Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Carolina Hurricanes sweater
← Mon, Dec 29 · the slate
Breakdown · NYR at CAR

Hurricanes run the Rangers off the ice on the underlying numbers

Final / OTMon, Dec 29
NYRNew York Rangers2CARCarolina Hurricanes3
The verdict · earned

The Hurricanes earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.

NYR 2 · CAR 3
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 10:16 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

Carolina's 3-2 overtime victory masks a dominant performance underneath. The Hurricanes controlled 66% of 5v5 expected goals (4.72–2.48) and held 64% of shot attempts (35–20 on goal), yet barely escaped in OT. I. Shesterkin's 0.914 save percentage and +1.72 performance above expected kept New York close.

Carolina underperformed its xG by 1.72 goals. The Hurricanes scored 3 on 44 rush chances but created 6 rebound opportunities and converted none. New York generated 4 rebound opportunities and converted 1, but couldn't overcome the Hurricanes' overall dominance.

Jackson Blake's overtime goal at 04:47 ended it, though the underlying metrics suggest the game should have been decided before OT. Carolina's power play was the night's decisive weapon: 2 goals on 15 shots (1.27 xG) translated a mismatch in raw control into actual advantages.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · OT · Dec 29
NYR
2
CAR
3

Hurricanes run the Rangers off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 2.5 – 4.7Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Hurricanes earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
NYR
2.48
CAR
4.72
34% of the chances66%

The board read NYR 2, CAR 3. The chances read NYR 2.5, CAR 4.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
CAR
−1.7
goals above expected
CAR4.72 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
NYR2.48 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

Both sides finished close to what their chances were worth. This one was earned on the ice.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 01:39NYRV. GavrikovPP1–0
  2. P1 15:57CARS. AhoPP1–1
  3. P2 13:00NYRJ. Brodzinski2–1
  4. P3 09:11CARJ. Martinook2–2
  5. OT 04:47CARJ. BlakePP2–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NYR
27 shots
2
Final
87 shots
CAR
60 shots
3
NYR attackCAR attack
NYR CAR Goal
27
shots · 2 in
60
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NYRCAR
1 / 5
1.20 xG
High danger
0 / 2
0.45 xG
0 / 10
0.98 xG
Medium
2 / 32
3.51 xG
1 / 24
0.30 xG
Low
1 / 49
0.76 xG

High-danger looks: NYR 1 of 5, CAR 0 of 2.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
I. Shesterkin
+1.7
NYR · 32/35
B
B. Bussi
+0.5
CAR · 18/20
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Hurricanes run the Rangers off the ice on the underlying numbers

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 5–13
  1. 01:39NYRV. Gavrikovpower play(A. Panarin, V. Trocheck)1–0
  2. 15:57CARS. Ahopower play(A. Nikishin, N. Ehlers)1–1
2ndshots 9–7
  1. 13:00NYRJ. Brodzinski(S. Carrick, M. Robertson)2–1
3rdshots 6–11
  1. 09:11CARJ. Martinook(J. Chatfield, K. Miller)2–2
OTshots 0–4
  1. 04:47CARJ. Blakepower play(S. Aho, N. Ehlers)2–3

score reads NYR–CAR

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.72
CAR chances
Goals their shots were worth
−1.7
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
0.985
CAR puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
68.0%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.48Expected goals4.72
CAR 66% of the chance quality
20Shots on goal35
5High-danger chances2
39All attempts (Corsi)83
Adjusted for score: NYR 30% · CAR 70%
Faceoffs · CAR won72%off62%neu37%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NYR1 / 5 · 1.20 xG
CAR0 / 2 · 0.45 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NYR0 / 10 · 0.98 xG
CAR2 / 32 · 3.51 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NYR1 / 24 · 0.30 xG
CAR1 / 49 · 0.76 xG

CAR went 2-for-32 from medium danger on 3.51 expected goals — 1.5 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NYR
2 G · 2.48 xG · -0.5
CAR
3 G · 4.72 xG · -1.7
0123456

NYR finished -0.5 against expected, CAR -1.7.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NYR
SNAP1/14
TIP IN0/1
WRIST0/9
SLAP1/1
BACKHAND0/1
DEFLECTED0/0
BAT0/1
OTHER0/12
CAR
SNAP1/27
TIP IN1/13
WRIST0/2
SLAP0/9
BACKHAND0/7
DEFLECTED1/2
BAT0/0
OTHER0/23
NYR
CAR
Off the rush
1 G on 20
1.85 xG
3 G on 44
3.49 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 4
0.59 xG
0 G on 6
0.80 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: NYR went 1-for-14, CAR 1-for-27. CAR scored 3 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 · 32/35 · .914
+1.7
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/20.5+0.5
Medium2/323.5+1.5
Low1/490.8-0.2

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

B. Bussi
CAR · 18/20 · .900
+0.5
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/51.2+0.2
Medium0/101.0+1.0
Low1/240.3-0.7

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

87 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
NYR
27 shots
2
Final
87 shots
CAR
60 shots
3
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
S. Aho
#20 · C · CAR
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 23:14 on ice
N. Ehlers
#27 · L · CAR
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 19:25 on ice
V. Gavrikov
#44 · D · NYR
1 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 26:25 on ice · -1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Dec 29
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 10:15 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 gives Carolina 59% win probability, projecting a 2.3-2.8 game margin.

Carolina has the hot hand. Over their last 10, the Hurricanes are 6-3-1 while New York sits at -6 goal differential—form that tilts toward the road team.

But form is noise. The underlying numbers favor Carolina decisively. The Hurricanes dominate expected goals at 56.0% xG versus New York's 48.0%, an 8-point edge reflecting shot quality. Corsi widens the gap: 60.0% to 49.0%, an 11-point spread predicting territorial control. Carolina will own the offensive zone.

PDO regression is the story. Carolina's 0.984 means they're due for positive regression—their results have trailed their underlying metrics. New York's 1.009 suggests the inverse: luck running out. Over 60 minutes, the underlying edge should prevail.

B. Bussi starts on a back-to-back. Whether he rides tired or a backup gets the call, this marginal disadvantage doesn't offset the play gap.

The player matchup widens it further. Jackson Blake (1.06 xG/60, 14G 19A, 2 HD goals) leads Carolina's offensive generation. Seth Jarvis (0.98 xG/60, 17G 12A) sits just behind. New York counters with Adam Sykora at 0.91 xG/60 and Gabe Perreault at 0.79 xG/60—both solid but trailing the Hurricanes' top two.

The model's 59% is a measured lean. Carolina's the play.

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
4-5-1
-6 GD · 2d rest
CAR
6-3-1
+3 GD · 1d 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.
  • B. Bussi is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Hurricanes are the hotter team by points pace (6-3-1 in their last 10).
  • The Rangers are underwater at -6 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
NYR
Expected in goal
I. Shesterkin
2 days rest.960 last start
Backup Igor Shesterkin · +21.3 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

CAR
Expected in goal
B. Bussi
back-to-back.900 last start
Backup Brandon Bussi · +2.8 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.

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

Back to the front page