.
Power play efficiency
Net xG on the power play above or below league-rate conversion of Buffalo's own power-play minutes, shorthanded chances conceded included.
Penalty kill efficiency
Net xG on the penalty kill above or below league-rate cost of Buffalo's own shorthanded minutes, shorthanded chances created included. Positive means fewer net chances conceded than the league would have.
Finishing
Goals scored above or below what Buffalo's chances were worth, goalie in the net.
Goaltending
Goals allowed below or above what opponents' chances were worth, goalie in the net.
Goalie pulled
Net goals with a goalie pulled: into an empty net, or by the extra attacker. Follows who was trailing late, not a skill of its own.
Unmodeled
Goals on shots the model could not score, plus any goal the shot list is missing.
  • 23 for, 27 against, regulation and overtime; the rows sum to the goal differential before rounding.
  • Built from 7 of 7 games with xG data.
  • Even-strength volume is priced at the league's average even-strength attempt for the season (0.0623 xG in 2025-26), and penalty differential at the league's net xG per power-play minute (0.104), both measured over every game in the league with the same model. Over the games covered, Buffalo's own games averaged 0.0715 xG per even-strength attempt; quality is what remains of the even-strength xG gap after volume.
  • Power-play and shorthanded minutes are read from the situation code on each play, both goalies in, which runs slightly above the official power-play figure because a penalty that expires between two plays is credited to the earlier state. The league rate per minute is priced on the same clock, so the two cancel.
  • Regulation and overtime goals only. A shootout's deciding goal is not a shot the model sees and is left out.
  • Shots at an empty net, and shots by a team with its own goalie pulled, count only as actual goals in the goalie-pulled bar. Both depend on who was trailing late, so they stay out of finishing, goaltending, special teams and even strength.
  • Goaltending leaves out shots taken while the opponent's goalie was pulled; those count only under Goalie pulled. The Goalies table's GSAx counts every shot faced, so it reads -1.6 against -2.9 here.
  • Whiskers on finishing and goaltending are one standard deviation of shot-outcome noise, each shot a coin flip weighted at its xG. The volume whisker is a Poisson approximation from the attempt counts. Quality, the three special-teams bars, goalie pulled and unmodeled carry no whisker.
  • Repeats asks how much of a component carries from one half of a team's season to the other, measured league-wide over 2016-17 to 2025-26 (314 team-seasons) with the same model: a split-half correlation, corrected to full-season length. Usually is 0.6 and above, sometimes 0.3 to 0.6, rarely below 0.3. Even a full season of finishing is about one third signal and two thirds shot-outcome luck.

Actual vs Expected

Summed across the series. Green beat expected, red fell short. What is xG?

Skaters: Goals vs xG

xGGoals
01234Jordan GreenwayJordan Greenway: 0.3 xGJordan Greenway: 2 Goals (+1.7 vs expected)2 / 0.3Zach MetsaZach Metsa: 0.1 xGZach Metsa: 1 Goals (+0.9 vs expected)1 / 0.1Zach BensonZach Benson: 2.2 xGZach Benson: 3 Goals (+0.8 vs expected)3 / 2.2Jason ZuckerJason Zucker: 1.3 xGJason Zucker: 2 Goals (+0.7 vs expected)2 / 1.3Rasmus DahlinRasmus Dahlin: 2.4 xGRasmus Dahlin: 3 Goals (+0.6 vs expected)3 / 2.4Mattias SamuelssonMattias Samuelsson: 0.5 xGMattias Samuelsson: 1 Goals (+0.5 vs expected)1 / 0.5Konsta HeleniusKonsta Helenius: 1.6 xGKonsta Helenius: 2 Goals (+0.4 vs expected)2 / 1.6Tage ThompsonTage Thompson: 2.9 xGTage Thompson: 3 Goals (+0.1 vs expected)3 / 2.9Logan StanleyLogan Stanley: 0.0 xGLogan Stanley: 0 Goals (0.0 vs expected)0 / 0.0Sam CarrickSam Carrick: 0.0 xGSam Carrick: 0 Goals (0.0 vs expected)0 / 0.0Josh DoanJosh Doan: 2.1 xGJosh Doan: 2 Goals (-0.1 vs expected)2 / 2.1Bowen ByramBowen Byram: 1.1 xGBowen Byram: 1 Goals (-0.1 vs expected)1 / 1.1Owen PowerOwen Power: 0.1 xGOwen Power: 0 Goals (-0.1 vs expected)0 / 0.1Tyson KozakTyson Kozak: 0.2 xGTyson Kozak: 0 Goals (-0.2 vs expected)0 / 0.2Ryan McLeodRyan McLeod: 1.2 xGRyan McLeod: 1 Goals (-0.2 vs expected)1 / 1.2Conor TimminsConor Timmins: 0.3 xGConor Timmins: 0 Goals (-0.3 vs expected)0 / 0.3Beck MalenstynBeck Malenstyn: 0.4 xGBeck Malenstyn: 0 Goals (-0.4 vs expected)0 / 0.4Jack QuinnJack Quinn: 2.5 xGJack Quinn: 2 Goals (-0.5 vs expected)2 / 2.5Peyton KrebsPeyton Krebs: 0.6 xGPeyton Krebs: 0 Goals (-0.6 vs expected)0 / 0.6Josh NorrisJosh Norris: 2.0 xGJosh Norris: 0 Goals (-2.0 vs expected)0 / 2.0Alex TuchAlex Tuch: 3.0 xGAlex Tuch: 0 Goals (-3.0 vs expected)0 / 3.0

Goalies: Goals Against vs xGA

xGAGoals Against
0491317Ukko-Pekka LuukkonenUkko-Pekka Luukkonen: 11.1 xGAUkko-Pekka Luukkonen: 10 Goals Against (+1.1 vs expected)10 / 11.1Alex LyonAlex Lyon: 12.3 xGAAlex Lyon: 15 Goals Against (-2.7 vs expected)15 / 12.3

Skaters

Player
GP
Scoring
PP
TOI/G
Hits
Blocks
GV
TK
Expected
On-Ice
Game Score
GAP ▾+/-PIMSOGixGGAxOn-Ice TOIxGF%xGF% RelCF%CF% RelFF%GF%PDOGSxGS
Rasmus Dahlin
7
3710+11425
1
23:47
5
8
4
1
2.4+0.6
130:5254.1%+2.4%52.5%-2.3%51.0%60.0%1.044
9.38.5
Tage Thompson
7
358-7420
1
19:40
10
2
7
1
2.9+0.1
101:3845.1%-12.9%51.3%-3.7%47.3%25.0%0.880
6.36.9
Josh Doan
7
257+3619
0
17:22
11
2
9
1
2.1-0.1
92:2367.5%+20.5%58.4%+6.2%57.9%85.7%1.098
8.17.8
Zach Benson
7
336+33615
1
19:09
9
6
7
1
2.2+0.8
102:1760.8%+11.5%58.9%+7.2%58.5%75.0%1.058
7.56.6
Mattias Samuelsson
7
145+3211
0
23:36
25
17
5
4
0.5+0.5
129:1561.1%+13.7%58.8%+8.0%58.8%66.7%1.032
7.87.3
Jack Quinn
7
224-1013
2
16:09
4
2
4
3
2.5-0.5
81:5356.9%+5.2%51.4%-3.3%57.4%50.0%0.992
4.24.7
Ryan McLeod
7
134-3010
1
15:53
2
3
7
4
1.2-0.2
77:2264.8%+15.4%63.2%+12.0%64.7%33.3%0.887
5.25.9
Jason Zucker
7
213-327
1
12:35
7
3
6
0
1.3+0.7
70:1750.1%-3.5%52.2%-2.2%53.8%37.5%0.951
3.23.0
Josh Norris
7
022+1612
0
16:58
14
2
4
1
2.0-2.0
94:3058.7%+8.4%58.3%+6.2%55.0%62.5%1.027
4.35.6
Jordan Greenway
7
202-125
0
11:17
15
4
7
2
0.3+1.7
53:4334.9%-20.9%47.0%-8.1%44.9%40.0%0.975
1.80.5
Bowen Byram
7
112-61014
1
21:59
6
6
8
3
1.1-0.1
123:1850.1%-4.8%53.7%-0.3%52.9%33.3%0.924
2.83.4
Conor Timmins
7
022-224
0
17:42
4
18
4
1
0.3-0.3
87:0632.4%-26.0%45.1%-11.8%43.6%28.6%0.955
1.21.6
Owen Power
7
022001
0
22:12
6
7
6
2
0.1-0.1
126:2163.1%+16.0%58.6%+7.7%60.7%50.0%0.977
4.04.4
Konsta Helenius
4
202+1010
0
13:28
5
4
0
0
1.6+0.4
50:5857.9%+6.1%49.6%-5.2%56.5%60.0%1.028
2.62.2
Beck Malenstyn
7
011044
0
9:54
20
4
2
2
0.4-0.4
47:5731.1%-24.1%51.2%-3.1%49.2%50.0%1.020
1.31.5
Zach Metsa
2
101-101
1
7:52
0
1
0
0
0.1+0.9
14:4838.2%-15.2%29.6%-25.3%31.6%33.3%1.000
0.2-0.4
Peyton Krebs
7
000-5144
0
13:04
14
3
5
0
0.6-0.6
82:0038.1%-20.0%49.1%-6.4%44.3%22.2%0.890
-0.60.4
Tyson Kozak
2
000+102
0
10:29
0
0
0
0
0.2-0.2
16:2350.2%-2.7%48.6%-5.6%42.3%100.0%1.143
0.40.4
Alex Tuch
7
000-8426
0
19:53
16
8
12
4
3.0-3.0
98:3353.3%+0.8%54.0%+0.2%52.8%11.1%0.831
1.85.2
Logan Stanley
3
000-2141
0
11:43
4
4
1
1
0.00.0
31:0023.6%-31.2%49.1%-5.2%45.9%0.0%0.833
-0.4-0.2
Sam Carrick
1
000022
0
6:17
0
0
0
0
0.00.0
5:597.2%-46.6%30.0%-24.3%42.9%–1.000
0.0-0.1
Luke Schenn
2
000-100
0
7:33
0
2
2
0
––
11:4279.6%+27.6%63.6%+10.1%53.8%0.0%0.800
0.30.5

On-ice rates are 5-on-5. "Rel" is measured against the team's series-wide 5-on-5 line with that skater off the ice.

Goalies

GoalieGP ▾W-LGAGAASV%SOTOI/GxGAGSAxGS
Alex Lyon51-2154.49.847040:0512.3-2.7-2.9
Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen42-2102.71.897155:1611.1+1.11.2

A goalie is credited a game played for any appearance, relief included, so GP sums above the team's own games played by the number of relief outings. GA is the goals charged to a goalie, so it can add up to less than the goals against in the Game Log: a goal into an empty net is charged to no goalie.

Line Combinations

Lines and pairs at 5v5 in the series, summed over all 7 games.

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
Best at 5v5: Tuch–McLeod–Doan, 91.1% of xG and 1-0 on goals (min 10:00 together and 0.25 xG, half that with a goal; units ahead on goals rank first, then the best mix of xG share and on-ice goals, weighted two to one).
LineGPTOI ▾xGFxGAxG%GFGACFCACF%CF% RelxGF% RelFFFASFSA
Norris–Doan–Benson553:372.231.5658.8%41584556.3%2.4%6.2%40322724
Tuch–Thompson–Krebs547:061.392.6634.4%05385441.3%-15.2%-23.3%26431728
Zucker–Quinn–Helenius438:262.051.0865.5%31474153.4%-1.0%13.7%39252214
Thompson–Norris–Benson228:531.640.8166.9%11372361.7%8.2%14.9%28211911
Tuch–McLeod–Doan225:201.760.1791.1%10381571.7%19.0%40.9%2710186
Zucker–McLeod–Quinn418:560.530.6445.1%02201852.6%-1.8%-9.0%1513610
Greenway–Malenstyn–Krebs212:530.270.1859.7%11131056.5%2.3%6.2%8954
Greenway–Malenstyn–Kozak211:580.290.4042.4%10141450.0%-4.5%-11.5%81156
Pageof 2
Defense Pairs
Best at 5v5: Timmins–Dahlin, 63.4% of xG and 2-0 on goals (min 10:00 together and 0.25 xG, half that with a goal; units ahead on goals rank first, then the best mix of xG share and on-ice goals, weighted two to one).
LineGPTOI ▾xGFxGAxG%GFGACFCACF%CF% RelxGF% RelFFFASFSA
Samuelsson–Dahlin770:123.012.3855.8%41695157.5%3.9%2.9%46383027
Byram–Power766:103.061.7663.5%22845361.3%8.9%12.5%62374024
Dahlin–Byram727:471.451.3951.1%12313745.6%-9.7%-2.9%20261516
Stanley–Timmins322:440.280.8424.7%01201852.6%-1.8%-30.4%111159
Samuelsson–Power721:091.290.4673.7%00281663.6%10.0%21.7%218116
Timmins–Power518:480.180.7120.4%02151845.5%-9.3%-34.5%111648
Timmins–Samuelsson715:160.370.1769.0%00151451.7%-2.7%15.8%10654
Timmins–Dahlin615:050.620.3663.4%20171651.5%-3.0%10.2%141399
Pageof 2

With or Without You

Buffalo's 5v5 CF% and xGF% with Dahlin on the ice, with and without each teammate. Δ is together minus apart. That gap is always measured from the named player's side, so the same pair can read positive on one player's table and negative on the other's. Round 2 vs MTL, minimum 20:00 together. Together counts every 5v5 second the two share, whoever else is on the ice, so a pair's time and xGF% here differ slightly from the Line Combinations table, which counts only the seconds that exact pair or trio was the unit.

Teammate
TOGETHER
DAHLIN APART
IMPACT
TOI Together ▾CF%xGF%CF%xGF%Δ CF%Δ xGF%
Samuelsson
70:5757.0%55.8%
48.6%52.4%
+8.4+3.4
Thompson
50:5749.0%41.3%
54.7%69.3%
-5.7-28.0
Benson
44:2157.6%65.8%
50.0%47.7%
+7.6+18.1
Tuch
42:0456.0%50.1%
50.8%56.3%
+5.2-6.2
Norris
40:5359.8%66.3%
49.2%47.5%
+10.6+18.8
Krebs
36:3646.3%36.4%
55.2%64.2%
-8.9-27.8
Doan
35:3465.3%77.4%
47.6%43.5%
+17.7+33.9
Quinn
30:0543.1%61.4%
55.2%53.1%
-12.1+8.3
Zucker
28:4447.6%53.5%
54.0%54.2%
-6.4-0.7
Byram
28:1045.6%51.1%
54.9%55.2%
-9.3-4.1
McLeod
24:4864.3%66.1%
50.2%51.9%
+14.1+14.2

Shift Profile

Shift length and on-ice results, the Round 2 series vs MTL. Empty-net goals against are left out.

What do Short %, Hemmed-In Shifts, Long-Change Gap etc. mean?
GP (shifts)
Games in which the NHL shift chart has rows for this skater. It can read lower than the games played in the Skaters table, because a game with no usable shift chart is left out of every column here.
Short / Long
"Short" is a skater's shifts under 0:45; "Long" is their shifts of 1:00 or more. Short % / Long % is the share of all their shifts that fall in that range.
CF% (short) / CF% (long)
Shot-attempt share (Corsi) specifically during a skater's own short shifts versus their own long shifts. Compares whether they generate or allow more when the shift is quick versus when it drags on.
GF-GA (long)
Goals for minus goals against specifically during a skater's shifts of 1:00 or more. A single-game or short-series number here is a very small sample; look for it to hold up across a season.
PP Shifts / PK Shifts
Number of shifts a skater started while their team had a power play or was shorthanded, tagged by the strength in effect at the moment they stepped on the ice.
Long-Change Gap
This skater's average 2nd-period shift length minus the average of their 1st and 3rd. Positive means their shifts really do run longer in the 2nd, but that period is the "long change" (the bench sits at center ice, so whichever team is defending the far end can't change on the fly as easily), so a positive gap isn't automatically fatigue.
Hemmed-In Shifts
Even-strength shifts in which the unit was on for more than 60 seconds of unbroken play: no whistle came, so they could not change. The number in parentheses is how many of those only ended at a whistle. Most of such a shift is ordinary play: the first minute looks like any other stretch of the game, and only the time past it tilts hard toward the defending end (the game page counts that as pinned time). Shift length is an outcome here, not a cause, so this column says nothing about why a goal went in.
Short-Rest Shifts
Even-strength shifts a skater started after less than 45 seconds on the bench, same period only (an intermission is a full rest). Power-play and penalty-kill units legitimately take long shifts and short rests, so both of these columns leave them out.
PlayerGP (shifts)Shifts ▾Avg ShiftShort %Long %CF% (short)CF% (long)GF-GA (long)PP ShiftsPK ShiftsLong-Change GapHemmed-In ShiftsShort-Rest Shifts
R. Dahlin71920:5241.7%30.2%46.8%65.1%+3169+4s27 (7 to whistle)27
O. Power71850:5038.9%29.2%60.0%50.6%-11223+6s25 (11 to whistle)19
M. Samuelsson71840:5439.7%33.7%40.8%47.2%-1424+13s30 (9 to whistle)17
B. Byram71810:5139.8%29.3%47.0%53.8%01810+5s26 (8 to whistle)22
A. Tuch71740:4847.7%27.6%38.5%61.9%-41925+1s25 (11 to whistle)11
T. Thompson71730:4848.6%26.6%45.8%67.0%-12210+6s24 (13 to whistle)9
Z. Benson71730:4642.2%23.1%52.9%72.7%+32110+2s19 (6 to whistle)10
J. Norris71680:4258.9%17.9%52.7%62.4%-1147+1s12 (5 to whistle)11
J. Doan71640:4452.4%17.7%54.1%60.6%+2226-6s12 (3 to whistle)6
R. McLeod71580:4255.7%17.1%43.8%74.6%+12025+4s12 (2 to whistle)8
J. Quinn71470:4649.7%25.9%48.1%59.2%+2244+2s18 (4 to whistle)11
C. Timmins71410:5344.0%27.0%37.7%17.9%-3129+16s16 (4 to whistle)7
J. Zucker71300:4158.5%19.2%47.1%61.5%0161+3s10 (4 to whistle)3
P. Krebs71280:4353.9%19.5%37.3%56.9%-189+1s13 (2 to whistle)6
J. Greenway71080:4447.2%16.7%28.6%14.5%-2226+14s7 (2 to whistle)4
B. Malenstyn7970:4359.8%15.5%40.4%19.1%-2224+13s4 (2 to whistle)2
K. Helenius4800:4058.8%15.0%54.7%40.4%-110-6s9 (3 to whistle)2
L. Stanley3470:4546.8%23.4%40.9%50.0%-105+1s7 (2 to whistle)1
T. Kozak2280:4557.1%21.4%63.6%23.1%005+17s3 (1 to whistle)0
L. Schenn2240:3862.5%12.5%38.5%100.0%016+3s20
Z. Metsa2200:4740.0%15.0%27.3%66.7%001-11s1 (1 to whistle)1
S. Carrick1110:3481.8%9.1%14.3%100.0%001-17s00