Motion-blurred skater in a New York Islanders sweater
Breakdown · TOR at NYI

Islanders edge the Maple Leafs in overtime

The verdict · stolen

The Islanders stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.08–2.75 and won anyway.

TOR 3 · NYI 4
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 11:07 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

The Maple Leafs held the underlying edge but lost 4–3 in overtime. Expected goals split 2.75–3.08, a 47–53 percent split favoring Toronto. The Islanders overperformed their xG by 1.25 goals. J. Woll simultaneously underperformed, surrendering 1.2 more than expected.

The shot volume tilt went New York's way: 54 percent of shot attempts (25–21 on goal). High-danger chances stayed even at 3–3. The rush game differentiated both offenses: New York scored 3 goals on 33 rush chances; Toronto scored 2 on 23.

M. Schaefer's snap shot from the high slot at 04:11 of overtime ended it. Woll finished 21 of 25 at 0.840 SV%. D. Rittich posted 0.857 on 18 of 21 stops.

Three Stars

  • #13 M. Barzal (NYI) — 2A in 22:49
  • #34 A. Matthews (TOR) — 2G in 22:29
  • #48 M. Schaefer (NYI) — 2G in 22:11
The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · OT · Jan 3
TOR
3
NYI
4

Islanders edge the Maple Leafs in overtime

Chances 3.1 – 2.8Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Islanders took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value
TOR
3.08
NYI
2.75
53% of the chances47%

The board read TOR 3, NYI 4. The chances read TOR 3.1, NYI 2.8.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NYI
+1.3
goals above expected
NYI2.75 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
TOR3.08 expected · 3 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. P2 01:10NYIA. Pelech0–1
  2. P2 09:30TORA. Matthews1–1
  3. P2 17:19TORA. Matthews2–1
  4. P3 11:10NYIM. Schaefer2–2
  5. P3 12:12TORN. Robertson3–2
  6. P3 17:15NYIE. Heineman3–3
  7. OT 04:11NYIM. Schaefer3–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
TOR
39 shots
3
Final
84 shots
NYI
45 shots
4
TOR attackNYI attack
TOR NYI Goal
39
shots · 3 in
45
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
TORNYI
0 / 3
0.74 xG
High danger
2 / 3
0.70 xG
3 / 15
1.78 xG
Medium
1 / 12
1.10 xG
0 / 36
0.55 xG
Low
1 / 43
0.95 xG

The Maple Leafs went 0 for 3 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
C
D. Rittich
+0.1
NYI · 18/21
D-
J. Woll
−1.3
TOR · 21/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Islanders edge the Maple Leafs in overtime

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 7–7no goals
    2ndshots 11–6
    1. 01:10NYIA. Pelech(J. Drouin)0–1
    2. 09:30TORA. Matthews1–1
    3. 17:19TORA. Matthews(B. McMann, M. Domi)2–1
    3rdshots 3–10
    1. 11:10NYIM. Schaefer(J. Drouin, J. Pageau)2–2
    2. 12:12TORN. Robertson(N. Roy)3–2
    3. 17:15NYIE. Heineman(M. Barzal, T. DeAngelo)3–3
    OTshots 0–2
    1. 04:11NYIM. Schaefer(M. Barzal, E. Heineman)3–4

    score reads TOR–NYI

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    2.75
    NYI chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    +1.3
    Finishing
    Goals above what those chances were worth
    1.013
    NYI puck luck
    About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
    51.8%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    3.08Expected goals2.75
    TOR 53% of the chance quality
    21Shots on goal25
    3High-danger chances3
    54All attempts (Corsi)58
    Adjusted for score: TOR 48% · NYI 52%
    Faceoffs · NYI won50%off43%neu38%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    TOR0 / 3 · 0.74 xG
    NYI2 / 3 · 0.70 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    TOR3 / 15 · 1.78 xG
    NYI1 / 12 · 1.10 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    TOR0 / 36 · 0.55 xG
    NYI1 / 43 · 0.95 xG

    NYI went 2-for-3 from high danger on 0.70 expected goals — 1.3 above expected.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    TOR
    3 G · 3.08 xG · -0.1
    NYI
    4 G · 2.75 xG · +1.3
    012345

    TOR finished -0.1 against expected, NYI +1.3.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    TOR
    SNAP2/25
    WRIST1/2
    BACKHAND0/6
    TIP IN0/3
    SLAP0/2
    DEFLECTED0/1
    BAT0/0
    OTHER0/15
    NYI
    SNAP2/8
    WRIST2/23
    BACKHAND0/3
    TIP IN0/6
    SLAP0/3
    DEFLECTED0/1
    BAT0/1
    OTHER0/13
    TOR
    NYI
    Off the rush
    2 G on 23
    1.93 xG
    3 G on 33
    2.13 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 2
    0.21 xG
    0 G on 2
    0.21 xG

    Snap shots carried the volume: TOR went 2-for-25, NYI 2-for-8. NYI 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
    J. Woll
    TOR · 21/25 · .840
    -1.3
    saved above expected
    D-
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger2/30.7-1.3
    Medium1/121.1+0.1
    Low1/430.9-0.1

    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

    D. Rittich
    NYI · 18/21 · .857
    +0.1
    saved above expected
    C
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/30.7+0.7
    Medium3/151.8-1.2
    Low0/360.6+0.6

    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

    84 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    TOR
    39 shots
    3
    Final
    84 shots
    NYI
    45 shots
    4
    TOR attackNYI attack
    TOR NYI Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — TOR left, NYI 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
    M. Barzal
    #13 · C · NYI
    0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 22:49 on ice · +1
    A. Matthews
    #34 · C · TOR
    2 G · 0 A · 6 SOG · 22:29 on ice
    M. Schaefer
    #48 · D · NYI
    2 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 22:11 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Sat, Jan 3
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 11:06 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

    This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find. The model projects a 2.5–2.7 xG game with the Islanders at 54% win probability.

    The Islanders will control play. Their 49.0% Corsi to Toronto's 45.0% means expect the Leafs defending their own end for stretches. Toronto's 46.0% xG% to New York's 48.0% hints at better chance quality when they attack, but shot volume favors the Islanders. Neither team's PDO (Toronto 1.002, New York 0.993) suggests unsustainable luck — the game will likely play close to expectation.

    D. Hildeby on a back-to-back bears watching. A backup start or a tired starter becomes a potential edge for Toronto's offense.

    The forwards matchup shapes everything. Auston Matthews (1.10 xG/60, 17 goals, 10.6% shooting) is Toronto's high-volume threat; John Tavares (0.91 xG/60, 15 goals, 24 assists, 12.4% shooting) adds further scoring depth. Anders Lee (1.20 xG/60, 9 goals, 6.4% shooting) generates the Islanders' best chances but hasn't converted at volume. Bo Horvat (0.87 xG/60, 18 goals, 12.8% shooting) leads the Islanders in goals despite lower expected-goal generation than Lee.

    Both teams sit at 0% for high-danger goals and 0% for rebound conversions — they don't score from scrambles or second chances.

    Toronto's Bo Groulx and New York's Alexander Romanov represent each team's defensive vulnerability.

    The Islanders have the edge. But in a game that hinges on possession versus efficiency, the gap is negligible.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    NYI 54%
    54%
    NYI
    Model favorite
    46%
    54%
    TOR50NYI

    NYI by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score TOR 2.5–2.7 NYI; 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
    TOR← edge
    edge →NYI
    46.0%48.0%
    45.0%49.0%
    2.242.48
    2.672.69
    2.091.78
    2.521.94
    1.0020.993

    NYI holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.002 vs 0.993) says TOR has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    TOR
    5-4-1
    -3 GD · 1d rest
    NYI
    5-4-1
    -4 GD · 2d rest
    1.002
    TOR PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    0.993
    NYI PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Where the edges live
    • The Islanders drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    Things to watch
    • The Islanders drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    • D. Hildeby is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    TOR
    Expected in goal
    D. Hildeby
    back-to-back.957 last start
    Backup Joseph Woll · -6.6 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.

    NYI
    Expected in goal
    D. Rittich
    2 days rest.643 last start
    Backup Ilya Sorokin · +25.3 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
    TOR
    Auston Matthews17G 13A
    1.10 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.6% sh
    John Tavares15G 24A
    0.91 xG/60 · 3 HD · 12.4% sh
    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
    Keep going

    Where to next