Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a New York Islanders sweater
← Tue, Feb 3 · the slate
Breakdown · PIT at NYI

Islanders steal one from the Penguins against the run of play

Final / OTTue, Feb 3
PITPittsburgh Penguins4NYINew York Islanders5
The verdict · stolen

The Islanders stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.44–2.58 and won anyway.

PIT 4 · NYI 5
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 3:53 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 5–4 in overtime despite controlling only 37% of expected goals. Pittsburgh dominated at 5v5—63% of xG—and fired 35 shots to 23, but New York converted their chances and escaped with the result.

The performance gap: xG finished 2.58–4.44, high-danger chances went 5–6. This wasn't luck; it was a mismatch that should have favored Pittsburgh.

S. Skinner cost the Penguins. He stopped 18 of 23 shots but posted a 0.783 SV%, surrendering 2.42 goals more than expected. I. Sorokin kept the Islanders alive: 31 of 35, 0.886 SV%, stealing moments when they deserved none.

New York's precision carried the rest. They buried 2 of 5 high-danger chances (40%) and scored 3 from low-danger looks—finishing that makes goalies look foolish. Off the rush, the Islanders converted 2 of 20 attempts; Pittsburgh scored twice on 33 tries. Both teams generated 4 rebound chances, but only New York cashed one.

Bo Horvat ended it at 00:52 of overtime with a snap shot from the high slot. He finished with 2 goals and 1 assist. M. Barzal logged 1 goal and 2 assists in 24:16. M. Schaefer posted 1 goal and 1 assist across 27:59.

New York outperformed their xG by 2.4 goals—elite execution masking a result they didn't earn. They stole this one.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · OT · Feb 3
PIT
4
NYI
5

Islanders steal one from the Penguins against the run of play

Chances 4.4 – 2.6Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Penguins deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
PIT
4.44
NYI
2.58
63% of the chances37%

The board read PIT 4, NYI 5. The chances read PIT 4.4, NYI 2.6.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NYI
+2.4
goals above expected
NYI2.58 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
PIT4.44 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored

The Islanders scored 2.4 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 12:09PITA. Mantha1–0
  2. P1 18:41NYIB. Horvat1–1
  3. P1 19:56NYIM. SchaeferPP1–2
  4. P2 03:52PITE. Chinakhov2–2
  5. P2 14:09PITB. Rust3–2
  6. P3 08:37NYIM. Barzal3–3
  7. P3 10:40PITJ. Brazeau4–3
+2 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
PIT
50 shots
4
Final
85 shots
NYI
35 shots
5
PIT attackNYI attack
PIT NYI Goal
50
shots · 4 in
35
shots · 5 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
PITNYI
1 / 6
1.60 xG
High danger
2 / 5
1.28 xG
3 / 22
2.20 xG
Medium
0 / 7
0.77 xG
0 / 36
0.64 xG
Low
3 / 34
0.52 xG

The Islanders buried 2 of 5 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B
I. Sorokin
+0.4
NYI · 31/35
F
S. Skinner
−2.4
PIT · 18/23
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Islanders steal one from the Penguins against the run of play

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 11–10
  1. 12:09PITA. Mantha(J. Brazeau)1–0
  2. 18:41NYIB. Horvat(A. Lee)1–1
  3. 19:56NYIM. Schaeferpower play(O. Palat, B. Horvat)1–2
2ndshots 12–5
  1. 03:52PITE. Chinakhov(T. Novak, E. Karlsson)2–2
  2. 14:09PITB. Rust(S. Crosby, I. Solovyov)3–2
3rdshots 12–7
  1. 08:37NYIM. Barzal(A. Pelech)3–3
  2. 10:40PITJ. Brazeau(B. Kulak)4–3
  3. 15:24NYIR. Pulock(M. Barzal, S. Holmstrom)4–4
OTshots 0–1
  1. 00:52NYIB. Horvat(M. Barzal, M. Schaefer)4–5

score reads PIT–NYI

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
2.58
NYI chances
Goals their shots were worth
+2.4
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.046
NYI puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
41.8%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.44Expected goals2.58
PIT 63% of the chance quality
35Shots on goal23
6High-danger chances5
64All attempts (Corsi)46
Adjusted for score: PIT 57% · NYI 43%
Faceoffs · NYI won47%off62%neu55%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
PIT1 / 6 · 1.60 xG
NYI2 / 5 · 1.28 xG
Medium dangermid-range
PIT3 / 22 · 2.20 xG
NYI0 / 7 · 0.77 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
PIT0 / 36 · 0.64 xG
NYI3 / 34 · 0.52 xG

NYI went 3-for-34 from low danger on 0.52 expected goals — 2.5 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
PIT
4 G · 4.44 xG · -0.4
NYI
5 G · 2.58 xG · +2.4
0123456

PIT finished -0.4 against expected, NYI +2.4.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
PIT
SNAP2/28
WRIST1/10
SLAP0/2
TIP IN1/5
BACKHAND0/5
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/14
NYI
SNAP2/14
WRIST0/7
SLAP2/9
TIP IN0/2
BACKHAND1/2
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/11
PIT
NYI
Off the rush
2 G on 33
2.99 xG
2 G on 20
1.37 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 4
0.74 xG
1 G on 4
0.95 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: PIT went 2-for-28, NYI 2-for-14. PIT 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. Skinner
PIT · 18/23 · .783
-2.4
saved above expected
F
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/51.3-0.7
Medium0/70.8+0.8
Low3/340.5-2.5

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

I. Sorokin
NYI · 31/35 · .886
+0.4
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/61.6+0.6
Medium3/222.2-0.8
Low0/360.6+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

85 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
PIT
50 shots
4
Final
85 shots
NYI
35 shots
5
PIT attackNYI attack
PIT NYI Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — PIT left, NYI 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
B. Horvat
#14 · C · NYI
2 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 24:35 on ice · +5
M. Barzal
#13 · C · NYI
1 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 24:16 on ice · +4
M. Schaefer
#48 · D · NYI
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 27:59 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Feb 3
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 3:51 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 pregame models don't have a favorite here. MoneyPuck projects a 2.7-2.6 Pittsburgh win with both teams at 50% win probability—as close to a pick'em as exists.

The Penguins bring recent momentum. They've gone 7-1-2 in their last ten games. At even strength, Pittsburgh controls the play. The Penguins generate 51.0% of expected goals to New York's 48.0%, a meaningful edge in games decided at five-on-five. Their Corsi sits at 50.0% to the Islanders' 49.0%. The underlying numbers belong to Pittsburgh, yet their PDO of 1.012 suggests they've overperformed their process—unsustainable luck. New York's 0.993 indicates the opposite.

Neither team converts hard-chance opportunities effectively. Pittsburgh and New York both carry 0% hard-chance goal rates and 0% rebound goal rates, indicating either poor finishing or exceptional goaltending.

Rickard Rakell is Pittsburgh's offensive engine with 13 goals and a 12.1% shooting percentage, generating 1.01 expected goals per 60 minutes. Filip Hallander won't provide support—he's undergoing further evaluation following his recall from his conditioning loan with the AHL Penguins, likely making him unavailable.

Anders Lee carries New York's offense with 9 goals, 20 assists, and 2 hard-chance goals on a 6.4% shooting percentage, generating 1.20 expected goals per 60 minutes. Bo Horvat's 18 goals represent the Islanders' purest output. He generates 0.87 expected goals per 60 and shoots at 12.8%, with 3 hard-chance goals. That efficiency—Horvat's 12.8% shooting—gives New York a pathway to outscoring Pittsburgh despite the underlying disadvantage.

Caleb Jones is Pittsburgh's defensive weak link; Alexander Romanov plays the same role for the Islanders. Neither team has the personnel to erase advantages built through even-strength play.

The model is right to call this even. Pittsburgh's edge in process is real but modest. New York's talent—particularly Horvat's efficiency—can absorb it. This is a true coin flip.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

PIT 51%
51%
PIT
Model favorite
51%
49%
PIT50NYI

PIT by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score PIT 2.7–2.6 NYI; 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
PIT← edge
edge →NYI
51.0%48.0%
50.0%49.0%
2.662.48
2.552.69
2.451.78
2.121.94
1.0120.993

PIT holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.012 vs 0.993) says PIT has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
PIT
7-1-2
+16 GD · 3d rest
NYI
5-5-0
-2 GD · 2d rest
1.012
PIT PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.993
NYI PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Penguins own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
Things to watch
  • The Penguins own the underlying play — 51.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Penguins are the hotter team by points pace (7-1-2 in their last 10).
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
PIT
Expected in goal
S. Skinner
3 days rest.750 last start
Backup Stuart Skinner · +8.3 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

NYI
Expected in goal
I. Sorokin
2 days rest.905 last start
Backup Ilya Sorokin · +25.3 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
PIT
Filip Hallander0G 3A
1.28 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% sh
Rickard Rakell13G 13A
1.01 xG/60 · 3 HD · 12.1% 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
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page