Backcheck
Recap · NJD at NYI

Islanders shut out the Devils, 9-0

The Islanders stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.23–2.52 and won anyway.

By the ModelJul 11, 11:33 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
NJD
New Jersey Devils
0
Home
NYI
New York Islanders
9
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

4.23Expected goals2.52
63% share for the better side
44Shot attempts (SOG)24
5High-danger chances3
82Corsi (all attempts)34
Score-adjusted: 77% / 23%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

The Islanders won by 9 goals while being outshot in expected goals 2.52–4.23. The Devils controlled 63% of scoring chances at 5v5 and still lost 9-0—a goaltending heist where elite execution on one end met catastrophic failure on the other.

New York generated 0.074 xG per shot versus New Jersey's 0.052, turning volume disadvantage into precision. The Islanders took 24 shots; the Devils 44. On high-danger chances, the gap was starker—3 for New York, 5 for New Jersey—yet the scoreboard inverted. I. Sorokin made all 44 saves, stopping 4.23 goals above expected. J. Markstrom surrendered 6.48 goals beyond model, including five from low-danger spots where an NHL goalie must have those.

The finishing gap was the real story. New Jersey created 7 rebound opportunities and converted zero. New York scored 8 goals on 20 rush chances. Casey Cizikas's snap shot from the high slot (P3, 19:02) was the turning point—the moment when New York's efficiency overwhelmed New Jersey's volume.

The three stars belonged entirely to New York:

  • #11 A. Duclair (NYI) — 3G, 2A in 13:41
  • #77 T. DeAngelo (NYI) — 1G, 2A in 20:37
  • #13 M. Barzal (NYI) — 1G, 2A in 17:24

Sorokin's perfect night and Duclair's three-goal performance won't repeat. But the gap between New Jersey's 4.23 xG and zero goals requires both sides to cooperate—one team playing almost perfectly, the other failing at the most basic level.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NJD0 / 5 · 1.09 xG
NYI1 / 3 · 0.91 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NJD0 / 18 · 2.11 xG
NYI3 / 10 · 1.18 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NJD0 / 59 · 1.03 xG
NYI5 / 21 · 0.42 xG

NYI went 5-for-21 from low danger on 0.42 expected goals — 4.6 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NJD
0 G · 4.23 xG · -4.2
NYI
9 G · 2.52 xG · +6.5
012345678910
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
J. MarkstromNJD
-6.5
I. SorokinNYI
+4.2

NJD finished -4.2 against expected, NYI +6.5 — J. Markstrom (NJD) allowed 6.5 more goals than expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NJD
WRIST0/35
SNAP0/10
TIP IN0/8
SLAP0/4
BACKHAND0/4
DEFLECTED0/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
OTHER0/19
NYI
WRIST5/9
SNAP3/12
TIP IN0/0
SLAP0/3
BACKHAND1/2
DEFLECTED0/3
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/5
NJD
NYI
Off the rush
0 G on 31 · 1.98 xG
8 G on 20 · 1.62 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 7 · 1.12 xG
0 G on 1 · 0.19 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: NJD went 0-for-35, NYI 5-for-9. NYI scored 8 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
A. Duclair
#11 · L · NYI
3 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 13:41 TOI · +6
T. DeAngelo
#77 · D · NYI
1 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 20:37 TOI · +5
M. Barzal
#13 · C · NYI
1 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 17:24 TOI · +4
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • NYI won despite being outplayed by xG (37%). Goaltending or finishing carried them.
  • I. Sorokin (NYI) stopped 4.2 goals above expected.
  • J. Markstrom (NJD) gave up 6.5 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
  • NYI generated far more dangerous chances — 0.074 xG/shot vs 0.052. Quality over quantity.
  • NJD couldn't convert — 0/5 on high-danger chances. That won't happen often.
  • NYI scored 5 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • NYI was lethal off the rush — 8 goals on 20 rush chances.
  • NJD created 7 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • NYI outperformed their expected goals by 6.5 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.
  • NJD underperformed xG by 4.2 — wasted quality chances.
  • I. Sorokin (NYI) saved 4.2 goals above expected — stole the show.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · NJD at NYI · 7:30 PM ET

Devils at Islanders: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 11:33 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

51%
NYI
Model favorite
49%
51%
NJD50NYI

NYI by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score NJD 2.62.6 NYI; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

NJD← edge
edge →NYI
50.0%5v5 xG%48.0%
51.0%Corsi%49.0%
2.45xGF / 602.48
2.50xGA / 602.69
1.66Goals for / gm1.78
2.23Goals against / gm1.94
0.971PDO — luck, not skill0.993

The season numbers split 33 — no clear process edge — and PDO (0.971 vs 0.993) says NYI has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model can't pick a winner because there isn't one to pick. New Jersey and the Islanders project to 2.6 goals apiece, with the Islanders narrowly favored at 51% win probability—but that's the furthest thing from confidence.

The underlying numbers explain why. At even strength, New Jersey's expected goal share sits at 50.0% to the Islanders' 48.0%—a dead heat. Corsi splits are equally muddled: 51.0% for the Devils, 49.0% for New York. You're splitting hairs to declare an edge either way.

The real divergence lies in what's actually gone in the net. New Jersey's PDO sits at 0.971, meaning the team has run cold relative to its underlying play. The Islanders are at 0.993, a sign they've converted at a clip closer to their chances. For a team like the Devils feeling snake-bitten, regression cuts one way: upward. That's built into tonight's odds.

Timo Meier is the first name to track for New Jersey. He's carrying 1.08 expected goals per 60 at even strength—among the highest on the team—and has converted at a credible 6.7% rate while collecting 13 goals and 15 assists. More immediately dangerous: he's scored 3 high-danger chances, the kind of shot that ends up in the back of the net regardless of goaltending variance. Jack Hughes runs just behind at 0.88 xG/60 with 18 goals, but his 11.5% shooting percentage is the real red flag for New York's defense. Hughes isn't just creating; he's finishing at an elevated clip.

The Islanders counter with Anders Lee, who edges out every other forward in expected goal generation at 1.20 xG/60. He's collected 9 goals and 20 assists, and he's gotten 2 high-danger chances home, which is efficiency. Bo Horvat adds another layer of risk. His 0.87 xG/60 looks modest until you note the 12.8% shooting rate, the highest on the Islanders' lineup. Both of these guys can bury half-chances.

The defensive liabilities cut both ways. New Jersey's Johnathan Kovacevic will be exposed on the ice. So will the Islanders' Alexander Romanov. One team gets lucky pinning the weakness against the other's hot hand. Neither team is manufacturing an unusual volume of rebounds or high-danger sequences in their own end—both sit at 0% for rebound-goal rate—suggesting goaltending stability. That means mistakes punish hard.

This is a game where the team that executes cleanest in the final minutes probably wins. The models can't separate them, and neither should you.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NJD
Timo Meier13G 15A
1.08 xG/60 · 3 HD · 6.7% sh
Jack Hughes18G 17A
0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.5% 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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters