Motion-blurred skater in a red sweater
Breakdown · NYR at CHI

Blackhawks shut out the Rangers, 3-0

The verdict · coin flip

The Blackhawks won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

NYR 0 · CHI 3
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 7:56 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

Chicago's scoreline masks a closer contest underneath. By expected goals, New York deserved better: 3.02 xG versus Chicago's 2.84. Yet the Blackhawks won 3-0. Goaltending decided this game.

S. Knight made every shot count. He stopped all 21 attempts—a perfect 1.000 SV%—and saved 3.0 goals above expected. I. Shesterkin faced 25 shots, let three slip, and finished 0.880. That disparity determined the outcome.

Chicago's underlying numbers were modest overall. They controlled 54% of shot attempts (25–21 on goal) but scored at an unsustainable clip: two goals on 27 rush chances. Where they excelled was high-danger range, finishing six of their chances at a respectable rate. New York offered better looks and still went scoreless. They were 0 for 5 on high-danger attempts—a drought that won't repeat when they play again.

The Rangers' real problem wasn't opportunity. They underperformed their 3.02 xG by that full margin, wasting quality looks. Rebound chances—four times crashing the net—yielded nothing. Shesterkin gave the team little margin; any one of those three goals might have stayed out on a different night.

Tyler Bertuzzi's wrist shot from the doorstep (period three, 3:52) iced the result when it mattered. But the actual pivot happened earlier: Knight's command from the opening set a tone Shesterkin never matched.

Chicago's only genuine dominance came on the rush—two goals off 27 attempts. Elsewhere, the scoreline lied. The Rangers generated better chances. Knight's perfection and Shesterkin's struggles decided which team left with the win.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Dec 10
NYR
0
CHI
3

Blackhawks shut out the Rangers, 3-0

Chances 3.0 – 2.8Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Blackhawks took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value
NYR
3.02
CHI
2.84
52% of the chances49%

The board read NYR 0, CHI 3. The chances read NYR 3.0, CHI 2.8.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
CHI
+0.2
goals above expected
CHI2.84 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
NYR3.02 expected · 0 scored
Expected
Scored

The Rangers left 3.0 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. P2 07:08CHIL. CrevierSH0–1
  2. P2 14:27CHIC. Bedard0–2
  3. P3 03:52CHIT. Bertuzzi0–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NYR
35 shots
0
Final
74 shots
CHI
39 shots
3
NYR attackCHI attack
NYR CHI Goal
35
shots · 0 in
39
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NYRCHI
0 / 5
1.22 xG
High danger
2 / 6
1.42 xG
0 / 12
1.41 xG
Medium
1 / 10
0.94 xG
0 / 32
0.39 xG
Low
0 / 37
0.48 xG

The Rangers went 0 for 5 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
S. Knight
+3.0
CHI · 21/21
C
I. Shesterkin
−0.2
NYR · 22/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Blackhawks shut out the Rangers, 3-0

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 6–10no goals
    2ndshots 11–8
    1. 07:08CHIL. Creviershorthanded(M. Grzelcyk, J. Dickinson)0–1
    2. 14:27CHIC. Bedard(A. Burakovsky)0–2
    3rdshots 4–7
    1. 03:52CHIT. Bertuzzi(R. Greene, C. Bedard)0–3

    score reads NYR–CHI

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    2.84
    CHI chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    +0.2
    Finishing
    Goals above what those chances were worth
    1.057
    CHI puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    52.0%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    3.02Expected goals2.84
    NYR 52% of the chance quality
    21Shots on goal25
    5High-danger chances6
    49All attempts (Corsi)53
    Adjusted for score: NYR 51% · CHI 49%
    Faceoffs · CHI won27%off36%neu33%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    NYR0 / 5 · 1.22 xG
    CHI2 / 6 · 1.42 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    NYR0 / 12 · 1.41 xG
    CHI1 / 10 · 0.94 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    NYR0 / 32 · 0.39 xG
    CHI0 / 37 · 0.48 xG

    NYR went 0-for-12 from medium danger on 1.41 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    NYR
    0 G · 3.02 xG · -3.0
    CHI
    3 G · 2.84 xG · +0.2
    01234

    NYR finished -3.0 against expected, CHI +0.2.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    NYR
    WRIST0/23
    SNAP0/3
    SLAP0/1
    TIP IN0/5
    BACKHAND0/2
    WRAP AROUND0/1
    DEFLECTED0/0
    OTHER0/14
    CHI
    WRIST1/22
    SNAP1/6
    SLAP0/7
    TIP IN0/2
    BACKHAND1/1
    WRAP AROUND0/0
    DEFLECTED0/1
    OTHER0/14
    NYR
    CHI
    Off the rush
    0 G on 16
    1.39 xG
    2 G on 27
    2.10 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 3
    0.74 xG
    1 G on 4
    0.59 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: NYR went 0-for-23, CHI 1-for-22. CHI 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 · 22/25 · .880
    -0.2
    saved above expected
    C
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger2/61.4-0.6
    Medium1/100.9-0.1
    Low0/370.5+0.5

    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. Knight
    CHI · 21/21 · 1.000
    +3.0
    saved above expected
    A+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/51.2+1.2
    Medium0/121.4+1.4
    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

    74 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    NYR
    35 shots
    0
    Final
    74 shots
    CHI
    39 shots
    3
    NYR attackCHI attack
    NYR CHI Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — NYR left, CHI 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
    C. Bedard
    #98 · C · CHI
    1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 17:34 on ice · +2
    M. Grzelcyk
    #48 · D · CHI
    0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 19:45 on ice · +2
    T. Bertuzzi
    #59 · L · CHI
    1 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 18:00 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Wed, Dec 10
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 7:45 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 projects a 2.6-2.4 Rangers win, placing New York at 54% probability—call this what it is: a pick'em. Chicago narrows this to the margin of error.

    The Rangers own the underlying play. At 5v5, they've controlled 48.0% of expected goals while Chicago sits at 42.0%—a 7-point gulf on a metric that predicts outcomes better than goals. They're also ahead on shot attempts (49.0% Corsi% to 46.0%), though possession quality matters more than volume. Neither team has run hot by PDO (New York at 1.009, Chicago at 0.996), suggesting shooting variance plays a modest role. The advantage in expected play belongs to the Rangers.

    Yet recent form complicates the reading. New York enters at 5-3-2 in their last 10—demonstrably hotter. Chicago is -20 in goal differential over the same stretch. The Blackhawks' slide looks structural; the Rangers' uptick is real. That tiebreaker favors New York, but only barely.

    Watch Adam Sykora and Gabe Perreault for New York. Sykora carries 0.91 expected goals per 60 minutes with 3 goals and 1 assist, shooting at 20.0%—a rate far above average. Perreault is the steadier presence: 0.79 xG/60, 8 goals, 11 assists, and 2 high-danger chances on 13.1% shooting. Chicago counters with Tyler Bertuzzi (0.85 xG/60, 20 goals, 15 assists, 7 high-danger goals at 18.0% shooting) and Connor Bedard (0.82 xG/60, 17 goals, 27 assists, 5 high-danger goals at 11.8% shooting). Bertuzzi is the more prolific finisher; Bedard's assist rate is elite.

    Chicago's defensive liability is Anton Frondell; New York's is Vincent Iorio. Both have soft moments in transition. Neither team has converted high-danger or rebound chances at rates that merit confidence—both sit at 0%—which means the next clean look could shift this game's trajectory. Depth matters as much as the stars.

    The xG advantage belongs to New York. The recent momentum belongs to New York. The talent on paper? Tighter than the metrics suggest. That's why 54% is right. The Rangers should win, but they won't wire it.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    NYR 54%
    54%
    NYR
    Model favorite
    54%
    46%
    NYR50CHI

    NYR by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NYR 2.6–2.4 CHI; 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 →CHI
    48.0%42.0%
    49.0%46.0%
    2.262.17
    2.402.94
    1.881.84
    1.902.41
    1.0090.996

    NYR holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.009 vs 0.996) says NYR has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    NYR
    5-3-2
    +1 GD · 2d rest
    CHI
    2-6-2
    -20 GD · 2d rest
    1.009
    NYR PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    0.996
    CHI PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Where the edges live
    • The Rangers own the underlying play — 48.0% 5v5 xG vs 42.0%.
    Things to watch
    • The Rangers own the underlying play — 48.0% 5v5 xG vs 42.0%.
    • The Rangers are the hotter team by points pace (5-3-2 in their last 10).
    • The Blackhawks are underwater at -20 goal differential over their last 10.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    NYR
    Expected in goal
    J. Quick
    2 days rest.893 last start
    Backup Igor Shesterkin · +21.3 GSAx this season

    No completed game on file for this club yet.

    CHI
    Expected in goal
    A. Soderblom
    2 days rest.868 last start
    Backup Spencer Knight · +10.9 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
    CHI
    Tyler Bertuzzi20G 15A
    0.85 xG/60 · 7 HD · 18.0% sh
    Connor Bedard17G 27A
    0.82 xG/60 · 5 HD · 11.8% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next