Motion-blurred skater in a blue sweater
Breakdown · NYR at CAR

Rangers hold off the Hurricanes

The verdict · stolen

The Rangers stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.32–4.22 and won anyway.

NYR 4 · CAR 2
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 5:43 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

I. Shesterkin's goaltending was the only reason the Rangers survived. New York won 4-2 despite allowing 4.22 expected goals to Carolina's 3.32 — a theft built on a 0.947 save percentage that sat 2.22 goals above average.

The Hurricanes held 68% of shot attempts (38-18) and controlled 56% of expected goals at 5v5, yet managed just 2 goals. They were 0 for 5 on high-danger chances — a variance that won't last. The Rangers, meanwhile, got higher-quality looks, generating 0.072 xG per shot versus Carolina's 0.054. When the Rangers finished, they won.

Will Cuylle's wrist shot from the wing at 18:17 of the third period proved decisive. Carolina responded with rush-threat aggression, scoring 2 goals on 41 rush attempts, but couldn't close the gap.

I. Shesterkin faced 38 shots and stopped 36, turning possession dominance into a Rangers victory. F. Andersen gave up 3 goals on 17 shots on goal, unable to answer when Carolina needed stops most. A. Panarin (NYR) led the way with 1 goal and 1 assist in 22:00, while S. Gostisbehere (CAR) answered with 1 goal and 1 assist in 21:19. S. Aho (CAR) added 2 assists in 19:23.

This was process versus outcome made concrete: Carolina owned the underlying metrics and lost anyway.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 26
NYR
4
CAR
2

Rangers hold off the Hurricanes

Chances 3.3 – 4.2Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Hurricanes deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
NYR
3.32
CAR
4.22
44% of the chances56%

The board read NYR 4, CAR 2. The chances read NYR 3.3, CAR 4.2.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NYR
+0.7
goals above expected
NYR3.32 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
CAR4.22 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

The Hurricanes left 2.2 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 16:53NYRN. Laba1–0
  2. P2 05:04CARS. GostisbeherePP1–1
  3. P2 18:56NYRA. Panarin2–1
  4. P3 00:45NYRV. Trocheck3–1
  5. P3 10:53CARS. Jarvis3–2
  6. P3 18:17NYRW. CuylleEN4–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NYR
35 shots
4
Final
90 shots
CAR
55 shots
2
NYR attackCAR attack
NYR CAR Goal
35
shots · 4 in
55
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NYRCAR
1 / 4
1.34 xG
High danger
0 / 5
1.14 xG
3 / 12
1.58 xG
Medium
2 / 19
2.14 xG
0 / 30
0.39 xG
Low
0 / 54
0.95 xG

The Hurricanes went 0 for 5 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
I. Shesterkin
+2.2
NYR · 36/38
B
F. Andersen
+0.3
CAR · 14/17
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Rangers hold off the Hurricanes

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 4–13
  1. 16:53NYRN. Laba(T. Raddysh, M. Robertson)1–0
2ndshots 9–11
  1. 05:04CARS. Gostisbeherepower play(S. Aho, N. Ehlers)1–1
  2. 18:56NYRA. Panarin(A. Fox, J. Miller)2–1
3rdshots 5–14
  1. 00:45NYRV. Trocheck(A. Panarin, M. Zibanejad)3–1
  2. 10:53CARS. Jarvis(S. Gostisbehere, S. Aho)3–2
  3. 18:17NYRW. Cuylleempty net4–2

score reads NYR–CAR

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.32
NYR chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.7
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.061
NYR puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
37.1%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.32Expected goals4.22
CAR 56% of the chance quality
18Shots on goal38
4High-danger chances5
46All attempts (Corsi)78
Adjusted for score: NYR 35% · CAR 65%
Faceoffs · CAR won59%off36%neu33%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NYR1 / 4 · 1.34 xG
CAR0 / 5 · 1.14 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NYR3 / 12 · 1.58 xG
CAR2 / 19 · 2.14 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NYR0 / 30 · 0.39 xG
CAR0 / 54 · 0.95 xG

NYR went 3-for-12 from medium danger on 1.58 expected goals — 1.4 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NYR
4 G · 3.32 xG · +0.7
CAR
2 G · 4.22 xG · -2.2
012345

NYR finished +0.7 against expected, CAR -2.2.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NYR
SNAP2/8
WRIST1/17
TIP IN0/3
SLAP1/2
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/2
OTHER0/11
CAR
SNAP2/30
WRIST0/6
TIP IN0/6
SLAP0/7
BACKHAND0/5
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/23
NYR
CAR
Off the rush
1 G on 20
1.43 xG
2 G on 41
3.12 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 0
0.00 xG
0 G on 4
0.58 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: NYR went 2-for-8, CAR 2-for-30. CAR scored 2 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
I. Shesterkin
NYR · 36/38 · .947
+2.2
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/51.1+1.1
Medium2/192.1+0.1
Low0/540.9+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

F. Andersen
CAR · 14/17 · .824
+0.3
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/41.3+0.3
Medium3/121.6-1.4
Low0/300.4+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

90 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
NYR
35 shots
4
Final
90 shots
CAR
55 shots
2
NYR attackCAR attack
NYR CAR Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — NYR left, CAR 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
A. Panarin
#10 · L · NYR
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 22:00 on ice · +1
S. Gostisbehere
#4 · D · CAR
1 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 21:19 on ice · -3
S. Aho
#20 · C · CAR
0 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 19:23 on ice · -1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Wed, Nov 26
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 5:40 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 projects a 2.3-2.8 game favoring Carolina at 59% win probability. The Hurricanes' underlying metrics justify the lean.

Carolina owns shot quality at 56.0% 5v5 xG versus New York's 48.0%, and drives territorial control at 60.0% Corsi to the Rangers' 49.0%. These gaps are structural, not marginal—they explain why the model sees Carolina as the clear choice.

A second layer reinforces it: Carolina's PDO of 0.984 sits well below the Rangers' 1.009. The Hurricanes run cold on finishing luck while New York runs hot. In models that account for regression, that gap translates to an edge—Carolina's underlying superiority should convert to more goals as finishing normalizes.

The Hurricanes carry a rest advantage as well, arriving on three days off to the Rangers' one day. Shesterkin's back-to-back appearance complicates New York's goaltending, forcing either a spot start or a tired starter.

Players to Watch

NYR

  • Adam Sykora: 0.91 xG/60, 3G 1A, 20.0% shooting
  • Gabe Perreault: 0.79 xG/60, 8G 11A, 2 HD goals, 13.1% shooting

CAR

  • Jackson Blake: 1.06 xG/60, 14G 19A, 2 HD goals, 10.9% shooting
  • Seth Jarvis: 0.98 xG/60, 17G 12A, 1 HD goal, 11.9% shooting
What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

CAR 59%
59%
CAR
Model favorite
41%
59%
NYR50CAR

CAR by 18 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score NYR 2.3–2.8 CAR; 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
NYR← edge
edge →CAR
48.0%56.0%
49.0%60.0%
2.262.98
2.402.31
1.882.26
1.901.95
1.0090.984

CAR holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.009 vs 0.984) says NYR has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
NYR
5-5-0
+1 GD · 1d rest
CAR
6-2-2
+1 GD · 3d rest
1.009
NYR PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.984
CAR PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Hurricanes own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Hurricanes drive Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Things to watch
  • The Hurricanes own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Hurricanes drive Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • I. Shesterkin is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
  • The Hurricanes have 2 more days of rest.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
NYR
Expected in goal
I. Shesterkin
back-to-back.905 last start
Backup Igor Shesterkin · +21.3 GSAx this season
Back-to-back: the backup often gets this one. Treat the starter as unconfirmed.

No completed game on file for this club yet.

CAR
Expected in goal
F. Andersen
3 days rest.850 last start
Backup Brandon Bussi · +2.8 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
NYR
Adam Sykora3G 1A
0.91 xG/60 · 0 HD · 20.0% sh
Gabe Perreault8G 11A
0.79 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.1% sh
CAR
Jackson Blake14G 19A
1.06 xG/60 · 2 HD · 10.9% sh
Seth Jarvis17G 12A
0.98 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.9% sh
Keep going

Where to next