Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a New York Islanders sweater
← Thu, Oct 16 · the slate
Breakdown · EDM at NYI

D. Rittich stands tall as the Islanders edge the Oilers

FinalThu, Oct 16
EDMEdmonton Oilers2NYINew York Islanders4
The verdict · stolen

The Islanders stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 5.08–4.15 and won anyway.

EDM 2 · NYI 4
◆ By the ModelJun 16, 2:54 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

The Islanders won 4–2 in a game that didn't belong to them. Edmonton generated 22% more expected goals (5.08 to 4.15), dominated high-danger chances 9-to-4, and limited New York to 43% of shot attempts. None of this mattered. D. Rittich made it not matter.

The goaltender stopped 31 of 33 shots for a 0.939 save percentage, posting a +3.08 performance against expectation. That's a steal—the margin between coin-flip hockey and a convincing win. Rittich was the only variable that broke in the Islanders' direction.

Edmonton's S. Skinner was excellent in defeat. He posted a +1.15 mark and a 0.875 save percentage, still above average. But New York's execution in the high-danger area proved decisive: the Islanders scored on 50% of their four HD chances while Edmonton finished 0-for-9. When you finish 0-for-9 from prime scoring area, a goaltender's quality becomes secondary.

The turning point arrived in the third period when B. Horvat finished from the doorstep at 19:51, capping a three-goal performance in 18:45. That wasn't dominance in puck possession but in the moments that counted. M. Barzal (1G, 1A in 24:31) and L. Draisaitl (1G in 25:22) rounded out the story.

New York's rush play proved lethal: four goals on 28 attempts. Edmonton matched that rate nearly (2 on 29) but the Islanders' margin came from one thing—goaltending. Remove Rittich's superlative game and this becomes a dominant Edmonton victory. Instead, it's a cautionary tale about variance, about xG shortfalls, about why a goaltender can single-handedly steal a night.

Three Stars

  • #14 B. Horvat — 3G in 18:45
  • #13 M. Barzal — 1G, 1A in 24:31
  • #29 L. Draisaitl — 1G in 25:22
The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Oct 16
EDM
2
NYI
4

D. Rittich stands tall as the Islanders edge the Oilers

Chances 5.1 – 4.2Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Oilers deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
EDM
5.08
NYI
4.15
55% of the chances45%

The board read EDM 2, NYI 4. The chances read EDM 5.1, NYI 4.2.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NYI
−0.1
goals above expected
NYI4.15 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
EDM5.08 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

The Oilers left 3.1 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 16:23NYIM. Barzal0–1
  2. P1 17:40EDML. DraisaitlPP1–1
  3. P2 08:53EDMR. Nugent-Hopkins2–1
  4. P2 17:56NYIB. HorvatSH2–2
  5. P3 15:14NYIB. HorvatPP2–3
  6. P3 19:51NYIB. HorvatEN2–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
EDM
48 shots
2
Final
91 shots
NYI
43 shots
4
EDM attackNYI attack
EDM NYI Goal
48
shots · 2 in
43
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
EDMNYI
0 / 9
2.04 xG
High danger
2 / 4
1.84 xG
2 / 22
2.67 xG
Medium
2 / 14
1.57 xG
0 / 32
0.37 xG
Low
0 / 40
0.74 xG

The Oilers went 0 for 9 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
D. Rittich
+3.1
NYI · 31/33
B+
S. Skinner
+1.1
EDM · 21/24
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

D. Rittich stands tall as the Islanders edge the Oilers

A model, not a newsroom. Every number on these frames comes from the NHL's play-by-play and our own models. Nothing was watched, guessed or heard from anyone.

Read the full breakdown
backcheckreport.com
01 / 08 · Final
Every goal, in order

How it happened

NHL play-by-play
1stshots 8–11
  1. 16:23NYIM. Barzal0–1
  2. 17:40EDML. Draisaitlpower play(C. McDavid, D. Tomasek)1–1
2ndshots 16–7
  1. 08:53EDMR. Nugent-Hopkins(T. Emberson)2–1
  2. 17:56NYIB. Horvatshorthanded(J. Pageau, R. Pulock)2–2
3rdshots 9–7
  1. 15:14NYIB. Horvatpower play(M. Barzal, M. Schaefer)2–3
  2. 19:51NYIB. Horvatempty net(J. Drouin, E. Heineman)2–4

score reads EDM–NYI

Source · NHL play-by-play (api-web.nhle.com)
Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.15
NYI chances
Goals their shots were worth
−0.1
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.037
NYI puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
47.9%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

5.08Expected goals4.15
EDM 55% of the chance quality
33Shots on goal25
9High-danger chances4
63All attempts (Corsi)58
Adjusted for score: EDM 52% · NYI 48%
Faceoffs · NYI won47%off46%neu39%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
EDM0 / 9 · 2.04 xG
NYI2 / 4 · 1.84 xG
Medium dangermid-range
EDM2 / 22 · 2.67 xG
NYI2 / 14 · 1.57 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
EDM0 / 32 · 0.37 xG
NYI0 / 40 · 0.74 xG

EDM went 0-for-9 from high danger on 2.04 expected goals — 2.0 left on the table.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play
The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
EDM
2 G · 5.08 xG · -3.1
NYI
4 G · 4.15 xG · -0.1
0123456

EDM finished -3.1 against expected, NYI -0.1.

Source · Backcheck xG model
Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
EDM
WRIST0/20
SLAP0/11
BACKHAND0/3
SNAP2/6
TIP IN0/5
WRAP AROUND0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/15
NYI
WRIST2/24
SLAP0/5
BACKHAND0/7
SNAP2/3
TIP IN0/3
WRAP AROUND0/0
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/15
EDM
NYI
Off the rush
2 G on 29
3.58 xG
4 G on 28
3.09 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 6
0.87 xG
0 G on 4
0.36 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: EDM went 0-for-20, NYI 2-for-24. NYI scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
New to these numbers?

Two things happened in this game: who created the better chances, and who put the puck in the net. They are not the same thing, and this page separates them on purpose.

The one to watch is expected goals— the best single read on who deserved to win. When it disagrees with the scoreboard, that disagreement is usually the story. Nothing here is a projection; every figure is computed from this game's play-by-play. Full glossary →

xG
Expected goals. Every shot scored by how often that exact look goes in. 2.5 xG means the chances were worth about two and a half goals.
HD
High-danger chances — shots from the slot and the crease, where shots actually become goals.
Corsi
Every shot attempt, including the ones that missed or got blocked. A rough read on who had the puck.
Adj.
Score-adjusted. Teams that trail shoot more and teams that lead sit back, so this corrects the attempt count for the scoreboard.
GSAx
Goals saved above expected. A positive number means the goalie stopped more than an average goalie would have on those shots.
PDO
Shooting % plus save % — a luck gauge. It sits near 1.000 over a season, so a game far from it usually means the bounces decided it.
Shot by shot

In the net

Graded on goals saved above expected
S. Skinner
EDM · 21/24 · .875
+1.1
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/41.8-0.2
Medium2/141.6-0.4
Low0/400.7+0.7

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

D. Rittich
NYI · 31/33 · .939
+3.1
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/92.0+2.0
Medium2/222.7+0.7
Low0/320.4+0.4

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

91 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
EDM
48 shots
2
Final
91 shots
NYI
43 shots
4
EDM attackNYI attack
EDM NYI Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — EDM left, NYI right — the way you would watch it. A dot's size is how dangerous the look was, from distance and angle; it is a proxy for shot quality, not the xG model the article is written from. Hover a dot for the shooter and the clock.

Ranked from the box score

Three stars

Points first
Three stars · computed, not voted
B. Horvat
#14 · C · —
3 G · 0 A · 7 SOG · 18:45 on ice · +3
M. Barzal
#13 · C · —
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 24:31 on ice · +1
L. Draisaitl
#29 · C · —
1 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 25:22 on ice · -1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Thu, Oct 16
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelSep 22, 3:35 AMEdited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

The model projects Edmonton 3.4 to Islanders 3.3, giving the Oilers 52% win probability — which is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

That razor-thin edge reflects genuine dominance in underlying play. Edmonton commands 52.2% of the expected goals at 5v5 against 47.7% for New York, and holds a 50.2% Corsi advantage to the Islanders' 49.0%. Yet Edmonton is running cold: a 0.981 PDO signals regression ahead, while New York sits at 0.992, closer to neutral. The model doesn't doubt Edmonton's superiority; it's pricing in a reversion tax.

Zach Hyman is the engine of Edmonton's attack. He's registered 14 goals and 13 assists on 1.23 expected goals per 60 minutes, shooting at 13.0% — efficient volume that the Islanders' shutdown unit will key on. Connor McDavid operates at another tier: 25 goals, 33 assists, 13.7% shooting, five high-danger chances. That pair generates the offensive load Edmonton needs to prevail.

New York's attack runs through Anders Lee, whose 1.20 xG/60 mirrors Hyman's rate but has yielded only nine goals and 20 assists at a 6.4% shooting percentage — he's been starved of either volume or bounces. Bo Horvat (18 goals, 12.8% shooting, 0.87 xG/60, three high-danger chances) has been more reliable but operates at a lower rate. Neither has the ceiling of an elite secondary scorer.

The tactical asymmetry is clear: if Edmonton's Hyman and McDavid operate and New York's Lee and Horvat are neutralized, Edmonton wins. But the Islanders' defensive structure holds — Alexander Romanov anchors a unit that's resisted collapse, and New York's PDO edge suggests they can steal this. The margin in expected goals is real but not vast; this is a variance game waiting for a spark.

Edmonton has a weak spot: Jake Walman's defensive burden. New York will probe there, just as Edmonton will target Lee's finishing. Whoever manages transition discipline takes it.

52% is the honest verdict: an edge to Edmonton's play, but not conviction. This is a toss-up with a whisper of difference.

Season rates in this preview are from 2025-26 — this season's sample isn't live yet.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

EDM 52%
52%
EDM
Model favorite
52%
48%
EDM50NYI

EDM by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score EDM 3.4–3.3 NYI; 16% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season rates · 5v5

Tale of the tape

NHL stats API · our xG
EDM← edge
edge →NYI
52.2%47.7%
50.2%49.0%
3.383.13
3.103.43
3.442.79
3.232.88
0.9810.992

EDM holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.981 vs 0.992) says NYI has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · No games yet
EDM
0-0-0
+0 GD · 0d rest
NYI
0-0-0
+0 GD · 0d rest
0.981
EDM PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.992
NYI PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

TACTICALNYI

Shutdown Assignment: Islanders

Key matchup: Neutralize Zach Hyman (14G, 1.23 xG/60, 1 HD goals)

Key matchup: Neutralize Zach Hyman (14G, 1.23 xG/60, 1 HD goals)

TACTICALEDM

Shutdown Assignment: Oilers

Key matchup: Neutralize Anders Lee (9G, 1.20 xG/60, 2 HD goals)

Key matchup: Neutralize Anders Lee (9G, 1.20 xG/60, 2 HD goals)

STRENGTHEDM

Zach Hyman drives the Oilers offense

Zach Hyman: 14G 13A, 1.23 xG/60, 1 high-danger goals.

STRENGTHNYI

Anders Lee drives the Islanders offense

Anders Lee: 9G 20A, 1.20 xG/60, 2 high-danger goals.

Where the edges live
  • The Oilers own the underlying play — 52.2% 5v5 xG vs 47.7%.
Regression watch
  • The Oilers' PDO is 0.981 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Things to watch
  • The Oilers own the underlying play — 52.2% 5v5 xG vs 47.7%.
  • The Oilers' PDO is 0.981 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG
EDM
Zach Hyman14G 13A
1.23 xG/60 · 1 HD · 13.0% sh
Connor McDavid25G 33A
0.92 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh
NYI
Anders Lee9G 20A
1.20 xG/60 · 2 HD · 6.4% sh
Bo Horvat18G 10A
0.87 xG/60 · 3 HD · 12.8% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page