Motion-blurred skater in a Florida Panthers sweater
Breakdown · NYR at FLA

Panthers steal one from the Rangers against the run of play

The verdict · stolen

The Panthers stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.88–2.48 and won anyway.

NYR 2 · FLA 3
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 11:31 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

Florida won 3–2 despite controlling just 39% of expected goals; the Rangers held 61% xG and still lost. The gap was enormous, and it came down to elite goaltending and a Rangers offense that misfired.

The Rangers dominated. They attempted 27 shots to Florida's 16 and generated higher-quality looks: 0.068 xG per shot versus Florida's 0.051. At 5v5, they controlled 61% of expected goals. Possession was irrelevant.

D. Tarasov flipped the result. He stopped 25 of 27 shots and posted 0.926 SV%, earning 1.88 goals above expected—a performance so dominant it erased Florida's deficit in every underlying metric. J. Quick saved 13 of 16 (0.812 SV%) but underperformed by 0.52, ceding the softer ones.

The turning point came at 18:10 of the third when Cole Reinhardt snapped a high-slot shot past Quick, crystallizing Florida's entire approach: convert on transitions, crash for rebounds, escape. Florida buried two goals on 15 rush chances and capitalized on one of five rebound opportunities. New York created six rebounds but finished only one, a fatal gap.

The Rangers underperformed their xG by 1.88 goals, wasting high-danger looks while Tarasov stood immovable. Florida's victory wasn't dominance—the Rangers were superior in nearly every measure—but ruthless execution paired with stellar goaltending. The Panthers took their chances and stole the result.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Apr 13
NYR
2
FLA
3

Panthers steal one from the Rangers against the run of play

Chances 3.9 – 2.5Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Rangers deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
NYR
3.88
FLA
2.48
61% of the chances39%

The board read NYR 2, FLA 3. The chances read NYR 3.9, FLA 2.5.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
FLA
+0.5
goals above expected
FLA2.48 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
NYR3.88 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

The Rangers left 1.9 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 09:35FLAC. Reinhardt0–1
  2. P1 11:31FLAM. Samoskevich0–2
  3. P1 15:19NYRM. Robertson1–2
  4. P2 17:20NYRG. Perreault2–2
  5. P3 18:10FLAC. Reinhardt2–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NYR
44 shots
2
Final
77 shots
FLA
33 shots
3
NYR attackFLA attack
NYR FLA Goal
44
shots · 2 in
33
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NYRFLA
1 / 6
1.34 xG
High danger
1 / 5
1.42 xG
0 / 15
1.82 xG
Medium
2 / 4
0.43 xG
1 / 36
0.72 xG
Low
0 / 40
0.62 xG

High-danger looks: NYR 1 of 6, FLA 1 of 5.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
D. Tarasov
+1.9
FLA · 25/27
D
J. Quick
−0.5
NYR · 13/16
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Panthers steal one from the Rangers 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 7–7
  1. 09:35FLAC. Reinhardt(T. Bjornfot, V. Hinostroza)0–1
  2. 11:31FLAM. Samoskevich0–2
  3. 15:19NYRM. Robertson(N. Laba)1–2
2ndshots 6–6
  1. 17:20NYRG. Perreault(A. Fox, A. Lafrenière)2–2
3rdshots 14–3
  1. 18:10FLAC. Reinhardt(L. Kunin, D. Sebrango)2–3

score reads NYR–FLA

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
2.48
FLA chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.5
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.026
FLA puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
46.2%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.88Expected goals2.48
NYR 61% of the chance quality
27Shots on goal16
6High-danger chances5
57All attempts (Corsi)49
Adjusted for score: NYR 56% · FLA 44%
Faceoffs · FLA won33%off12%neu69%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NYR1 / 6 · 1.34 xG
FLA1 / 5 · 1.42 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NYR0 / 15 · 1.82 xG
FLA2 / 4 · 0.43 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NYR1 / 36 · 0.72 xG
FLA0 / 40 · 0.62 xG

NYR went 0-for-15 from medium danger on 1.82 expected goals — 1.8 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NYR
2 G · 3.88 xG · -1.9
FLA
3 G · 2.48 xG · +0.5
012345

NYR finished -1.9 against expected, FLA +0.5.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NYR
SNAP1/26
TIP IN0/8
BACKHAND0/5
SLAP0/1
WRIST0/2
DEFLECTED1/2
OTHER0/13
FLA
SNAP2/23
TIP IN0/3
BACKHAND0/3
SLAP0/3
WRIST1/1
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/16
NYR
FLA
Off the rush
1 G on 30
2.68 xG
2 G on 15
0.98 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 6
1.06 xG
1 G on 5
0.49 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: NYR went 1-for-26, FLA 2-for-23. FLA 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 · 13/16 · .812
-0.5
saved above expected
D
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/51.4+0.4
Medium2/40.4-1.6
Low0/400.6+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

D. Tarasov
FLA · 25/27 · .926
+1.9
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/61.3+0.3
Medium0/151.8+1.8
Low1/360.7-0.3

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

77 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
NYR
44 shots
2
Final
77 shots
FLA
33 shots
3
NYR attackFLA attack
NYR FLA Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — NYR left, FLA 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. Reinhardt
#29 · L · FLA
2 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 16:03 on ice · +1
A. Fox
#23 · D · NYR
0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 28:10 on ice
A. Lafrenière
#13 · L · NYR
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 22:10 on ice
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Apr 13
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 11:28 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 matchup is a coin flip. The model projects a 2.4-to-2.6-goal game with Florida holding just a 53% win probability—nearly even odds.

The Rangers and Panthers possess nearly identical underlying talent. New York edges expected goals at 48.0% to Florida's 49.0%, while the Panthers control possession at 52.0% Corsi to the Rangers' 49.0%. New York compensates through superior luck: a 1.009 PDO beats Florida's 0.989, indicating better-than-average conversion and goaltending performance. Neither team has a structural advantage.

But Florida arrives damaged. The Panthers are -11 in goal differential over their last 10 games—a collapse rooted in defensive breakdowns, not mere cold shooting. This decay is the opening New York exploits.

The Rangers' offense depends on Adam Sykora and Gabe Perreault. Sykora generates 0.91 expected goals per 60 minutes and has scored 3 goals on a 20.0% shooting rate, indicating genuine production rather than variance. Perreault's 0.79 xG/60 with 8 goals, 11 assists, and 2 high-danger goals reflects elite efficiency at 13.1% shooting; regression risk exists, but both Rangers consistently generate offense.

Florida counters with Sam Bennett, who drives 0.97 xG/60 with 18 goals and 6 high-danger goals—volume and efficiency paired at 13.1% shooting. Brad Marchand, however, is almost certainly unavailable after 38 days missed to injury. That loss is catastrophic for Florida's depth: Marchand posted 17 goals, 9 assists, and a 19.5% shooting rate when healthy—an entire offensive tier that vanishes.

Vincent Iorio represents a defensive liability for the Rangers. Florida's defensive problems are more acute: recent collapse plus Marchand's absence combine to hollow out their backend.

The 53% edge for Florida tells the story—two evenly matched teams where injury status, recent form, and execution efficiency decide the outcome, not underlying talent. New York holds a marginal advantage. Expect a tight game determined by fine margins, not philosophy.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

FLA 53%
53%
FLA
Model favorite
47%
53%
NYR50FLA

FLA by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NYR 2.4–2.6 FLA; 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
NYR← edge
edge →FLA
48.0%49.0%
49.0%52.0%
2.262.48
2.402.56
1.881.98
1.902.21
1.0090.989

FLA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.009 vs 0.989) says NYR has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
NYR
5-5-0
+13 GD · 2d rest
FLA
3-6-1
-11 GD · 2d rest
1.009
NYR PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.989
FLA PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Panthers drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Things to watch
  • The Panthers drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • The Panthers are underwater at -11 goal differential over their last 10.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
NYR
Expected in goal
I. Shesterkin
2 days rest.944 last start
Backup Igor Shesterkin · +21.3 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

FLA
Expected in goal
D. Tarasov
2 days rest.895 last start
Backup Sergei Bobrovsky · -12.2 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
FLA
Sam Bennett18G 19A
0.97 xG/60 · 6 HD · 13.1% sh
Brad Marchand17G 9A
0.93 xG/60 · 3 HD · 19.5% sh
Keep going

Where to next