Motion-blurred skater in a Anaheim Ducks sweater
Breakdown · NYR at ANA

Ducks hold off the Rangers

The verdict · earned

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

NYR 3 · ANA 5
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:40 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

Both teams created four high-danger chances, yet Anaheim converted two while New York converted zero. The scoreboard read 5–3 Ducks, but the tied high-danger count explains the result: ruthless efficiency in dangerous areas.

The Ducks controlled 54% of shot attempts (26–22) and dominated expected goals 4.59–3.29 (58–42). Yet the quality gap was sharper: Anaheim generated 0.083 expected goals per shot versus New York's 0.062, a meaningful advantage in how they deployed their opportunities.

New York scored twice from low-danger spots — chances L. Dostal should have stopped. Dostal made 19 of 22 (0.864 SV%), while S. Martin stopped 21 of 25 (0.840). Martin beat his expected save percentage by 0.59, yet the gap still favored Anaheim's opportunism.

The Rangers' power play was a bright spot: 2 goals on 15 shots, 1.43 expected goals, offsetting their even-strength deficit. Anaheim's transition game proved decisive. The Ducks scored twice on 28 rush attempts, showing the conversion efficiency New York (2 goals on 20 rushes) could not match.

The turning point: Cutter Gauthier's snap shot from the point at 19:24 of the third period crystallized Anaheim's dominance.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Jan 19
NYR
3
ANA
5

Ducks hold off the Rangers

Chances 3.3 – 4.6Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Ducks earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
NYR
3.29
ANA
4.59
42% of the chances58%

The board read NYR 3, ANA 5. The chances read NYR 3.3, ANA 4.6.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
ANA
+0.4
goals above expected
ANA4.59 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
NYR3.29 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. P1 04:00NYRM. Robertson1–0
  2. P1 11:31ANAM. McTavish1–1
  3. P2 04:03NYRA. PanarinPP2–1
  4. P2 08:29ANAJ. Viel2–2
  5. P2 18:02ANAA. KillornPP2–3
  6. P3 01:01ANAC. Gauthier2–4
  7. P3 07:11NYRV. GavrikovPP3–4
+1 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NYR
39 shots
3
Final
79 shots
ANA
40 shots
5
NYR attackANA attack
NYR ANA Goal
39
shots · 3 in
40
shots · 5 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NYRANA
0 / 4
0.92 xG
High danger
2 / 4
2.22 xG
1 / 17
1.83 xG
Medium
3 / 16
1.73 xG
2 / 32
0.54 xG
Low
0 / 35
0.64 xG

The Rangers went 0 for 4 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B
S. Martin
+0.6
NYR · 21/25
B
L. Dostal
+0.3
ANA · 19/22
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Ducks hold off the Rangers

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 6–5
  1. 04:00NYRM. Robertson(M. Zibanejad, J. Miller)1–0
  2. 11:31ANAM. McTavish(P. Mintyukov)1–1
2ndshots 9–14
  1. 04:03NYRA. Panarinpower play(V. Trocheck, J. Miller)2–1
  2. 08:29ANAJ. Viel(R. Poehling)2–2
  3. 18:02ANAA. Killornpower play(J. Trouba)2–3
3rdshots 7–7
  1. 01:01ANAC. Gauthier(D. Helleson)2–4
  2. 07:11NYRV. Gavrikovpower play(A. Panarin, V. Trocheck)3–4
  3. 19:24ANAC. Gauthierempty net(J. LaCombe)3–5

score reads NYR–ANA

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.59
ANA chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.4
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.034
ANA puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
50.9%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.29Expected goals4.59
ANA 58% of the chance quality
22Shots on goal26
4High-danger chances4
53All attempts (Corsi)55
Adjusted for score: NYR 50% · ANA 50%
Faceoffs · ANA won45%off63%neu29%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NYR0 / 4 · 0.92 xG
ANA2 / 4 · 2.22 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NYR1 / 17 · 1.83 xG
ANA3 / 16 · 1.73 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NYR2 / 32 · 0.54 xG
ANA0 / 35 · 0.64 xG

NYR went 2-for-32 from low danger on 0.54 expected goals — 1.5 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NYR
3 G · 3.29 xG · -0.3
ANA
5 G · 4.59 xG · +0.4
0123456

NYR finished -0.3 against expected, ANA +0.4.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NYR
SNAP1/12
SLAP2/9
WRIST0/6
TIP IN0/7
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/2
BAT0/0
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/14
ANA
SNAP4/24
SLAP0/6
WRIST0/4
TIP IN0/3
BACKHAND1/1
DEFLECTED0/0
BAT0/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
OTHER0/15
NYR
ANA
Off the rush
2 G on 20
1.54 xG
2 G on 28
1.90 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 7
1.08 xG
2 G on 5
0.94 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: NYR went 1-for-12, ANA 4-for-24. NYR scored 2 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 · 21/25 · .840
+0.6
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/42.2+0.2
Medium3/161.7-1.3
Low0/350.6+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

L. Dostal
ANA · 19/22 · .864
+0.3
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/40.9+0.9
Medium1/171.8+0.8
Low2/320.5-1.5

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

79 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
NYR
39 shots
3
Final
79 shots
ANA
40 shots
5
NYR attackANA attack
NYR ANA Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — NYR left, ANA 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
J. Miller
#8 · C · NYR
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 22:41 on ice · -2
A. Panarin
#10 · L · NYR
1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 21:15 on ice · -1
V. Trocheck
#16 · C · NYR
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 19:50 on ice · -1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Jan 19
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:48 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 an Anaheim 2.4–2.7 New York goal range with the Ducks at 55% win probability.

Both teams are bleeding goals. The Ducks sit minus-12 over their last 10; the Rangers are minus-17. But Anaheim dominates the underlying play. The Ducks generate 52.0% expected goals at even strength versus New York's 48.0%, controlling possession at 52.0% Corsi. They own the territorial tilt.

The wrinkle: Anaheim's 0.981 PDO reads as outright bad puck luck, while New York's 1.009 reads as unsustainable good luck. Expect positive regression favoring the Ducks.

Goaltending adds a layer. V. Husso plays on the back-to-back for the Rangers — watch for either a backup or a tired starter.

Beckett Sennecke is Anaheim's engine. He posts 1.03 expected goals per 60 minutes, 20 goals and 19 assists, and drives 8 high-danger chances. That volume makes him the Ducks' most dangerous player. Cutter Gauthier, also a driver at 0.99 xG/60, brings 25 goals and 16 assists to stress New York's depth.

For the Rangers, Adam Sykora carries 0.91 xG/60 with a blistering 20.0% shooting rate — proof he's heating up on just 3 goals and 1 assist. Gabe Perreault adds 8 goals with a 13.1% shooting clip and 2 high-danger chances, a secondary threat.

New York's defensive liability sits with Vincent Iorio. Anaheim's is Mason McTavish. Neither team is converting off the rush — both sit at 0% high-danger goal rate and 0% rebound goal rate. This means the Ducks' volume edge matters even more. They'll pile chances; at worst, they'll eventually find one.

The Ducks are cold but own what matters: the puck. The Rangers are warm but own nothing underneath. When PDO regresses, this game's expected winner becomes the actual one.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

ANA 55%
55%
ANA
Model favorite
45%
55%
NYR50ANA

ANA by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NYR 2.4–2.7 ANA; 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 →ANA
48.0%52.0%
49.0%52.0%
2.262.80
2.402.59
1.882.09
1.902.32
1.0090.981

ANA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.009 vs 0.981) says NYR has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
NYR
2-6-2
-17 GD · 2d rest
ANA
3-6-1
-12 GD · 1d rest
1.009
NYR PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.981
ANA PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Ducks own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Ducks drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Ducks' PDO is 0.981 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Things to watch
  • The Ducks own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Ducks drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • V. Husso is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Ducks are underwater at -12 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Rangers are underwater at -17 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Ducks' PDO is 0.981 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
NYR
Expected in goal
S. Martin
2 days rest.893 last start
Backup Igor Shesterkin · +21.3 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

ANA
Expected in goal
V. Husso
back-to-back.944 last start
Backup Lukas Dostal · -2.9 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
ANA
Beckett Sennecke20G 19A
1.03 xG/60 · 8 HD · 13.5% sh
Cutter Gauthier25G 16A
0.99 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.9% sh
Keep going

Where to next