Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Los Angeles Kings sweater
← Tue, Jan 20 · the slate
Breakdown · NYR at LAK

A. Forsberg stands tall as the Kings edge the Rangers

FinalTue, Jan 20
NYRNew York Rangers3LAKLos Angeles Kings4
The verdict · coin flip

The Kings won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

NYR 3 · LAK 4
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:57 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

A. Forsberg stole this game. The Kings' goaltender saved 3.7 goals above expected — making 27 of 28 saves at 0.964 SV% — while the Rangers wasted a 10–5 edge in high-danger chances.

Expected goals barely split, 4.77 to 4.71. Yet the Rangers' quality didn't translate: zero goals on 10 high-danger attempts. The Kings, meanwhile, were ruthless in that zone, scoring 2 on 5 (40%). The Rangers underperformed their expected total by 1.71 goals, the margin that lost the game.

Shot volume favored the Rangers (36 on goal versus 27), but the Kings controlled 43% of attempts. On the rush, both teams were lethal: two apiece off 29 chances for the Kings, two off 20 for the Rangers. But the high-danger zone is where precision kills. The Rangers generated 11 rebound chances and converted zero. The Kings created four and buried one.

J.T. Miller's snap shot from the wing late in the third period was the turning point.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Jan 20
NYR
3
LAK
4

A. Forsberg stands tall as the Kings edge the Rangers

Chances 4.7 – 4.8Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Kings took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value
NYR
4.71
LAK
4.77
50% of the chances50%

The board read NYR 3, LAK 4. The chances read NYR 4.7, LAK 4.8.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
LAK
−0.8
goals above expected
LAK4.77 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
NYR4.71 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored

The Rangers left 1.7 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. P1 00:18LAKA. Kempe0–1
  2. P1 08:18NYRW. Cuylle1–1
  3. P1 09:00LAKK. Fiala1–2
  4. P1 16:36NYRJ. Miller2–2
  5. P2 04:23LAKT. Ward2–3
  6. P2 12:37LAKA. Kuzmenko2–4
  7. P3 19:33NYRJ. MillerPP3–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NYR
49 shots
3
Final
97 shots
LAK
48 shots
4
NYR attackLAK attack
NYR LAK Goal
49
shots · 3 in
48
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NYRLAK
0 / 10
2.35 xG
High danger
2 / 5
1.87 xG
2 / 14
1.76 xG
Medium
1 / 19
2.24 xG
1 / 40
0.60 xG
Low
1 / 47
0.66 xG

The Rangers went 0 for 10 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
A. Forsberg
+3.7
LAK · 27/28
A+
D. Kuemper
+2.7
LAK · 6/8
+1 more on the full breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

A. Forsberg stands tall as the Kings edge 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 8–8
  1. 00:18LAKA. Kempe(B. Clarke, C. Perry)0–1
  2. 08:18NYRW. Cuylle(S. Morrow, N. Laba)1–1
  3. 09:00LAKK. Fiala1–2
  4. 16:36NYRJ. Miller(M. Zibanejad, B. Schneider)2–2
2ndshots 16–11
  1. 04:23LAKT. Ward(J. Malott, S. Helenius)2–3
  2. 12:37LAKA. Kuzmenko(K. Fiala, A. Turcotte)2–4
3rdshots 12–8
  1. 19:33NYRJ. Millerpower play(V. Gavrikov, V. Trocheck)3–4

score reads NYR–LAK

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.77
LAK chances
Goals their shots were worth
−0.8
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.010
LAK puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
52.6%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.71Expected goals4.77
LAK 50% of the chance quality
36Shots on goal27
10High-danger chances5
64All attempts (Corsi)71
Adjusted for score: NYR 53% · LAK 47%
Faceoffs · LAK won22%off44%neu25%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NYR0 / 10 · 2.35 xG
LAK2 / 5 · 1.87 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NYR2 / 14 · 1.76 xG
LAK1 / 19 · 2.24 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NYR1 / 40 · 0.60 xG
LAK1 / 47 · 0.66 xG

NYR went 0-for-10 from high danger on 2.35 expected goals — 2.4 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NYR
3 G · 4.71 xG · -1.7
LAK
4 G · 4.77 xG · -0.8
0123456

NYR finished -1.7 against expected, LAK -0.8.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NYR
WRIST0/34
SLAP0/5
TIP IN1/4
SNAP1/3
BACKHAND0/1
DEFLECTED1/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
POKE0/0
OTHER0/15
LAK
WRIST1/20
SLAP1/9
TIP IN0/6
SNAP1/7
BACKHAND1/3
DEFLECTED0/2
WRAP AROUND0/0
POKE0/1
OTHER0/23
NYR
LAK
Off the rush
2 G on 20
1.78 xG
2 G on 29
2.26 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 11
1.94 xG
1 G on 4
0.54 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: NYR went 0-for-34, LAK 1-for-20. 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
J. Quick
NYR · 23/27 · .852
+0.8
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/51.9-0.1
Medium1/192.2+1.2
Low1/470.7-0.3

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. Forsberg
LAK · 27/28 · .964
+3.7
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/102.4+2.4
Medium2/141.8-0.2
Low1/400.6-0.4

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

D. Kuemper
LAK · 6/8 · .750
+2.7
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/102.4+2.4
Medium2/141.8-0.2
Low1/400.6-0.4

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

97 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
NYR
49 shots
3
Final
97 shots
LAK
48 shots
4
NYR attackLAK attack
NYR LAK Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — NYR left, LAK 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
2 G · 0 A · 7 SOG · 21:35 on ice · +1
K. Fiala
#22 · L · LAK
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 17:43 on ice · +2
V. Gavrikov
#44 · D · NYR
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 25:24 on ice · -1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Jan 20
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 1:54 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

Los Angeles is favored by the projection model, which assigns the Kings a 55% win probability in a 2.2-2.5 goal game. The lean rests on territorial control and conversion efficiency.

At 5v5, the Kings dominate both metrics. They generate expected goals at 52.0% to the Rangers' 48.0%, and control Corsi (a puck-possession proxy) at 52.0% to 49.0%. These gaps compound—more time with the puck yields more quality looks and forces tighter defensive structures.

The durability of these advantages matters. The Kings' PDO sits at 1.002, indicating they're converting at expected rates. The Rangers stand at 1.009, suggesting they're running slightly lucky. In a tight projection, structural edges beat variance. Los Angeles's advantages are repeatable; New York's are partly noise.

The recent record underscores this tilt. The Kings have weathered choppy waters over their last ten (3-3-4, minus-8 goal differential) but remained competitive. The Rangers are significantly worse—minus-17 goal differential—with offensive and defensive decline both evident. Los Angeles will enter as the sharper team.

Players to Watch

NYR

  • Adam Sykora — 0.91 xG/60, 3G 1A, 20.0% shooting
  • Gabe Perreault — 0.79 xG/60, 8G 11A, 2 HD goals, 13.1% shooting

LAK

  • Alex Laferriere — 0.87 xG/60, 16G 18A, 2 HD goals, 9.9% shooting
  • Jared Wright — 0.83 xG/60, 0G 4A

Both teams lack depth scoring and neither generates high-danger goals (0% HD goal rate) or converts rebounds (0% rebound goal rate). The Rangers' defensive liability is Vincent Iorio; the Kings' is Adrian Kempe. These vulnerabilities bite when you're defending most of the night, which New York will be.

The Kings' structural edge should let them dictate play and create tighter scoring chances. Whether they finish is the only open question.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

LAK 55%
55%
LAK
Model favorite
45%
55%
NYR50LAK

LAK by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NYR 2.2–2.5 LAK; 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 →LAK
48.0%52.0%
49.0%52.0%
2.262.42
2.402.20
1.881.85
1.901.71
1.0091.002

LAK holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.009 vs 1.002) 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 · 3d rest
LAK
3-3-4
-8 GD · 2d rest
1.009
NYR PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.002
LAK PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Kings own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Kings drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Things to watch
  • The Kings own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Kings drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • The Kings are the hotter team by points pace (3-3-4 in their last 10).
  • The Kings are underwater at -8 goal differential over their last 10.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

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

No completed game on file for this club yet.

LAK
Expected in goal
A. Forsberg
2 days rest.939 last start
Backup Darcy Kuemper · -5.8 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
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
LAK
Alex Laferriere16G 18A
0.87 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.9% sh
Jared Wright0G 4A
0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page