Backcheck
Recap · NYI at UTA

Islanders edge the Mammoth in overtime

The Islanders stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.65–4.13 and won anyway.

By the ModelJul 11, 4:01 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
NYI
New York Islanders
3
Home
UTA
Utah Mammoth
2
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.65Expected goals4.13
53% share for the better side
22Shot attempts (SOG)30
7High-danger chances4
59Corsi (all attempts)59
Score-adjusted: 52% / 48%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

The Mammoth dominated the underlying numbers and lost anyway. They generated 4.13 expected goals to the Islanders' 3.65, held 58% of shot attempts, and created seven high-danger chances to New York's four. Final score: Islanders 3, Mammoth 2, overtime.

Utah underperformed their xG by 2.13 goals—the chasm between what their shooting created and what they actually scored. D. Rittich posted 28 saves on 30 shots (0.933 SV%), stopping 2.13 goals above expected and stealing a game Utah's dominance should have won. K. Vejmelka's 19 saves on 21 shots (0.905 SV%) held the line, but it wasn't enough.

Matthew Schaefer's slap shot from the high slot at 02:06 of overtime decided it. New York's advantage came down to efficiency. Both teams converted twice on the rush—Utah on 30 chances, New York on 25—but the Islanders crashed the net harder, generating four rebound opportunities and capitalizing on one. Utah's seven high-danger chances nearly doubled New York's four; Rittich simply didn't allow them to matter.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NYI1 / 7 · 1.55 xG
UTA0 / 4 · 1.12 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NYI2 / 14 · 1.76 xG
UTA2 / 28 · 2.54 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NYI0 / 38 · 0.34 xG
UTA0 / 27 · 0.48 xG

UTA went 0-for-4 from high danger on 1.12 expected goals — 1.1 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NYI
3 G · 3.65 xG · -0.7
UTA
2 G · 4.13 xG · -2.1
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
D. RittichNYI
+2.1
K. VejmelkaUTA
+1.6

NYI finished -0.7 against expected, UTA -2.1 — D. Rittich (NYI) saved 2.1 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
NYI
SNAP1/19
SLAP1/5
TIP IN0/4
BACKHAND0/4
WRAP AROUND0/3
WRIST0/2
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER1/22
UTA
SNAP0/24
SLAP1/16
TIP IN1/5
BACKHAND0/2
WRAP AROUND0/0
WRIST0/0
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/11
NYI
UTA
Off the rush
2 G on 25 · 2.74 xG
2 G on 30 · 2.84 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 4 · 0.73 xG
0 G on 2 · 0.28 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: NYI went 1-for-19, UTA 0-for-24. NYI scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
M. Schaefer
#48 · D · NYI
1 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 25:49 TOI · +1
M. Sergachev
#98 · D · UTA
0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 25:33 TOI · -1
A. Romanov
#28 · D · NYI
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 22:41 TOI
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • D. Rittich (NYI) stopped 2.1 goals above expected.
  • UTA was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 30 rush chances.
  • NYI was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 25 rush chances.
  • NYI created 4 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • UTA underperformed xG by 2.1 — wasted quality chances.
  • D. Rittich (NYI) saved 2.1 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • K. Vejmelka (UTA) saved 1.6 goals above expected — stole the show.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · NYI at UTA · 9:00 PM ET

The Mammoth are the model's lean over the Islanders on the rest edge

By the ModelJul 11, 3:58 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

56%
UTA
Model favorite
44%
56%
NYI50UTA

UTA by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NYI 2.42.8 UTA; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

NYI← edge
edge →UTA
48.0%5v5 xG%52.0%
49.0%Corsi%53.0%
2.48xGF / 602.64
2.69xGA / 602.39
1.78Goals for / gm2.26
1.94Goals against / gm1.99
0.993PDO — luck, not skill1.003

UTA holds 5 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.993 vs 1.003) says UTA has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

Utah holds a 56% win probability over New York, with the model projecting a 2.4-2.8 game. Two edges explain the lean: territorial control and rest.

The Mammoth dominate 5v5 play. They generate 52.0% expected goals to New York's 48.0%, and control shot attempts at 53.0% Corsi to 49.0%. These margins suggest Utah dictates play.

The rest disparity amplifies that advantage. Utah arrives on one day of rest; the Islanders on three. Fresh legs mean faster decisions and sharper conditioning in the third period.

One watch: K. Vejmelka plays on a back-to-back for Utah, which could mean a backup start or tired starter.

For New York, Anders Lee (1.20 xG/60, 9G 20A, 6.4% shooting) and Bo Horvat (0.87 xG/60, 18G 10A, 12.8% shooting) anchor the offense. Lee generates at an elite rate but his 6.4% shooting suggests finish variance. Horvat's 12.8% rate indicates sustainable conversion.

Utah counters with Dylan Guenther (1.02 xG/60, 28G 15A, 16.8% shooting) and Daniil But (1.01 xG/60, 2G 2A, 5.6% shooting). Guenther's 16.8% shooting compounds Utah's shot volume advantage. Daniil But, despite 2 goals and 2 assists, produces at 1.01 xG/60—generating chances awaiting conversion.

Both teams sit at 0% high-danger goal rate and 0% rebound goal rate. Unconverted opportunities remain vulnerable. Whoever converts marginal plays first gains leverage.

New York's defensive weak link is Alexander Romanov; Utah should attack him early. Utah's Maveric Lamoureux is where New York should probe. Utah's path: control possession, exploit rest, and let Guenther finish. New York must pressure Lamoureux and cycle deep in Utah's zone—but they're behind in volume and recovery time. That's why the model calls for the Mammoth.

Data: MoneyPuck 5v5 models, NHL API

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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
UTA
Dylan Guenther28G 15A
1.02 xG/60 · 3 HD · 16.8% sh
Daniil But2G 2A
1.01 xG/60 · 1 HD · 5.6% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters