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

V. Husso stands tall as the Ducks edge the Islanders

The verdict · coin flip

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

NYI 1 · ANA 5
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 5:36 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 5-1 final masked a close underlying game — expected goals split 4.74–4.75 in the Islanders' favor, a 50-50 verdict the scoreboard completely rejected. V. Husso stole this one.

The Ducks' goaltender stopped 42 of 43 shots (0.977 SV%), posting a +3.75 differential against expected. That single-handedly swallowed the Islanders' xG advantage. New York generated higher-quality chances than their shot total (26 attempts) suggests, but squandered them: they underperformed their 4.75 xG by 3.75 goals.

Frank Vatrano's wrist shot from the wing at 15:49 set the tone early. Anaheim held 38% of shot attempts and scored 3 goals on 24 rush attempts, an unsustainable rate that nonetheless defined the game's outcome. The Ducks' clinical conversion stood in sharp contrast to New York's wastefulness.

D. Rittich saved 21 of 25 shots (0.840 SV%) and outperformed expected by 0.74, yet his teammates failed him. The Islanders created 12 rebound opportunities and converted just one; Anaheim created three and converted one as well. New York had the chances. They simply could not finish.

The gap between quality and results could not be starker. New York deserved better than this scoreline; Husso's heroics and the Ducks' clinical finishing ensured they did not get it.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Mar 4
NYI
1
ANA
5

V. Husso stands tall as the Ducks edge the Islanders

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

Dead even on chances. The Ducks took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value
NYI
4.75
ANA
4.74
50% of the chances50%

The board read NYI 1, ANA 5. The chances read NYI 4.8, ANA 4.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
ANA
+0.3
goals above expected
ANA4.74 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
NYI4.75 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Islanders left 3.8 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 04:58NYIA. LeePP1–0
  2. P1 12:56ANAC. GauthierPP1–1
  3. P1 16:05ANAC. Gauthier1–2
  4. P1 18:40ANAB. Sennecke1–3
  5. P3 02:11ANAR. Poehling1–4
  6. P3 15:49ANAF. VatranoEN1–5
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NYI
62 shots
1
Final
107 shots
ANA
45 shots
5
NYI attackANA attack
NYI ANA Goal
62
shots · 1 in
45
shots · 5 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NYIANA
1 / 6
1.68 xG
High danger
2 / 8
2.70 xG
0 / 19
1.96 xG
Medium
3 / 12
1.43 xG
0 / 51
1.11 xG
Low
0 / 42
0.61 xG

The Ducks buried 2 of 8 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
V. Husso
+3.8
ANA · 42/43
B
D. Rittich
+0.7
NYI · 21/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

V. Husso stands tall as the Ducks edge the Islanders

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 17–12
  1. 04:58NYIA. Leepower play(T. DeAngelo, J. Drouin)1–0
  2. 12:56ANAC. Gauthierpower play(B. Sennecke, C. Kreider)1–1
  3. 16:05ANAC. Gauthier(L. Carlsson, C. Kreider)1–2
  4. 18:40ANAB. Sennecke(M. McTavish, I. Moore)1–3
2ndshots 13–4no goals
    3rdshots 13–10
    1. 02:11ANAR. Poehling(R. Strome)1–4
    2. 15:49ANAF. Vatranoempty net(J. Trouba)1–5

    score reads NYI–ANA

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    4.74
    ANA chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    +0.3
    Finishing
    Goals above what those chances were worth
    1.067
    ANA puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    44.9%
    Shot attempts
    Under half — they were outshot
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    4.75Expected goals4.74
    NYI 50% of the chance quality
    43Shots on goal26
    6High-danger chances8
    76All attempts (Corsi)62
    Adjusted for score: NYI 59% · ANA 41%
    Faceoffs · ANA won32%off65%neu64%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    NYI1 / 6 · 1.68 xG
    ANA2 / 8 · 2.70 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    NYI0 / 19 · 1.96 xG
    ANA3 / 12 · 1.43 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    NYI0 / 51 · 1.11 xG
    ANA0 / 42 · 0.61 xG

    NYI went 0-for-19 from medium danger on 1.96 expected goals — 2.0 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    NYI
    1 G · 4.75 xG · -3.8
    ANA
    5 G · 4.74 xG · +0.3
    0123456

    NYI finished -3.8 against expected, ANA +0.3.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    NYI
    WRIST0/28
    SNAP1/16
    SLAP0/8
    TIP IN0/4
    BACKHAND0/3
    DEFLECTED0/1
    BAT0/1
    POKE0/1
    WRAP AROUND0/0
    OTHER0/14
    ANA
    WRIST1/13
    SNAP3/19
    SLAP0/4
    TIP IN0/3
    BACKHAND1/3
    DEFLECTED0/1
    BAT0/1
    POKE0/0
    WRAP AROUND0/1
    OTHER0/17
    NYI
    ANA
    Off the rush
    0 G on 28
    2.02 xG
    3 G on 24
    2.40 xG
    Off rebounds
    1 G on 12
    1.96 xG
    1 G on 3
    0.36 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: NYI went 0-for-28, ANA 1-for-13. ANA 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
    D. Rittich
    NYI · 21/25 · .840
    +0.7
    saved above expected
    B
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger2/82.7+0.7
    Medium3/121.4-1.6
    Low0/420.6+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

    V. Husso
    ANA · 42/43 · .977
    +3.8
    saved above expected
    A+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/61.7+0.7
    Medium0/192.0+2.0
    Low0/511.1+1.1

    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

    107 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    NYI
    62 shots
    1
    Final
    107 shots
    ANA
    45 shots
    5
    NYI attackANA attack
    NYI ANA Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — NYI 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
    C. Gauthier
    #61 · L · ANA
    2 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 18:02 on ice · +1
    C. Kreider
    #20 · L · ANA
    0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 16:38 on ice
    B. Sennecke
    #45 · R · ANA
    1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 15:06 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Wed, Mar 4
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 12, 5:35 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 2.5-2.9 game with Anaheim at 56% win probability. That edge roots in underlying play, not luck, which means it should persist.

    Anaheim's 52.0% expected goals share against New York's 48.0% shows the Ducks generate better scoring chances. Their 52.0% Corsi against 49.0% confirms territorial control; Anaheim shoots from better ice.

    The PDO gap reveals the model's conviction. Anaheim runs at 0.981 while New York sits at 0.993—the Islanders have benefited from finishing luck that doesn't sustain. When both teams regress to mean shooting and save percentages, Anaheim's underlying edge becomes goals.

    Players to Watch

    • Beckett Sennecke (ANA) — 1.03 xG/60, 20 goals, 19 assists, 8 high-danger goals, 13.5% shooting
    • Cutter Gauthier (ANA) — 0.99 xG/60, 25 goals, 16 assists, 2 high-danger goals, 12.9% shooting
    • Anders Lee (NYI) — 1.20 xG/60, 9 goals, 20 assists, 2 high-danger goals, 6.4% shooting
    • Bo Horvat (NYI) — 0.87 xG/60, 18 goals, 10 assists, 3 high-danger goals, 12.8% shooting
    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    ANA 56%
    56%
    ANA
    Model favorite
    44%
    56%
    NYI50ANA

    ANA by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NYI 2.5–2.9 ANA; 17% 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 →ANA
    48.0%52.0%
    49.0%52.0%
    2.482.80
    2.692.59
    1.782.09
    1.942.32
    0.9930.981

    ANA holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.993 vs 0.981) says NYI has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    NYI
    8-2-0
    +10 GD · 3d rest
    ANA
    8-2-0
    +5 GD · 2d rest
    0.993
    NYI 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.
    • The Ducks' PDO is 0.981 — running cold, due for positive regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    NYI
    Expected in goal
    D. Rittich
    3 days rest.879 last start
    Backup Ilya Sorokin · +25.3 GSAx this season

    No completed game on file for this club yet.

    ANA
    Expected in goal
    L. Dostal
    2 days rest.941 last start
    Backup Lukas Dostal · -2.9 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
    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
    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