Motion-blurred skater in a Pittsburgh Penguins sweater
Breakdown · PIT at FLA

Penguins hold off the Panthers

The verdict · stolen

The Penguins stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.60–5.26 and won anyway.

PIT 5 · FLA 3
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 12:45 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

Pittsburgh stole this one. The Penguins beat Florida 5–3 despite the Panthers controlling 59% of expected goals at 5.26–3.60 — a heist built on elite goaltending and precision finishing in clutch moments.

The Panthers dominated by volume. They held 68% of shot attempts and 9 high-danger chances to Pittsburgh's 5. But volume without conversion is just noise. Florida managed only 12 shots on goal from all that territory; Pittsburgh converted at an astonishing rate in danger areas, finishing 2-for-5 on high-danger chances while Florida managed 3-for-9.

T. Jarry turned the outcome decisively. He stopped 34 of 37 shots, outperforming his expected save total by 2.26 goals — the kind of performance that swings a game when you're a heavy underdog in the metrics. S. Bobrovsky faced a lighter workload (12 saves on 17 shots) but underperformed his expected goals by 1.40, surrendering key chances when the game was in reach.

Sidney Crosby's wrist shot from a sharp angle midway through the first period opened Pittsburgh's advantage. Crosby finished with 2 goals and an assist over 19:06; E. Karlsson's 2 assists in 22:27 provided continuity on the back end.

Florida demonstrated precision in specific areas — their rush game was lethal, converting 3 goals from 44 rush attempts — but they couldn't sustain pressure when it mattered most. Even their dominant power play (2 goals on 19 shots) couldn't overcome Pittsburgh's elite goaltending and clinical execution in transition.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Oct 23
PIT
5
FLA
3

Penguins hold off the Panthers

Chances 3.6 – 5.3Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Panthers deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
PIT
3.60
FLA
5.26
41% of the chances59%

The board read PIT 5, FLA 3. The chances read PIT 3.6, FLA 5.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
PIT
+1.4
goals above expected
PIT3.60 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
FLA5.26 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored

The Panthers left 2.3 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 06:24PITS. CrosbyPP1–0
  2. P2 06:36PITR. Rakell2–0
  3. P2 08:26FLAB. MarchandPP2–1
  4. P2 15:24PITB. Kindel3–1
  5. P3 02:24FLAS. ReinhartPP3–2
  6. P3 04:49PITC. Dewar4–2
  7. P3 11:06FLAB. Marchand4–3
+1 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
PIT
34 shots
5
Final
95 shots
FLA
61 shots
3
PIT attackFLA attack
PIT FLA Goal
34
shots · 5 in
61
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
PITFLA
2 / 5
2.10 xG
High danger
1 / 9
2.06 xG
3 / 7
0.82 xG
Medium
2 / 20
2.31 xG
0 / 31
0.67 xG
Low
0 / 52
0.89 xG

The Penguins buried 2 of 5 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
T. Jarry
+2.3
PIT · 34/37
D-
S. Bobrovsky
−1.4
FLA · 12/17
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Penguins hold off the Panthers

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 7–6
  1. 06:24PITS. Crosbypower play(B. Rust, E. Malkin)1–0
2ndshots 6–13
  1. 06:36PITR. Rakell(E. Karlsson, S. Crosby)2–0
  2. 08:26FLAB. Marchandpower play(M. Samoskevich, S. Jones)2–1
  3. 15:24PITB. Kindel(T. Novak)3–1
3rdshots 4–18
  1. 02:24FLAS. Reinhartpower play(M. Samoskevich, S. Jones)3–2
  2. 04:49PITC. Dewar(E. Karlsson)4–2
  3. 11:06FLAB. Marchand(E. Luostarinen, A. Lundell)4–3
  4. 11:49PITS. Crosbypower play(R. Rakell, E. Malkin)5–3

score reads PIT–FLA

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.60
PIT chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.4
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.079
PIT puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
34.7%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.60Expected goals5.26
FLA 59% of the chance quality
17Shots on goal37
5High-danger chances9
43All attempts (Corsi)81
Adjusted for score: PIT 30% · FLA 70%
Faceoffs · FLA won60%off44%neu39%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
PIT2 / 5 · 2.10 xG
FLA1 / 9 · 2.06 xG
Medium dangermid-range
PIT3 / 7 · 0.82 xG
FLA2 / 20 · 2.31 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
PIT0 / 31 · 0.67 xG
FLA0 / 52 · 0.89 xG

PIT went 3-for-7 from medium danger on 0.82 expected goals — 2.2 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
PIT
5 G · 3.60 xG · +1.4
FLA
3 G · 5.26 xG · -2.3
0123456

PIT finished +1.4 against expected, FLA -2.3.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
PIT
SNAP2/5
WRIST2/17
BACKHAND1/4
TIP IN0/3
SLAP0/4
DEFLECTED0/0
BAT0/1
OTHER0/9
FLA
SNAP0/37
WRIST1/2
BACKHAND1/7
TIP IN0/8
SLAP0/3
DEFLECTED1/4
BAT0/0
OTHER0/20
PIT
FLA
Off the rush
4 G on 18
2.18 xG
3 G on 44
4.15 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 4
1.04 xG
0 G on 4
0.44 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: PIT went 2-for-5, FLA 0-for-37. PIT 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
T. Jarry
PIT · 34/37 · .919
+2.3
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/92.1+1.1
Medium2/202.3+0.3
Low0/520.9+0.9

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

S. Bobrovsky
FLA · 12/17 · .706
-1.4
saved above expected
D-
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/52.1+0.1
Medium3/70.8-2.2
Low0/310.7+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

95 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
PIT
34 shots
5
Final
95 shots
FLA
61 shots
3
PIT attackFLA attack
PIT FLA Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — PIT left, FLA 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
S. Crosby
#87 · C · PIT
2 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 19:06 on ice
E. Karlsson
#65 · D · PIT
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 22:27 on ice · +3
S. Jones
#3 · D · FLA
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 22:14 on ice · -1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Thu, Oct 23
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 12:45 PMEdited 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 sees this as a pure toss-up: 2.6 goals projected for Pittsburgh, 2.6 for Florida, with the Panthers sitting at exactly 50% win probability. There is no edge here.

The Penguins have the momentum. They're 8-2-0 in their last 10 games, which translates to a pace that beats the rest of the league. That form advantage matters—even against a capable team, Pittsburgh enters with rhythm.

But the underlying metrics suggest the Panthers are no easy target. Pittsburgh leads in shot quality with an xG% of 51.0% to Florida's 49.0%, a gap that matters over time. Florida counters with territory—a Corsi% of 52.0% to Pittsburgh's 50.0%—which means they're controlling play even when generating fewer dangerous chances. The luck factor tells a story too: Pittsburgh's PDO sits at 1.012, a shade above neutral, while Florida's 0.989 suggests some regression risk.

Pittsburgh's top line is carrying the load through Rickard Rakell, who has 13 goals and 13 assists while shooting at 12.1% on chances that average 1.01 expected goals per 60 minutes. That's volume with precision. The x-factor is Filip Hallander, who generates 1.28 xG/60—elite creation—though he carries 0 goals and 3 assists, a stat line that signals he's either snake-bitten or due. Hallander is likely out, recalled from conditioning for further evaluation.

Florida counters with Sam Bennett, who has 18 goals and 19 assists on 0.97 xG/60, a clinical finisher at 13.1% shooting. Brad Marchand (0.93 xG/60, 17G 9A) is their secondary threat, operating at an eye-popping 19.5% shooting rate. That kind of conversion cannot hold; regression is due.

The breakdown point for Pittsburgh: Caleb Jones anchors a defense that has generated 0% of its offense from high-danger chances and 0% from rebounds. That's not just conservative—it's vulnerable. Florida's mirror image, 0% on both counts, creates an equivalent problem. The difference is Marchand can still pull a game loose with one shift; Pittsburgh lacks that wildcard now that Hallander is on the shelf.

This remains exactly what the model said: a genuine coin flip.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

FLA 51%
50%
FLA
Model favorite
50%
50%
PIT50FLA

FLA by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score PIT 2.6–2.6 FLA; 18% 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
PIT← edge
edge →FLA
51.0%49.0%
50.0%52.0%
2.662.48
2.552.56
2.451.98
2.122.21
1.0120.989

PIT holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.012 vs 0.989) says PIT has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
PIT
8-2-0
+11 GD · 2d rest
FLA
5-5-0
+0 GD · 2d rest
1.012
PIT PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.989
FLA PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Things to watch
  • The Penguins are the hotter team by points pace (8-2-0 in their last 10).
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
PIT
Expected in goal
A. Silovs
2 days rest.958 last start
Backup Stuart Skinner · +8.3 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

FLA
Expected in goal
S. Bobrovsky
2 days rest.903 last start
Backup Sergei Bobrovsky · -12.2 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

Lineups are the players who dressed in each club's last game, with their minutes; clubs confirm tonight's at warm-up. Every player this preview names was in that lineup.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG
PIT
Filip Hallander0G 3A
1.28 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% sh
Rickard Rakell13G 13A
1.01 xG/60 · 3 HD · 12.1% sh
FLA
Sam Bennett18G 19A
0.97 xG/60 · 6 HD · 13.1% sh
Brad Marchand17G 9A
0.93 xG/60 · 3 HD · 19.5% sh
Keep going

Where to next