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

Islanders shut out the Oilers, 1-0

The verdict · stolen

The Islanders stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.08–6.04 and won anyway.

NYI 1 · EDM 0
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 12:59 AMxG: 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 Islanders won 1-0 despite ceding 60% of expected goals to Edmonton (6.04–4.08). The Oilers also held 66% of shot attempts at 35–18. They lost anyway. This was a heist.

I. Sorokin (NYI) stopped all 35 shots, posting a 1.000 SV% and +6.04 against expected. He was perfect on high-danger chances. The Oilers couldn't convert theirs: 0 for 9 on high-danger attempts. The Islanders went 0 for 7. When both teams miss their looks, goaltending decides.

Edmonton generated quality elsewhere. The Oilers created 7 rebound opportunities and converted zero. New York created 3 and converted none. At 13:42 of the third period, Anthony Duclair's snap shot from the high slot ended the game. It was the only goal the Islanders needed.

C. Ingram (EDM) was solid at 17 for 18 (0.944 SV%, +3.08 above expected), but the volume worked against him. Edmonton owned nearly every metric—shot attempts, expected goals, high-danger chances—and had nothing to show for it. The Islanders stole this one.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Jan 15
NYI
1
EDM
0

Islanders shut out the Oilers, 1-0

Chances 4.1 – 6.0Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Oilers deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
NYI
4.08
EDM
6.04
40% of the chances60%

The board read NYI 1, EDM 0. The chances read NYI 4.1, EDM 6.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NYI
−3.1
goals above expected
NYI4.08 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored
EDM6.04 expected · 0 scored
Expected
Scored

The Oilers left 6.0 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. P3 13:42NYIA. DuclairPP1–0
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NYI
31 shots
1
Final
90 shots
EDM
59 shots
0
NYI attackEDM attack
NYI EDM Goal
31
shots · 1 in
59
shots · 0 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NYIEDM
0 / 7
2.54 xG
High danger
0 / 9
2.40 xG
1 / 8
0.97 xG
Medium
0 / 28
3.05 xG
0 / 28
0.58 xG
Low
0 / 38
0.59 xG

The Oilers went 0 for 9 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
I. Sorokin
+6.0
NYI · 35/35
A+
C. Ingram
+3.1
EDM · 17/18
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Islanders shut out the Oilers, 1-0

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 12–12no goals
    2ndshots 4–13no goals
      3rdshots 2–10
      1. 13:42NYIA. Duclairpower play(C. Ritchie, M. Barzal)1–0

      score reads NYI–EDM

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

      The numbers

      XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
      4.08
      NYI chances
      Goals their shots were worth
      −3.1
      Finishing
      Goals below what those chances were worth
      1.023
      NYI puck luck
      Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
      36.4%
      Shot attempts
      Under half — they were outshot
      Split by club

      Who controlled the game

      4.08Expected goals6.04
      EDM 60% of the chance quality
      18Shots on goal35
      7High-danger chances9
      43All attempts (Corsi)75
      Adjusted for score: NYI 36% · EDM 64%
      Faceoffs · EDM won70%off36%neu40%def
      Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
      How the game was won

      The danger ladder

      shotsgoalsexpected
      High dangerslot & crease
      NYI0 / 7 · 2.54 xG
      EDM0 / 9 · 2.40 xG
      Medium dangermid-range
      NYI1 / 8 · 0.97 xG
      EDM0 / 28 · 3.05 xG
      Low dangerperimeter & point
      NYI0 / 28 · 0.58 xG
      EDM0 / 38 · 0.59 xG

      EDM went 0-for-28 from medium danger on 3.05 expected goals — 3.0 left on the table.

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

      Finishing vs expected

      expectedactual
      NYI
      1 G · 4.08 xG · -3.1
      EDM
      0 G · 6.04 xG · -6.0
      01234567

      NYI finished -3.1 against expected, EDM -6.0.

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

      Shot diet

      goalsshots
      NYI
      SNAP1/6
      WRIST0/21
      SLAP0/2
      BACKHAND0/1
      TIP IN0/1
      WRAP AROUND0/0
      OTHER0/12
      EDM
      SNAP0/35
      WRIST0/9
      SLAP0/7
      BACKHAND0/4
      TIP IN0/3
      WRAP AROUND0/1
      OTHER0/16
      NYI
      EDM
      Off the rush
      1 G on 20
      1.79 xG
      0 G on 42
      4.87 xG
      Off rebounds
      0 G on 3
      0.32 xG
      0 G on 7
      0.85 xG

      Snap shots carried the volume: NYI went 1-for-6, EDM 0-for-35.

      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. Sorokin
      NYI · 35/35 · 1.000
      +6.0
      saved above expected
      A+
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger0/92.4+2.4
      Medium0/283.0+3.0
      Low0/380.6+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

      C. Ingram
      EDM · 17/18 · .944
      +3.1
      saved above expected
      A+
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger0/72.5+2.5
      Medium1/81.0-0.0
      Low0/280.6+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

      90 shots · press play to watch the game back

      Where the shots came from

      NHL play-by-play coordinates
      NYI
      31 shots
      1
      Final
      90 shots
      EDM
      59 shots
      0
      NYI attackEDM attack
      NYI EDM Goal

      Each club shoots toward its own end — NYI left, EDM 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 · 1 A · 2 SOG · 20:52 on ice
      A. Duclair
      #11 · L · NYI
      1 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 17:25 on ice
      C. Ritchie
      #64 · C · NYI
      0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 11:30 on ice
      Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
      What the model said beforehand

      Before the game

      Written Thu, Jan 15
      Open the pre-game read
      Written from the numbers

      The read

      Edited for clarity
      ◆ By the ModelJul 12, 12:58 AMEdited 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 favors Edmonton at 55% win probability in what it projects as a 2.5–2.8 goal game. That edge is rooted in Alberta's control metrics: the Oilers are winning the 5v5 xG battle 52.0% to 48.0%, a meaningful gap that suggests they're generating the better chances at equal strength. Edmonton's Corsi% (50.0% vs. 49.0%) reinforces that pattern, though the difference is tighter—a reminder that possession metrics and shot quality don't always align perfectly.

      The more compelling argument for Edmonton surfaces in PDO regression. The Oilers are running a 0.982 PDO, which marks them as unusually cold from an efficiency standpoint. A team controlling play this well shouldn't see pucks bounce this badly. The Islanders' 0.993 PDO is closer to neutral, meaning neither team has luck advantage left to lose.

      Goaltending introduces uncertainty. T. Jarry is on a back-to-back, creating the possibility of a backup appearance or a starter managing fatigue. I. Sorokin faces the same schedule pressure. If either lineup shifts, the injury calculus changes.

      New York's offensive burden falls on Anders Lee (1.20 xG/60, 9G 20A) and Bo Horvat (0.87 xG/60, 18G 10A). Lee's 2 high-danger goals and 6.4% shooting suggest his goal rate remains unsustainably depressed relative to his chances, a canary for regression. Horvat has scored at a 12.8% clip on his looks—closer to sustainable—backed by 3 HD goals.

      Edmonton's advantage rests on Zach Hyman (1.23 xG/60, 14G 13A) and Connor McDavid (0.92 xG/60, 25G 33A). Hyman's 1 HD goal on heavy volume signals he's out-scoring his underlying play, a note for regression risk. McDavid's 5 HD goals and 13.7% shooting represent elite volume and elite finishing, the kind of combination that doesn't reverse easily.

      Defensively, each team has a liability. Alexander Romanov is the weak link on New York's blue line; Jake Walman is Edmonton's vulnerability. Neither team generates significant secondary scoring through high-danger play (both at 0% on rebound and HD-goal rates), which concentrates goal-scoring responsibility on the stars.

      The regression story leans Edmonton's way: Hyman's efficiency normalizes downward, McDavid simply operates at his ceiling, and the team's cold PDO corrects upward.

      What the model said beforehand

      The model's lean

      EDM 55%
      55%
      EDM
      Model favorite
      45%
      55%
      NYI50EDM

      EDM by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NYI 2.5–2.8 EDM; 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
      NYI← edge
      edge →EDM
      48.0%52.0%
      49.0%50.0%
      2.482.64
      2.692.47
      1.782.13
      1.942.29
      0.9930.982

      EDM holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.993 vs 0.982) says NYI has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

      Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
      Form · Last 10
      NYI
      6-3-1
      +6 GD · 1d rest
      EDM
      5-3-2
      +4 GD · 1d rest
      0.993
      NYI PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      0.982
      EDM PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      What decides it

      Keys to the game

      Where the edges live
      • The Oilers own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
      Regression watch
      • The Oilers' PDO is 0.982 — running cold, due for positive regression.
      Things to watch
      • The Oilers own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
      • T. Jarry is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
      • I. Sorokin is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
      • The Oilers' PDO is 0.982 — running cold, due for positive regression.
      Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

      Lineups

      NHL box score
      NYI
      Expected in goal
      I. Sorokin
      back-to-back.773 last start
      Backup Ilya Sorokin · +25.3 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.

      EDM
      Expected in goal
      T. Jarry
      back-to-back.852 last start
      Backup Connor Ingram · +1.7 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
      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
      EDM
      Zach Hyman14G 13A
      1.23 xG/60 · 1 HD · 13.0% sh
      Connor McDavid25G 33A
      0.92 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh
      Keep going

      Where to next