Motion-blurred skater in a Carolina Hurricanes sweater
Breakdown · CAR at NYI

Hurricanes hold off the Islanders

The verdict · earned

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

CAR 2 · NYI 1
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 11:40 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 dominated the volume—59% of shot attempts—and still lost 2–1. That's the game: good chances matter more than quantity.

Expected goals split 3.16–3.84, a modest advantage to the Hurricanes, but high-danger chances told the real story: 8 to 3 in Carolina's favor. The Islanders were left crashing for offensive rebounds (5 created, 0 converted), while the Hurricanes found prime looks off the rush—2 goals from 27 chances. That efficiency on transitions, not possession time, decided it.

B. Bussi anchored the win. He stopped 29 of 30 shots and beat his expected save percentage by 2.16 goals—elite, single-game performance. The Islanders' D. Rittich played well (19 of 21, +1.84 vs expected) but faced tougher shot quality. The Hurricanes averaged 0.089 xG per shot; the Islanders, 0.054. Marginal difference in volume, vast difference in danger.

The turning point came early in the third when Mark Jankowski's snap shot from a sharp angle found the net at 14:38. It proved to be the difference in a tight game where both teams left goals on the table—the Hurricanes 0 for 8 on high-danger chances, the Islanders underperforming xG by 2.2.

This was a win built on converting opportunity into speed, and on a goaltender who outperformed expectation.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Apr 14
CAR
2
NYI
1

Hurricanes hold off the Islanders

Chances 3.8 – 3.2Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Hurricanes earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
CAR
3.84
NYI
3.16
55% of the chances45%

The board read CAR 2, NYI 1. The chances read CAR 3.8, NYI 3.2.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
CAR
−1.8
goals above expected
CAR3.84 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored
NYI3.16 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Islanders left 2.2 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 03:05CARN. Ehlers1–0
  2. P2 13:14NYIB. HorvatPP1–1
  3. P3 14:38CARM. Jankowski2–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
CAR
36 shots
2
Final
76 shots
NYI
40 shots
1
CAR attackNYI attack
CAR NYI Goal
36
shots · 2 in
40
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
CARNYI
0 / 8
2.41 xG
High danger
1 / 3
0.70 xG
1 / 10
0.95 xG
Medium
0 / 19
2.05 xG
1 / 25
0.49 xG
Low
0 / 37
0.41 xG

High-danger looks: CAR 0 of 8, NYI 1 of 3.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
B. Bussi
+2.2
CAR · 29/30
A
D. Rittich
+1.8
NYI · 19/21
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Hurricanes hold off 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 7–9
  1. 03:05CARN. Ehlers(F. Unger Sorum, L. Stankoven)1–0
2ndshots 8–8
  1. 13:14NYIB. Horvatpower play(M. Barzal, V. Eklund)1–1
3rdshots 6–13
  1. 14:38CARM. Jankowski(J. Nystrom, A. Nikishin)2–1

score reads CAR–NYI

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.84
CAR chances
Goals their shots were worth
−1.8
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.030
CAR puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
42.2%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.84Expected goals3.16
CAR 55% of the chance quality
21Shots on goal30
8High-danger chances3
43All attempts (Corsi)59
Adjusted for score: CAR 40% · NYI 60%
Faceoffs · NYI won58%off38%neu53%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
CAR0 / 8 · 2.41 xG
NYI1 / 3 · 0.70 xG
Medium dangermid-range
CAR1 / 10 · 0.95 xG
NYI0 / 19 · 2.05 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
CAR1 / 25 · 0.49 xG
NYI0 / 37 · 0.41 xG

CAR went 0-for-8 from high danger on 2.41 expected goals — 2.4 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
CAR
2 G · 3.84 xG · -1.8
NYI
1 G · 3.16 xG · -2.2
012345

CAR finished -1.8 against expected, NYI -2.2.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
CAR
WRIST0/3
SNAP2/24
TIP IN0/4
SLAP0/4
BACKHAND0/1
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/7
NYI
WRIST0/32
SNAP1/2
TIP IN0/3
SLAP0/2
BACKHAND0/0
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/19
CAR
NYI
Off the rush
2 G on 27
2.36 xG
1 G on 22
2.15 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3
0.59 xG
0 G on 5
0.70 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: CAR went 0-for-3, NYI 0-for-32. CAR 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
B. Bussi
CAR · 29/30 · .967
+2.2
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/30.7-0.3
Medium0/192.0+2.0
Low0/370.4+0.4

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. Rittich
NYI · 19/21 · .905
+1.8
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/82.4+2.4
Medium1/100.9-0.1
Low1/250.5-0.5

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

76 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
CAR
36 shots
2
Final
76 shots
NYI
40 shots
1
CAR attackNYI attack
CAR NYI Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — CAR 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
A. Nikishin
#21 · D · CAR
0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 23:40 on ice · +1
B. Horvat
#14 · C · NYI
1 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 20:18 on ice
M. Barzal
#13 · C · NYI
0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 19:55 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Apr 14
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 11:39 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

Carolina enters this game as a strong model favorite: 2.8 to 2.5 scoring advantage and a 55% win probability. That projection isn't built on recent hot streaks or depth charts—it rests on how these teams actually control play at five-on-five.

Form suggests Carolina has momentum. They've posted 7-2-1 over their last ten games, each win compounding confidence. The Islanders, meanwhile, have cratered: -11 goal differential over the same span, a profile that signals structural problems beyond correctable variance. But looking at recent results alone misses the deeper architecture of this matchup, the one built from shot quality.

At five-on-five, the gap widens dramatically. Carolina owns a 56.0% expected goals share against New York's 48.0%—an eight-point edge that means Carolina generates higher-quality scoring chances and dictates the terms of engagement. Corsi amplifies this picture: 60.0% for Carolina, 49.0% for the Islanders. These numbers aren't abstract. They mean Carolina controls possession, forces New York into reactive hockey, and sustains relentless pressure. Territorial dominance compounds over sixty minutes.

Here's where the projection gets interesting: luck. Carolina's PDO sits at 0.984, cold by league standards. That's jargon for one thing: their actual goals haven't matched their shot quality. When teams run cold on PDO, regression toward the mean is inevitable—and in Carolina's case, it's large. The Islanders' 0.993 also depresses, but they have less distance to recover. Carolina's shooting luck is due to flip positive, which only strengthens their advantage.

B. Bussi faces a back-to-back situation—a variable that matters. New York may deploy a fresh backup or roll the dice on a fatigued starter, introducing uncertainty into goaltending.

Players to Watch

Jackson Blake generates at 1.06 xG per 60, an elite creation rate. He's recorded 14 goals, 19 assists, and 2 high-danger goals on just 10.9% shooting—a clip that will climb when variance corrects. Seth Jarvis sits at 0.98 xG/60 with 17 goals, 12 assists, 1 high-danger goal, and 11.9% shooting; he's already cashing in on the fortunate side of finishing variance.

Anders Lee leads New York offensively at 1.20 xG/60 but has scored only 9 goals, held back by a 6.4% shooting percentage. Bo Horvat, at 0.87 xG/60, posts 18 goals on 12.8% shooting with 3 high-danger goals—outperforming his chances in ways that regress inward.

Charles Alexis Legault is Carolina's defensive liability. Alexander Romanov carries that burden for New York.

The model's lean is grounded in process, not luck. Carolina plays better hockey. Regression only reinforces that edge.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

CAR 55%
55%
CAR
Model favorite
55%
45%
CAR50NYI

CAR by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score CAR 2.8–2.5 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
CAR← edge
edge →NYI
56.0%48.0%
60.0%49.0%
2.982.48
2.312.69
2.261.78
1.951.94
0.9840.993

CAR holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.984 vs 0.993) says NYI has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
CAR
7-2-1
+14 GD · 1d rest
NYI
3-7-0
-11 GD · 2d rest
0.984
CAR 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 Hurricanes own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Hurricanes drive Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Things to watch
  • The Hurricanes own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
  • The Hurricanes drive Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • B. Bussi is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Hurricanes are the hotter team by points pace (7-2-1 in their last 10).
  • The Islanders are underwater at -11 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
CAR
Expected in goal
B. Bussi
back-to-back.913 last start
Backup Brandon Bussi · +2.8 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.

NYI
Expected in goal
I. Sorokin
2 days rest.818 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
CAR
Jackson Blake14G 19A
1.06 xG/60 · 2 HD · 10.9% sh
Seth Jarvis17G 12A
0.98 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.9% 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