Find year-round coverage of betting news and insights for all sports by visiting our Betting section and subscribing to push notifications.

As we prepare for the Stanley Cup Playoffs, we've reviewed how recent conference finalists have fared during the regular season in expected goals share (xG%) and via our new metric SNIPES. The idea? Can we take what teams were good at and apply it to this season in hopes of identifying any dark horse candidates for a playoff run?

SNIPES showed a significant predictive element for postseason scoring, but xG% did not. Of course, there's another end of the ice. So we need to see if there's any correlation between how well recent teams have kept the puck out of their own net during the regular season and whether that's been predictive for the playoffs.

I looked at high-danger chances allowed by teams, but the average ordinal finish in that category was 12.25, with just one in the top five. Instead, we'll use goals saved above expected per 60 minutes (GSAx/60) metrics to evaluate how goaltenders have aided a long playoff run.

Here's how the primary goaltenders for the last 12 teams to make the conference finals fared in the regular season after Feb. 1 and then in the playoffs.

Is there a correlation to playoff success?

Ten of the 12 conference finalists had above-average (0.25 GSAx/60 or better) goaltending during the regular season. Future Hall of Famer Carey Price turned his game around for an epic playoff run in 2021, while the 2023 Stars got past the Wild and Kraken despite Jake Oettinger's struggles.

On Monday, we noticed three substandard teams in our scoring talent metric, SNIPES. Price and Sergei Bobrovsky each made up for those deficiencies, as did Marc-Andre Fleury during his bounce-back 2020-'21 season.

In 2022, Darcy Kuemper gave away an average of a half-goal per game, but amazingly, the Avalanche won the Stanley Cup anyway.

Last year alone, the goaltending duos in Vegas and Carolina, as well as Bobrovsky, showed improved numbers down the regular-season stretch. Meanwhile, Oettinger, despite great first-half numbers, showed cracks later on. Each offered glimpses of what was to come.

Who can put it all together?

We've established that good xG% doesn't necessarily translate to playoff success, so the following is the list of teams that take advantage of their scoring chances (>14.5% SNIPES) while also rostering a goaltender who has saved his team a significant number of goals against (>0.25 GSAx/60) since the All-Star break.

Since they're coming out of the same quarter of the bracket, only one of the Bruins and Maple Leafs can make the conference final. We don't yet have certainty about how things will fall because of shaky ground in the Pacific and wild-card positions, but the Kings, Predators, and Canucks may end up grouped. That would leave the Jets in a quarter with a trio of sketchy goaltending situations in Dallas, Colorado, and Vegas.

Only the Rangers have a path to the conference finals without a team that excels at converting scoring chances while boasting high-level goaltending. That route includes Carolina, who - based on their market rating - would be favored over New York in a second-round matchup.

The cheat sheet

Each week, we balance market information from regular-season point totals and in-season advanced metrics - with an even-strength focus - to determine the win probability for each team and the moneyline needed to bet on either side.

You can compare those prices with our "price to bet" column to see if you're getting any value with either side's moneyline. There's a possibility that a moneyline moves into a bet-friendly range at some point between the market opening and puck drop.

*Prices for Edmonton assume Connor McDavid (day-to-day) plays

Matt Russell is the lead betting analyst for theScore. If there's a bad beat to be had, Matt will find it. Find him on social media @mrussauthentic.

Copyright © 2024 Score Media Ventures Inc. All rights reserved. Certain content reproduced under license.

Find year-round coverage of betting news and insights for all sports by visiting our Betting section and subscribing to push notifications.

We discovered last week that it hasn't been so simple for teams to turn strong expected goals share metrics into playoff success.

The 2023 Golden Knights had the 16th-best xG% during the regular season and only marginally improved that rate in the playoffs, and all they did was win the Stanley Cup.

Instead, Vegas scored on its even-strength high-danger chances (ES HDC) at a ridiculously opportunistic rate: 21.2%. Was something like that predictable? No, but if a team shows it has the high-end talent to turn a chance - estimated at a fraction of an expected goal - into an actual goal during the regular season, bettors may be inclined to believe an above-average conversion rate can be predictive.

Some teams boast more talented scorers than others. For example, an Auston Matthews shot from close range has a better chance of going in than almost anyone else's.

A team's best measurable scoring opportunity is an ES HDC or power play (league average: 20.8%). The teams with the most talent have a good power play (PP) and are also likely to score at an above-average rate on ES HDC (league average: 12.5%).

Adding PP and ES HDC goals together and dividing them by power-play opportunities and high-danger chances gets you a metric we call SNIPES percentage.

The league average for SNIPES is 14.5%. Here's how the last 12 teams to make a conference final fared during the regular season and then in the playoffs:

Is there a correlation to playoff success?

Eleven of the 12 teams in the above table were above average in SNIPES percentage during the regular season. Only last year's Hurricanes came into the playoffs below average. Carolina had the best regular-season xG% and was third during the playoffs, which can make up for low conversion rates for two rounds.

While some teams saw their efficiency drop, just three fell below average: the 2021 Canadiens, 2021 Golden Knights, and 2023 Panthers. Later this week, we'll see how those three managed to thrive in the postseason when we look at how teams keep the puck out of the net.

The lesson? If any of the above teams score more often relative to how many chances they get in the playoffs, it shouldn't come as a total surprise.

The cheat sheet

The dirty little secret in the betting world is that while there are no bad bets at the right price, the discovery process of what a good price looks like is hidden.

Each week, we balance market information from regular-season point totals and in-season advanced metrics - with an even-strength focus - to determine the win probability for each team and the moneyline needed to bet on either side. The idea is to remove the cognitive bias of win-loss records, which can be skewed by outliers like special-team results, poor goaltending performances, and other unreliable events.

You can use whatever parameters you like to decide how much of an edge you need to trigger a bet, but here are mine:

• True line favorite of -111 or longer: 1%
• True line between -110 and +110: 2.5%
• True line underdog of +111 or longer: 4%

I also have a 5% win probability consideration for a team playing in the second game of a back-to-back with travel and a 3% consideration for the second leg of a home back-to-back. When it comes to injured players, an estimation is made on the player's impact on their team's win probability.

When the betting markets open up the night before, you can compare those prices with our "price to bet" column to see if you're getting any value with either side's moneyline. There's a possibility that a moneyline moves into a bet-friendly range at some point between the market opening and puck drop.

Matt Russell is the lead betting analyst for theScore. If there's a bad beat to be had, Matt will find it. Find him on social media @mrussauthentic.

Copyright © 2024 Score Media Ventures Inc. All rights reserved. Certain content reproduced under license.

Find year-round coverage of betting news and insights for all sports by visiting our Betting section and subscribing to push notifications.

What does it take to win the Stanley Cup?

The qualitative answers to such an all-encompassing question include toughness, determination, resilience, strength, skill, and a whole lot of luck.

Approaching the playoffs, we look for quantitative hints to spring's biggest question. Thinking about it logically, we want our team to do three things:

1. Outplay opponents at even strength, drive play to wear down the opposition, get high-danger chances, and draw penalties.
2. Score at a high rate when the best opportunities (even-strength high-danger chances, power plays) come about.
3. Limit chances and expected goals from opponents' high-danger chances more often than an average netminder.

Before we get to this year's Stanley Cup Playoffs, let's look back at the last three years and see how the conference finalists faired during the regular season.

First up, a trusted method to measure play-driving: expected goals share (xG%) at even strength (ES):

Is there a correlation to playoff success?

Interestingly, just five of the 12 teams to make a conference final and just one Stanley Cup finalist - the teams in bold in the table above - had a season where they finished in the top eight, a cohort that suggests they're in the top half of the 16 playoff teams.

While we'd prefer to back teams that have a better rate of creating scoring chances than not, there's no recent direct correlation from regular-season success in this metric. This is similar to the regular-season standings, where we've seen three division winners, four second-place finishers, two third-place teams, and three from the fourth/wild-card spot make a conference final.

2023-'24 Even-strength xG%

The top eight teams in xG% are all expected to be in the playoffs but will likely need to do more to make a run in the Stanley Cup Playoffs.

On Monday, we'll see how successful playoff teams have recently stacked up in SNIPES, a metric we created that evaluates how good a team's top-end talent is at converting scoring opportunities.

The cheat sheet

The dirty little secret in the betting world is that while there are no bad bets at the right price, the discovery process of what a good price looks like is hidden.

Each week, we balance market information from regular-season point totals and in-season advanced metrics - with an even-strength focus - to determine the win probability for each team and the moneyline needed to bet on either side. The idea is to remove the cognitive bias of win-loss records, which can be skewed by outliers like special-team results, poor goaltending performances, and other unreliable events.

You can use whatever parameters you like to decide how much of an edge you need to trigger a bet, but here are mine:

• True line favorite of -111 or longer: 1%
• True line between -110 and +110: 2.5%
• True line underdog of +111 or longer: 4%

I also have a 5% win probability consideration for a team playing in the second game of a back-to-back with travel and a 3% consideration for the second leg of a home back-to-back. When it comes to injured players, an estimation is made on the player's impact on their team's win probability.

When the betting markets open up the night before, you can compare those prices with our "price to bet" column to see if you're getting any value with either side's moneyline. There's a possibility that a moneyline moves into a bet-friendly range at some point between the market opening and puck drop.

Matt Russell is the lead betting analyst for theScore. If there's a bad beat to be had, Matt will find it. Find him on social media @mrussauthentic.

Copyright © 2024 Score Media Ventures Inc. All rights reserved. Certain content reproduced under license.

Find year-round coverage of betting news and insights for all sports by visiting our Betting section and subscribing to push notifications.

Don't look now, but it's April.

Even though teams still have more than a handful of games left, we haven't checked in on the betting market's power ratings since the All-Star break. What do those who put their money where their mouth is think of each team?

As a reminder, moneylines are a function of win probability, so each team's rating is based on how much better (plus) or worse (minus) it is than an average team on neutral ice. For example, if your favorite club flies to Sweden and is -150 (60% likely) to beat a league-average (zero) team like the Wild, the betting market has deemed your club 20% better than average.

Below is an estimation of how the betting market rates each team based on recent moneylines. Luckily, at the moment, there are very few player injuries throughout the NHL drastically affecting a team's rating.

NHL betting market power ratings

We included teams' preseason market rating - based on their regular-season points total before the season started - and our estimated rating at the All-Star break (teams with an asterisk are currently in playoff position).

Conceptually, the standings measure what happened yesterday, while market ratings measure what'll happen tomorrow.

The market's still giving the Devils credit as a good team but has backtracked on the Penguins relative to All-Star break expectations. The Flyers and Capitals are currently taking what the market thinks should have been playoff spots for New Jersey and Pittsburgh.

The Predators' rating rose as high as 10% above an average team during their 18-game points streak, but two losses have caused a dip.

There are two types of market scenarios:

1. A team goes on a run (good/bad) and the market changes its rating along the way. You'll need to be lucky to profit during the streak since the team's price is continuously fair.
2. A team goes on a run (good/bad) and the market doesn't move. In this scenario, you're likely getting good value betting on/against the team during its streak.

As games pile up, perception snowballs and teams further separate from top to bottom. For example, a 45% gap between the Hurricanes and Sharks - the NHL's best and worst teams - existed before the season and it's up to 70% today.

The cheat sheet

The dirty little secret in the betting world is that while there are no bad bets at the right price, the discovery process of what a good price looks like is hidden.

Each week, we balance market information from regular-season point totals and in-season advanced metrics - with an even-strength focus - to determine the win probability for each team and the moneyline needed to bet on either side. The idea is to remove the cognitive bias of win-loss records, which can be skewed by outliers like special-team results, poor goaltending performances, and other unreliable events.

You can use whatever parameters you like to decide how much of an edge you need to trigger a bet, but here are mine:

• True line favorite of -111 or longer: 1%
• True line between -110 and +110: 2.5%
• True line underdog of +111 or longer: 4%

I also have a 5% win probability consideration for a team playing in the second game of a back-to-back with travel and a 3% consideration for the second leg of a home back-to-back. When it comes to injured players, an estimation is made on the player's impact on their team's win probability.

When the betting markets open up the night before, you can compare those prices with our "price to bet" column to see if you're getting any value with either side's moneyline. There's a possibility that a moneyline moves into a bet-friendly range at some point between the market opening and puck drop.

Matt Russell is the lead betting analyst for theScore. If there's a bad beat to be had, Matt will find it. Find him on social media @mrussauthentic.

Copyright © 2024 Score Media Ventures Inc. All rights reserved. Certain content reproduced under license.

Find year-round coverage of betting news and insights for all sports by visiting our Betting section and subscribing to push notifications.

Two weeks ago, we introduced a one-and-done midseason tournament concept for the NHL called "Ice Insanity," seeding teams 1-32 based on league standings but setting parameters for advancement based on tenets of hockey handicapping to ready ourselves for the real thing - the Stanley Cup Playoffs. Here's how we got here:

1. First round: Recent form (even-strength expected goals share (xG%) since the All-Star break)
2. Sweet 16: Ability to drive play (full season even-strength xG%)
3. Elite Eight: A hot goaltender (GSAx per 60 minutes since the All-Star break)

The Hurricanes had a pair of easy matchups in the first two rounds, especially given how good their advanced metrics are. The Canes suddenly have reliable goaltending, which pushed them past the Bruins.

The Flames got fictionally hot at the right time to knock off the Kings in the first round, and then were set up with a great matchup in the second round against the Senators. Calgary barely snuck past the Canucks, thanks to Vancouver's former goalie Jacob Markstrom.

The Panthers beat the Ducks easily, then topped the Lightning in a down year for Tampa, before Sergei Bobrovsky held off the scorching Predators and Juuse Saros.

The Wild's hot play took down the Flyers. Minnesota then beat the Rangers, who were lucky to get past the first round based on their even-strength metrics. The Oilers' shaky goaltending cost them in the Elite Eight, even against mediocre Marc-Andre Fleury.

Final Four

To win our made-up tournament's title belt (we can't compete with the Cup), teams must convert minimal chances the late stages of the playoffs provide. While fluky goals can happen at any moment, they can't be relied upon. But there are two areas where a team's talent level can be the difference-maker: High-danger chances at even strength (ES HDC) and power plays (PPG).

To make "Ice Insanity" even nuttier, we're creating a metric based on how efficiently a team converts high-danger chances at even strength and on the power play. Dividing the goals into the opportunities, we get what we're calling their "SNIPES (Score Now, It's Playoff Extreme Stress) Percentage."

Hockey's version of a "Cinderella" run often ends before the Stanley Cup Final and that's the case for the Flames in our fake tournament.

When the going gets tough, with fewer penalties called and high-danger chances scarce during the run of play, Minnesota - somewhat surprisingly - is more likely than Florida to take advantage of minimal chances available. So it's a Minnesota-Carolina final.

"Ice Insanity" Championship

To crown our champion, we put all our stat categories together, and with a sweep of the four categories, the Hurricanes are your first "Ice Insanity" winners. Their prize: Potential inclusion into your futures portfolio at +650 to win the Stanley Cup. (And a title belt.)

The cheat sheet

The betting world's dirty little secret is that while there are no bad bets at the right price, the process of discovering a good price is hidden.

Each week, we balance market information from regular-season point totals and in-season advanced metrics - with an even-strength focus - to determine the win probability for each team and the moneyline needed to bet on either side. The idea is to remove the cognitive bias of win-loss records, which can be skewed by outliers like special-team results, poor goaltending performances, and other unreliable events.

You can use whatever parameters you like to decide how much of an edge you need to trigger a bet, but here are mine:

• True line favorite of -111 or longer: 1%
• True line between -110 and +110: 2.5%
• True line underdog of +111 or longer: 4%

I also have a 5% win probability consideration for a team playing the second game of a back-to-back with travel and a 3% consideration for the second leg of a home back-to-back. For injured players, the player's impact on their team's win probability is estimated.

When the betting markets open up the night before, you can compare those prices with our "price to bet" column to see if you're getting any value with either side's moneyline. There's a possibility that a moneyline moves into a bet-friendly range at some point between the market opening and puck drop.

Matt Russell is the lead betting analyst for theScore. If there's a bad beat to be had, Matt will find it. Find him on social media @mrussauthentic.

Copyright © 2024 Score Media Ventures Inc. All rights reserved. Certain content reproduced under license.

Find year-round coverage of betting news and insights for all sports by visiting our Betting section and subscribing to push notifications.

Things are heating up inside our fake midseason NHL one-and-done tournament.

In preparation for the Stanley Cup Playoffs, but with the intense urgency of March Madness, we've taken tenets of hockey handicapping and applied them to a made-up tournament to show how early upsets may happen a month from now and what's required for a deep run.

"Ice Insanity" started with the hot team advancing out of the first round. The Sweet 16 came down to which team was more likely to sustain good play for more than one matchup.

Now into the Elite Eight, we know the remaining teams can hold their own. However, at some point, you need a good goaltender, ideally one coming in hot. So, to pick our Final Four, we're looking at who's most likely to steal a game for their team by breaking down the starting goaltender's GSAx (goals saved above expected) per 60 minutes since the All-Star break. With goaltenders as finicky as they are, how one played back in October means little to expectations today:

The Smythe final is interesting because the Bruins and Hurricanes are currently alternating goalies. We picked the better of Boston's Linus Ullmark and Jeremy Swayman and Carolina's Frederik Andersen and Pyotr Kochetkov. Bottom line: Carolina's netminders are playing better.

The Norris final was similarly intriguing as both Thatcher Demko and Jacob Markstrom have identical 0.3 GSAx/60 marks since the All-Star break, but both have also been banged up. Assuming they're healthy, we're going to a tiebreaker: season-long GSAx. Both goalies have been great on balance, but Markstrom's 31.22 goals saved in 2,475 minutes are more impressive than Demko's 24.79 in 2,896.

The most clear-cut winner comes in the Patrick region, where Sergei Bobrovsky has been better than rock-solid Juuse Saros.

In each round of our fictional tournament, there's been one mediocre matchup. Maybe the Oilers will overcome lackluster goaltending in real life, or turn to Calvin Pickard (0.31 GSAx/60), but until then, Marc-Andre Fleury clips Edmonton.

On Friday, we'll decide the finalists and the first champion of "Ice Insanity," focusing on high-end on-ice talent. With scoring chances at a minimum, who's more likely to convert the few opportunities afforded them?

The cheat sheet

The betting world's dirty little secret is that while there are no bad bets at the right price, the process of discovering a good price is hidden.

Each week, we balance market information from regular-season point totals and in-season advanced metrics - with an even-strength focus - to determine the win probability for each team and the moneyline needed to bet on either side. The idea is to remove the cognitive bias of win-loss records, which can be skewed by outliers like special-team results, poor goaltending performances, and other unreliable events.

You can use whatever parameters you like to decide how much of an edge you need to trigger a bet, but here are mine:

• True line favorite of -111 or longer: 1%
• True line between -110 and +110: 2.5%
• True line underdog of +111 or longer: 4%

I also have a 5% win probability consideration for a team playing the second game of a back-to-back with travel and a 3% consideration for the second leg of a home back-to-back. For injured players, the player's impact on their team's win probability is estimated.

When the betting markets open up the night before, you can compare those prices with our "price to bet" column to see if you're getting any value with either side's moneyline. There's a possibility that a moneyline moves into a bet-friendly range at some point between the market opening and puck drop.

Matt Russell is the lead betting analyst for theScore. If there's a bad beat to be had, Matt will find it. Find him on social media @mrussauthentic.

Copyright © 2024 Score Media Ventures Inc. All rights reserved. Certain content reproduced under license.

Find year-round coverage of betting news and insights for all sports by visiting our Betting section and subscribing to push notifications.

On Monday, we introduced our made-up March Madness-style tournament for the NHL, "Ice Insanity." Beyond bringing levity at a point in the season that could use some, the idea is to see how NHL teams are faring in categories we use to handicap games.

In Round 1, we advanced the hotter team. Using even-strength expected goals share (xG%) from the All-Star break onwards, we saw that there may be a handful of upsets and a few near-shockers, indicating that some playoff teams need to pick up their play if they don't want to be victimized when the real thing starts in late April.

Coming in hot is cool and all, but who has the staying power to make the Elite Eight? We'll pull back, looking at a full season of even-strength play, knowing we want to back quality squads - not streaky ones - when the going gets tough.

Here's how the bracket breaks for Round 2, using teams' expected goals percentage at even strength (ES xG%) since the start of the season (as of March 20):

We have a handful of bracket-breakers. The Avalanche have the better record, but the Predators' extended hot streak has surprisingly made them the slightly better team this season when it comes to creating expected goals at even strength (171-165). The Rangers survived the fake first round with a low xG% because they were facing the Blackhawks, but that won't work against the Wild, who've been very good since a late November coaching change.

It seems unfair that the Oilers and Stars face each other this early, while Senators-Flames is like that occasional No. 12 versus No. 13 second-round matchup in the NCAA Tournament.

From here, we'll move away from who's driving play and advance teams whose goaltenders are more likely to save their team enough goals to send them to the Final Four.

The cheat sheet

The betting world's dirty little secret is that while there are no bad bets at the right price, the process of discovering a good price is hidden.

Each week, we balance market information from regular-season point totals and in-season advanced metrics - with an even-strength focus - to determine the win probability for each team and the moneyline needed to bet on either side. The idea is to remove the cognitive bias of win-loss records, which can be skewed by outliers like special-team results, poor goaltending performances, and other unreliable events.

You can use whatever parameters you like to decide how much of an edge you need to trigger a bet, but here are mine:

• True line favorite of -111 or longer: 1%
• True line between -110 and +110: 2.5%
• True line underdog of +111 or longer: 4%

I also have a 5% win probability consideration for a team playing the second game of a back-to-back with travel and a 3% consideration for the second leg of a home back-to-back. For injured players, the player's impact on their team's win probability is estimated.

When the betting markets open up the night before, you can compare those prices with our "price to bet" column to see if you're getting any value with either side's moneyline. There's a possibility that a moneyline moves into a bet-friendly range at some point between the market opening and puck drop.

Matt Russell is the lead betting analyst for theScore. If there's a bad beat to be had, Matt will find it. Find him on social media @mrussauthentic.

Copyright © 2024 Score Media Ventures Inc. All rights reserved. Certain content reproduced under license.

Find year-round coverage of betting news and insights for all sports by visiting our Betting section and subscribing to push notifications.

We're in the throes of March Madness elsewhere in the sports world, while the NHL is truthfully a little sleepy, with a wild-card race that hasn't been turned all the way up yet.

So, while we wait for next month's Stanley Cup Playoffs, let's have some fun and play a "What if" for the NHL, while simultaneously checking in how each team is playing down the stretch.

If the NHL had a midseason tournament like the NBA, only it was one-and-done style like the NCAA Tournament, what would it look like?

Let's find out. Our theoretical bracket's based on the standings through March 17, and we'll use a different core element of hockey handicapping to advance teams in our made-up tournament.

Below are the 16 first-round matchups for what we're calling "Ice Insanity." Like the Stanley Cup Playoffs, teams need to come in playing "playoff-style hockey," since we're picking this round's winners based on teams playing the best since the All-Star break, using a tried and true metric: even-strength expected goals share (ES xG%).

The Red Wings advance thanks to getting one of two matchups that would give them a better xG% since Feb. 1. The Kings and Jets weren't so lucky, as they suffered the biggest theoretical upsets in this not-real exercise. The 2-seed Rangers probably should have suffered the type of upset the actual Stanley Cup Playoffs are known for, but their 46.4% expected goals share was good enough to get past the Ducks. The Golden Knights, the defending Cup champions, weren't so lucky, unable to get away with recent lackluster play.

With the playoffs only a month away, this exercise shines light on teams that may be vulnerable early relative to the betting market, depending on the matchup.

On Friday, we'll look at the Sweet 16 matchups, asking teams: "Is your recent play sustainable beyond a good first-round matchup?"

The cheat sheet

The betting world's dirty little secret is that while there are no bad bets at the right price, the process of discovering a good price is hidden.

Each week, we balance market information from regular-season point totals and in-season advanced metrics - with an even-strength focus - to determine the win probability for each team and the moneyline needed to bet on either side. The idea is to remove the cognitive bias of win-loss records, which can be skewed by outliers like special-team results, poor goaltending performances, and other unreliable events.

You can use whatever parameters you like to decide how much of an edge you need to trigger a bet, but here are mine:

• True line favorite of -111 or longer: 1%
• True line between -110 and +110: 2.5%
• True line underdog of +111 or longer: 4%

I also have a 5% win probability consideration for a team playing the second game of a back-to-back with travel and a 3% consideration for the second leg of a home back-to-back. For injured players, the player's impact on their team's win probability is estimated.

When the betting markets open up the night before, you can compare prices with our "price to bet" column to see if you're getting any value with either side's moneyline. There's a possibility that a moneyline moves into a bet-friendly range at some point between the market opening and puck drop.

Matt Russell is the lead betting analyst for theScore. If there's a bad beat to be had, Matt will find it. Find him on social media @mrussauthentic.

Copyright © 2024 Score Media Ventures Inc. All rights reserved. Certain content reproduced under license.

Find year-round coverage of betting news and insights for all sports by visiting our Betting section and subscribing to push notifications.

Since we figured out how much a goal matters to the likelihood of victory earlier this week, you can turn to the person you're watching the game with, high-five, and yell "12.5%!" in celebration amid the horn and your favorite team's goal song.

Scoring is an obvious way to boost a team's chances of winning, but while we know a big save helps, it's harder to quantify how much - as you exhale after a breakaway stop or a turned-away one-timer.

Last week, we listed the goaltenders who matter within their team - where there's a difference from the theoretical No.1 to the backup - measured by advanced metric GSAx. We made our arbitrary cutoff a differential of 0.2, but what does that mean to a team's likelihood of winning?

Goaltending Valuation

If the primary aim is to score four goals, the other part of the equation should be to prevent the opponent from getting four themselves. Therefore, every goal saved above expected (GSAx) contributes 12.5% toward a team win in the same way a goal scored improves a team's chances by 12.5%. As a primer, let's look at some of the best individual goaltending efforts this week.

Daniil Tarasov was great, but Cayden Primeau was better Tuesday in Montreal. Sam Montembeault did everything he could as the Canadiens forced overtime against the much better Bruins. Karel Vejmelka deserved better, but Wild skaters dominated the Coyotes with a 70% expected goal share and a 12-3 high-danger chance ratio at five-on-five. The other five games where a goaltender stood out led to the Blues beating the Kings and Bruins, the Devils blowing out the Stars, and the Senators snapping a seven-game skid.

That's a change of pace in Ottawa, as they've gotten the worst goaltending this year with a collective -31.22 GSAx in 62 contests (as of March 11). Allowing a half-goal per game more than a replacement-level goalie, Joonas Korpisalo, Anton Forsberg, and Mads Sogaard have hurt the Senators' win probability by an average of 6.25% before the puck drops. Theoretically, at -6.25% implied win probability, they've hurt Ottawa's chances more than all but six skaters help their team's cause, according to market evaluations of NHL stars.

Since the betting market couldn't have predicted it would be that bad, Ottawa bettors have been buying the Sens at a -EV (expected value) price. With tax time around the corner and no relief for the nearly $10 million the Sens have spent on goaltenders against the salary cap, the only write-off coming in Ottawa is this season as a whole.

The cheat sheet

The betting world's dirty little secret is that, while there are no bad bets at the right price, the process of discovering a good price is hidden.

Each week, we balance market information from regular-season point totals and in-season advanced metrics - with an even-strength focus - to determine the win probability for each team and the moneyline needed to bet on either side. The idea is to remove the cognitive bias of win-loss records, which can be skewed by outliers like special-team results, poor goaltending performances, and other unreliable events.

You can use whatever parameters you like to decide how much of an edge you need to trigger a bet, but here are mine:

• True line favorite of -111 or longer: 1%
• True line between -110 and +110: 2.5%
• True line underdog of +111 or longer: 4%

I also have a 5% win probability consideration for a team playing the second game of a back-to-back with travel and a 3% consideration for the second leg of a home back-to-back. For injured players, the player's impact on their team's win probability is estimated.

When the betting markets open up the night before, you can compare those prices with our "price to bet" column to see if you're getting any value with either side's moneyline. There's a possibility that a moneyline moves into a bet-friendly range at some point between the market opening and puck drop.

Matt Russell is the lead betting analyst for theScore. If there's a bad beat to be had, Matt will find it. Find him on social media @mrussauthentic.

Copyright © 2024 Score Media Ventures Inc. All rights reserved. Certain content reproduced under license.

Find year-round coverage of betting news and insights for all sports by visiting our Betting section and subscribing to push notifications.

We had some fun last week with the betting market's evaluation of players this season. Now it's time to do our math homework, since we should figure out what a goal is worth to a team's theoretical chances of winning.

Through March 10, an average of 6.12 goals have been scored per NHL game. As a result, if you were to practically set targets for your team as you sit down to watch them play, you'd pick two:

1. Score four goals
2. Allow fewer than three

If the average number of goals in a game is six, teams should frequently win with four goals or by allowing two or fewer. Look at the league-wide scoreboard on any given night to note how often 4-3, 4-2, and 3-2 final scores occur.

Skater valuations

If four goals should get you a win, each goal scored should be worth 25% toward an expected win, right? Sort of. Since getting to four goals is only half the battle, each goal is actually worth 12.5% toward an expected win.

Each player's valuation should be built on how likely they are to contribute to a goal. With 153 points last season, did Connor McDavid contribute toward 82 more goals than a replacement-level player would have? If you put an average center on the Oilers alongside Leon Draisaitl and on the power play, and they had a 71-point season, the answer is yes. At that point, McDavid's 12% valuation is fair.

If Auston Matthews scores 70 goals this season, he'll have singularly contributed 8.75 wins to the Maple Leafs, who are on pace for 47.4 wins this season. Is he worth 8.75 wins? No, because if Toronto had to replace his role (first line and power play) with a league-average player, that player (think a combination of Matthew Knies and Tyler Bertuzzi) could score 24 goals (three expected wins) of his own surrounded by the Leafs' remaining talent.

Matthews' goals alone could be credited for almost six wins per season. At $11.6 million in salary, Matthews' historic season may net Toronto one win per $2 million spent. In a less-than-shocking development: He's worth it. If everyone else could do that, a team would be a lock for 50 wins per year in this era of the nearly $100-million salary cap.

As an aside: Six wins in an 82-game season equates to 7.3% of Toronto's wins, so last week's 5% market valuation of Matthews is close.

The cheat sheet

The betting world's dirty little secret is that while there are no bad bets at the right price, the process of discovering a good price is hidden.

Each week, we balance market information from regular-season point totals and in-season advanced metrics - with an even-strength focus - to determine the win probability for each team and the moneyline needed to bet on either side. The idea is to remove the cognitive bias of win-loss records, which can be skewed by outliers like special-team results, poor goaltending performances, and other unreliable events.

You can use whatever parameters you like to decide how much of an edge you need to trigger a bet, but here are mine:

• True line favorite of -111 or longer: 1%
• True line between -110 and +110: 2.5%
• True line underdog of +111 or longer: 4%

I also have a 5% win probability consideration for a team playing the second game of a back-to-back with travel and a 3% consideration for the second leg of a home back-to-back. For injured players, the player's impact on their team's win probability is estimated.

When the betting markets open up the night before, you can compare those prices with our "price to bet" column to see if you're getting any value with either side's moneyline. There's a possibility that a moneyline moves into a bet-friendly range at some point between the market opening and puck drop.

Matt Russell is the lead betting analyst for theScore. If there's a bad beat to be had, Matt will find it. Find him on social media @mrussauthentic.

Copyright © 2024 Score Media Ventures Inc. All rights reserved. Certain content reproduced under license.