Motion-blurred skater in a blue sweater
Breakdown · NYR at PHI

Rangers pull away from the Flyers

The verdict · stolen

The Rangers stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 2.66–3.82 and won anyway.

NYR 6 · PHI 2
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 6:19 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 6-2, but the Flyers controlled the game. Philadelphia held 59% of expected goals (3.82–2.66) and 56% of shot attempts—yet lost by four. This was a variance heist.

The difference came down to goaltending and finishing. I. Shesterkin stopped 32 of 34 shots (0.941 SV%), beating his expected performance by 1.82 goals. D. Vladar surrendered 3.64 more goals than expected, a collapse that reveals how thoroughly the Flyers squandered their dominance. Philadelphia posted 5 high-danger chances to New York's 3, yet scored only 2—a 40% conversion rate masking a deeper inability to finish.

New York's power play engineered the heist. The Rangers scored 3 goals on 0.94 expected goals across 10 shots, an absurd overperformance that accounts for most of their margin. Even-strength finishing was just as lethal: 3 goals on 22 rush chances and 2 from 5 rebounds. M. Zibanejad (2G, 1A in 17:50) and V. Trocheck (3A in 17:18) led the attack, with V. Gavrikov (2A in 19:54) orchestrating from the blue line.

The Flyers generated chances—S. Ersson was flawless in limited work—but couldn't convert when it mattered. Sean Couturier's snap shot from the slot (P3, 15:28) marked the game's only turning point, though it shifted nothing.

The Flyers underperformed their expected goals by 1.82. The Rangers overperformed by 3.34. Where shot quality favored Philadelphia, execution belonged entirely to New York.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Mar 9
NYR
6
PHI
2

Rangers pull away from the Flyers

Chances 2.7 – 3.8Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Flyers deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
NYR
2.66
PHI
3.82
41% of the chances59%

The board read NYR 6, PHI 2. The chances read NYR 2.7, PHI 3.8.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NYR
+3.3
goals above expected
NYR2.66 expected · 6 scored
Expected
Scored
PHI3.82 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

The Rangers scored 3.3 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 01:04NYRN. Laba1–0
  2. P1 13:07NYRM. Zibanejad2–0
  3. P1 19:23NYRA. LafrenièrePP3–0
  4. P2 03:54PHIM. MichkovPP3–1
  5. P2 06:40NYRG. PerreaultPP4–1
  6. P2 18:40NYRM. ZibanejadPP5–1
  7. P2 19:00NYRT. Kartye6–1
+1 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NYR
34 shots
6
Final
82 shots
PHI
48 shots
2
NYR attackPHI attack
NYR PHI Goal
34
shots · 6 in
48
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NYRPHI
2 / 3
0.66 xG
High danger
2 / 5
1.62 xG
3 / 15
1.59 xG
Medium
0 / 15
1.48 xG
1 / 29
0.40 xG
Low
0 / 37
0.72 xG

The Rangers buried 2 of 3 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
S. Ersson
+2.7
PHI · 3/3
A
I. Shesterkin
+1.8
NYR · 32/34
+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 12–8
  1. 01:04NYRN. Laba(M. Robertson, T. Kartye)1–0
  2. 13:07NYRM. Zibanejad(A. Lafrenière, V. Gavrikov)2–0
  3. 19:23NYRA. Lafrenièrepower play(M. Zibanejad, V. Trocheck)3–0
2ndshots 12–13
  1. 03:54PHIM. Michkovpower play(J. Drysdale, T. Zegras)3–1
  2. 06:40NYRG. Perreaultpower play(V. Trocheck, A. Fox)4–1
  3. 18:40NYRM. Zibanejadpower play(G. Perreault, V. Trocheck)5–1
  4. 19:00NYRT. Kartye(V. Gavrikov, N. Laba)6–1
3rdshots 3–13
  1. 15:28PHIS. Couturier(N. Grebenkin, L. Glendening)6–2

score reads NYR–PHI

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
2.66
NYR chances
Goals their shots were worth
+3.3
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.093
NYR puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
45.2%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.66Expected goals3.82
PHI 59% of the chance quality
27Shots on goal34
3High-danger chances5
47All attempts (Corsi)57
Adjusted for score: NYR 38% · PHI 62%
Faceoffs · PHI won58%off53%neu52%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NYR2 / 3 · 0.66 xG
PHI2 / 5 · 1.62 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NYR3 / 15 · 1.59 xG
PHI0 / 15 · 1.48 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NYR1 / 29 · 0.40 xG
PHI0 / 37 · 0.72 xG

PHI went 0-for-15 from medium danger on 1.48 expected goals — 1.5 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NYR
6 G · 2.66 xG · +3.3
PHI
2 G · 3.82 xG · -1.8
01234567

NYR finished +3.3 against expected, PHI -1.8.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NYR
WRIST3/19
SNAP1/6
SLAP1/6
TIP IN1/3
BACKHAND0/0
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/13
PHI
WRIST1/15
SNAP1/19
SLAP0/9
TIP IN0/2
BACKHAND0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/9
NYR
PHI
Off the rush
3 G on 22
1.34 xG
1 G on 24
2.33 xG
Off rebounds
2 G on 5
0.87 xG
1 G on 2
0.82 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: NYR went 3-for-19, PHI 1-for-15. 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
I. Shesterkin
NYR · 32/34 · .941
+1.8
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/51.6-0.4
Medium0/151.5+1.5
Low0/370.7+0.7

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 · 3/3 · 1.000
+2.7
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/30.7-1.3
Medium3/151.6-1.4
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

D. Vladar
PHI · 18/24 · .750
-3.3
saved above expected
F
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/30.7-1.3
Medium3/151.6-1.4
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

82 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
NYR
34 shots
6
Final
82 shots
PHI
48 shots
2
NYR attackPHI attack
NYR PHI Goal

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
M. Zibanejad
#93 · C · NYR
2 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 17:50 on ice · +1
V. Trocheck
#16 · C · NYR
0 G · 3 A · 3 SOG · 17:18 on ice
V. Gavrikov
#44 · D · NYR
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 19:54 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Mar 9
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 6:18 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

This is a true pick'em. The model projects a 2.2-2.5 goal range with Philadelphia at 54% win probability—close enough that any edge is theoretical.

The Flyers own the underlying play. Over the full season at 5v5, they generate 51.0% of expected goals to New York's 48.0%, though their shot share sits at 48.0% Corsi versus 49.0% for the Rangers. Both register similar PDO, so luck isn't the differentiator. The gap is real but thin.

New York carries recent baggage: the Rangers sit -6 goal differential over their last 10 games. That's not catastrophic, but it's a headwind into a matchup where the other team already holds the possession advantage.

The player story tilts toward Philadelphia. Owen Tippett (0.88 xG/60, 19 goals, 2 high-danger goals) and Christian Dvorak (0.81 xG/60, 12 goals, 3 high-danger goals) anchor the Flyers' attack with elite production. Adam Sykora generates 0.91 xG/60 for New York—his per-60 leads the group—but has just 3 goals and zero high-danger goals. Gabe Perreault (0.79 xG/60, 8 goals, 2 high-danger goals) forms New York's secondary option.

The tactical picture is where it gets interesting: both teams register 0% high-danger goal rates and 0% rebound goal rates, meaning both are leaving damage on the table and could improve sharply or regress. Vincent Iorio stands out as New York's defensive liability. Christian Dvorak, while elite offensively, is flagged as Philadelphia's weak point defensively—a note that matters little if he continues producing at 0.81 xG/60 but signals where the Rangers should hunt.

The Flyers are the right small lean. Philadelphia's edge in underlying play is marginal but consistent, and their forward depth is proven over the season. New York's recent downturn is the kind of momentum that rarely persists. At 54%, though, there's no real signal here—just a coin that landed marginally Philadelphia.

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 · Last 10
NYR
3-5-2
-6 GD · 2d rest
PHI
5-3-2
-3 GD · 2d 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%.
  • The Rangers are underwater at -6 goal differential over their last 10.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
NYR
Expected in goal
J. Quick
2 days rest.853 last start
Backup Igor Shesterkin · +21.3 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

PHI
Expected in goal
D. Vladar
2 days rest.870 last start
Backup Dan Vladar · +13.8 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
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