Motion-blurred skater in a Washington Capitals sweater
Breakdown · PIT at WSH

Capitals shut out the Penguins, 3-0

The verdict · earned

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

PIT 0 · WSH 3
◆ By the ModelJun 16, 1:09 PMxG: 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

Pittsburgh's shutout masks a game where underlying metrics suggested the Penguins deserved better. They generated 3.79 expected goals and seven high-danger chances but finished with zero — a complete variance from their underlying play.

Washington's superiority was genuine. They controlled 57% of five-on-five expected goals (5.05–3.79), led shot attempts 27–24, and created far more dangerous looks — 0.092 xG per shot versus Pittsburgh's 0.058. The Capitals executed on the rush, scoring twice on transition chances.

Still, Washington benefited from fortune. They underperformed their expected goals by 2.05, scoring three on 5.05 xG. L. Thompson allowed none: 24 saves on 24 shots, a +3.79 performance above expected that proved decisive. S. Skinner stopped 24 of 26 for Pittsburgh, posting a +3.05 save percentage above expected, but Pittsburgh never converted when it mattered.

Connor McMichael's snap shot from the doorstep at 17:16 of the third period opened the game. M. Fehérváry recorded two assists. T. van Riemsdyk scored once.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Apr 12
PIT
0
WSH
3

Capitals shut out the Penguins, 3-0

Chances 3.8 – 5.0Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Capitals earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
PIT
3.79
WSH
5.05
43% of the chances57%

The board read PIT 0, WSH 3. The chances read PIT 3.8, WSH 5.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
WSH
−2.0
goals above expected
WSH5.05 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
PIT3.79 expected · 0 scored
Expected
Scored

The Penguins 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. P2 12:22WSHT. van Riemsdyk0–1
  2. P3 15:50WSHC. McMichael0–2
  3. P3 17:16WSHC. McMichaelEN0–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
PIT
48 shots
0
Final
90 shots
WSH
42 shots
3
PIT attackWSH attack
PIT WSH Goal
48
shots · 0 in
42
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
PITWSH
0 / 7
1.51 xG
High danger
2 / 10
3.12 xG
0 / 12
1.31 xG
Medium
1 / 12
1.33 xG
0 / 46
0.97 xG
Low
0 / 33
0.60 xG

The Penguins went 0 for 7 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
L. Thompson
+3.8
WSH · 24/24
A+
S. Skinner
+3.0
PIT · 24/26
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Capitals shut out the Penguins, 3-0

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 8–8no goals
    2ndshots 13–13
    1. 12:22WSHT. van Riemsdyk(P. Dubois, C. McMichael)0–1
    3rdshots 3–6
    1. 15:50WSHC. McMichael(R. Leonard, M. Fehérváry)0–2
    2. 17:16WSHC. McMichaelempty net(A. Ovechkin, M. Fehérváry)0–3

    score reads PIT–WSH

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    5.05
    WSH chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    −2.0
    Finishing
    Goals below what those chances were worth
    1.054
    WSH puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    45.8%
    Shot attempts
    Under half — they were outshot
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    3.79Expected goals5.05
    WSH 57% of the chance quality
    24Shots on goal27
    7High-danger chances10
    65All attempts (Corsi)55
    Adjusted for score: PIT 56% · WSH 44%
    Faceoffs · WSH won50%off44%neu59%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    PIT0 / 7 · 1.51 xG
    WSH2 / 10 · 3.12 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    PIT0 / 12 · 1.31 xG
    WSH1 / 12 · 1.33 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    PIT0 / 46 · 0.97 xG
    WSH0 / 33 · 0.60 xG

    PIT went 0-for-7 from high danger on 1.51 expected goals — 1.5 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    PIT
    0 G · 3.79 xG · -3.8
    WSH
    3 G · 5.05 xG · -2.0
    0123456

    PIT finished -3.8 against expected, WSH -2.0.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    PIT
    SNAP0/20
    SLAP0/13
    WRIST0/6
    BACKHAND0/5
    TIP IN0/3
    DEFLECTED0/1
    WRAP AROUND0/0
    OTHER0/17
    WSH
    SNAP1/24
    SLAP0/3
    WRIST1/6
    BACKHAND1/5
    TIP IN0/3
    DEFLECTED0/0
    WRAP AROUND0/1
    OTHER0/13
    PIT
    WSH
    Off the rush
    0 G on 29
    2.46 xG
    2 G on 20
    2.37 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 6
    0.90 xG
    1 G on 11
    1.95 xG

    Snap shots carried the volume: PIT went 0-for-20, WSH 1-for-24. WSH 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 · 24/26 · .923
    +3.0
    saved above expected
    A+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger2/103.1+1.1
    Medium1/121.3+0.3
    Low0/330.6+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. Thompson
    WSH · 24/24 · 1.000
    +3.8
    saved above expected
    A+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/71.5+1.5
    Medium0/121.3+1.3
    Low0/461.0+1.0

    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

    90 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    PIT
    48 shots
    0
    Final
    90 shots
    WSH
    42 shots
    3
    PIT attackWSH attack
    PIT WSH Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — PIT left, WSH 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. McMichael
    #24 · L · —
    2 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 15:31 on ice · +3
    M. Fehérváry
    #42 · D · —
    0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 18:50 on ice · +1
    T. van Riemsdyk
    #57 · D · —
    1 G · 0 A · 5 SOG · 18:59 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Sun, Apr 12
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJun 16, 1:12 PMEdited 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 sees this as a toss-up: Washington at 51% win probability, a 2.6- to 2.7-goal game. That's not a clear favorite—it's even.

    The underlying shot metrics confirm it. Pittsburgh is generating 51.0% of expected goals at 5-on-5, Washington 50.0%; Pittsburgh leads Corsi 50.0% to 49.0%. Both teams exist in a narrow band of competence—neither is running away, neither is collapsing.

    The wrinkle: Washington's PDO of 1.018 suggests the Capitals are running hot, converting more than expected. Pittsburgh's 1.012 is closer to neutral. If Washington regresses even slightly, that one-goal separation in the model shrinks further. Watch for a tighter game than the raw xG might suggest.

    Goaltending creates a second layer of risk. Both L. Thompson and A. Silovs are on back-to-backs. That doesn't guarantee a backup or a tired starter, but it narrows the margin for error. Fatigue compounds fast in a close match.

    On offense, Rickard Rakell is the clearer focal point for Pittsburgh. At 1.01 xG/60 with 13 goals and 13 assists, he's producing volume without elite finishing—his 12.1% shooting rate is elevated but sustainable for a player of his skill. Alex Ovechkin carries Washington's load: 0.97 xG/60, 19 goals and 17 assists, with a 13.8% shooting rate that reflects his elite release. Ovechkin's power play activity is the likeliest source of separation in a close game.

    Anthony Beauvillier fills the secondary role for Washington, generating 0.89 xG/60 with 14 goals and 9 assists at a 10.4% shooting rate. He's outperforming his expected goal creation but with less firepower than Rakell.

    Filip Hallander (1.28 xG/60) is expected to be unavailable pending further evaluation.

    This is what 51% looks like: marginal separation, overlapping quality, a result decided by conversion rate and goaltending performance on a tired night.

    Three things to watch:

    • Thompson and Silovs both on back-to-backs—fatigue could materialize as goalie weakness.
    • Washington's 1.018 PDO—expect regression toward neutral conversion rates.
    • Rakell (12.1% shooting) and Ovechkin (13.8% shooting)—margin-of-error finishers in a margin-of-error game.
    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    WSH 51%
    51%
    WSH
    Model favorite
    49%
    51%
    PIT50WSH

    WSH by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score PIT 2.6–2.7 WSH; 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 →WSH
    51.0%50.0%
    50.0%49.0%
    2.662.62
    2.552.62
    2.452.18
    2.121.79
    1.0121.018

    PIT holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.012 vs 1.018) says WSH has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    PIT
    6-4-0
    +8 GD · 1d rest
    WSH
    6-3-1
    +2 GD · 1d rest
    1.012
    PIT PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    1.018
    WSH PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Regression watch
    • WSH PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Things to watch
    • L. Thompson is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • A. Silovs is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • WSH PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    PIT
    Expected in goal
    A. Silovs
    back-to-back.839 last start
    Backup Stuart Skinner · +8.3 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.

    WSH
    Expected in goal
    L. Thompson
    back-to-back.727 last start
    Backup Logan Thompson · +29.3 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
    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
    WSH
    Alex Ovechkin19G 17A
    0.97 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.8% sh
    Anthony Beauvillier14G 9A
    0.89 xG/60 · 2 HD · 10.4% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next