Breakdown · NYR at PHI

Rangers pull away from the Flyers

FinalSat, Jan 17

NYRNew York Rangers6 PHIPhiladelphia Flyers3

The verdict · earned

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

NYR 6 · PHI 3

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:07 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 Rangers won 6-3 despite shot attempts splitting 28-28. New York controlled 56% of 5v5 expected goals (4.19-3.29). The difference was execution: the Rangers generated 0.069 expected goals per shot against Philadelphia's 0.051.

The Rangers overperformed their xG by 1.81 goals—elite shooting or lucky bounces. High-danger chances went 6-4 for New York.

Both teams scored on the rush, but New York was more efficient. Philadelphia scored 2 goals on 29 rush chances. New York scored 3 goals on 34 rush attempts. The Rangers created 4 rebound opportunities while crashing the net.

Philadelphia's goaltending was mixed. S. Martin (NYR) stopped 25 of 28 for a 0.893 SV%. S. Ersson posted a 0.880 SV% and outperformed expectations by 0.74 goals. A. Kolosov gave up 2.6 goals more than expected on limited work (0/3 saves, 0.000 SV%).

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Jan 17

NYR

PHI

Rangers pull away from the Flyers

Chances 4.2 – 3.3Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Rangers earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

NYR

4.19

PHI

3.29

56% of the chances44%

The board read NYR 6, PHI 3. The chances read NYR 4.2, PHI 3.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations

Luck check

NYR

+1.8

goals above expected

NYR4.19 expected · 6 scored

Expected

Scored

PHI3.29 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

The Rangers scored 1.8 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season

Every goal, in order

P1 06:22PHIT. Konecny0–1
P1 07:05NYRA. Panarin1–1
P1 07:26NYRM. Zibanejad2–1
P1 08:25NYRB. Othmann3–1
P2 05:38NYRM. ZibanejadPP4–1
P2 08:25NYRM. Zibanejad5–1
P2 14:31NYRA. Panarin6–1

+2 more on the full breakdown

NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model

Where the shots came from

NYR

48 shots

Final

91 shots

PHI

43 shots

NYR PHI GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 6 in

shots · 3 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

NYRPHI

0 / 4

0.91 xG

High danger

1 / 6

1.33 xG

5 / 28

2.92 xG

Medium

1 / 13

1.33 xG

1 / 29

0.37 xG

Low

1 / 46

0.63 xG

High-danger looks: NYR 0 of 4, PHI 1 of 6.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance

In the net

B+

S. Ersson

+1.2

PHI · 22/25

B+

A. Kolosov

+1.2

PHI · 0/3

+1 more on the full breakdown

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Rangers pull away from the Flyers

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 6–8

06:22PHIT. Konecny(T. Zegras, T. Sanheim)0–1
07:05NYRA. Panarin(V. Trocheck, A. Lafrenière)1–1
07:26NYRM. Zibanejad(J. Miller, B. Schneider)2–1
08:25NYRB. Othmann(W. Cuylle)3–1

2ndshots 13–7

05:38NYRM. Zibanejadpower play(A. Panarin, V. Trocheck)4–1
08:25NYRM. Zibanejad(J. Miller, S. Morrow)5–1
14:31NYRA. Panarin(A. Lafrenière)6–1
16:48PHIT. Sanheimshorthanded(T. Konecny)6–2

3rdshots 9–13

08:01PHIT. Zegras(D. Barkey, O. Tippett)6–3

score reads NYR–PHI

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

4.19

NYR chances

Goals their shots were worth

+1.8

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.052

NYR puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

48.4%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.19Expected goals3.29

NYR 56% of the chance quality

28Shots on goal28

4High-danger chances6

61All attempts (Corsi)65

Adjusted for score: NYR 41% · PHI 59%

Faceoffs · PHI won38%off35%neu36%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

NYR0 / 4 · 0.91 xG

PHI1 / 6 · 1.33 xG

Medium dangermid-range

NYR5 / 28 · 2.92 xG

PHI1 / 13 · 1.33 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

NYR1 / 29 · 0.37 xG

PHI1 / 46 · 0.63 xG

NYR went 5-for-28 from medium danger on 2.92 expected goals — 2.1 above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

NYR

6 G · 4.19 xG · +1.8

PHI

3 G · 3.29 xG · -0.3

01234567

NYR finished +1.8 against expected, PHI -0.3.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

NYR

SNAP5/34

WRIST1/3

TIP IN0/5

SLAP0/3

BACKHAND0/0

WRAP AROUND0/1

BAT0/1

DEFLECTED0/1

OTHER0/13

PHI

SNAP2/14

WRIST1/19

TIP IN0/2

SLAP0/2

BACKHAND0/5

WRAP AROUND0/1

BAT0/0

DEFLECTED0/0

OTHER0/22

NYR

PHI

Off the rush

3 G on 34

3.05 xG

2 G on 29

2.52 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 4

0.76 xG

0 G on 1

0.17 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: NYR went 5-for-34, PHI 2-for-14. NYR 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

S. Martin

NYR · 25/28 · .893

+0.3

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/61.3+0.3

Medium1/131.3+0.3

Low1/460.6-0.4

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

S. Ersson

PHI · 22/25 · .880

+1.2

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/40.9+0.9

Medium5/282.9-2.1

Low1/290.4-0.6

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

A. Kolosov

PHI · 0/3 · .000

+1.2

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/40.9+0.9

Medium5/282.9-2.1

Low1/290.4-0.6

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

91 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

NYR

48 shots

Final

91 shots

PHI

43 shots

NYR PHI GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — NYR left, PHI 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

A. Panarin

#10 · L · NYR

2 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 20:56 on ice

M. Zibanejad

#93 · C · NYR

3 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 20:02 on ice

T. Sanheim

#6 · D · PHI

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 24:00 on ice

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Jan 17

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:05 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 projects a NYR 2.2 - 2.5 PHI game with the Flyers at 54% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

Philadelphia owns the underlying play. At 5v5, the Flyers generate 51.0% of expected goals to New York's 48.0%—a meaningful edge in shot quality that typically translates to wins over time. Possession is nearly even: Corsi% sits at NYR 49.0% versus PHI 48.0%. Shooting luck is nearly identical—NYR 1.009 PDO, PHI 1.008 PDO.

The difference comes down to four skaters. Adam Sykora (3G 1A, 0.91 xG/60, 20.0% shooting) and Gabe Perreault (8G 11A, 0.79 xG/60, 2 HD goals, 13.1% shooting) anchor New York's offense. Philadelphia counters with Owen Tippett (19G 18A, 0.88 xG/60, 2 HD goals, 12.1% shooting) and Christian Dvorak (12G 21A, 0.81 xG/60, 3 HD goals, 11.2% shooting).

Both teams finish at identical rates: 0% on high-danger chances, 0% on rebounds. Defense becomes the swing factor. Vincent Iorio is New York's weak link. Dvorak serves that role for Philadelphia. In a game this tight, marginal edges compound.

The 54% edge for Philadelphia isn't a ringing endorsement. It reflects a game that could flip on a single bounce. This is a coin flip that happens to land heads.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

PHI 54%

54%

PHI

Model favorite

46%

54%

NYR50PHI

PHI by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NYR 2.2–2.5 PHI; 19% 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 →PHI

48.0%51.0%

49.0%48.0%

2.262.26

2.402.20

1.881.96

1.901.82

1.0091.008

PHI holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.009 vs 1.008) says NYR has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · No games yet

NYR

0-0-0

+0 GD · 0d rest

PHI

0-0-0

+0 GD · 0d rest

1.009

NYR PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.008

PHI PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Flyers own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.

Things to watch

The Flyers own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.

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

PHI

Owen Tippett19G 18A

0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.1% sh

Christian Dvorak12G 21A

0.81 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.2% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page