Rush defense leaked all night
Gave up 29 rush shots worth 2.64 xG (3 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.
Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.

Split squads and prospects, not the club that will take the ice in October. The shots and grades below describe this game only: nothing here counts toward season records, form, rankings or player numbers.
Expected goals split 3.19–3.62 in favor of the Devils — a slight edge — yet the final score read 4–1 because J. Allen stole the whole thing.
J. Allen saved 2.19 goals above what his expected save percentage should have allowed. The Islanders squeezed more value from fewer chances — 0.084 expected goals per shot versus 0.059 for New Jersey — but finished just one goal despite generating 4 dangerous scoring chances to the Devils' 7. I. Sorokin's save percentage of 0.846 couldn't match Allen's theft.
The Devils leaned on their transition. They scored three times off the rush on 29 chances, the kind of conversion rate that wins games but rarely sustains. E. Rodrigues and J. Siegenthaler each picked up two assists, turning opportunity into goals.
The power play cashed in early. L. Evangelista scored twice, once on the man advantage in the first period and again early in the second — both low-danger looks converted because the Devils executed timing. The second came just four seconds after a J. Siegenthaler shot, the kind of chaos that feeds finishing.
New York held 37% of shot attempts (15–26 on goal) but couldn't capitalize. S. Holmstrom's third-period goal was the only answer to the barrage. The Islanders underperformed their expected goal total by 2.19 — a chasm between quality and result that Allen filled.
What the numbers can't tell you. Whether the finishing was luck or skill, why the benches were run the way they were, who was hurt, and anything said in the room. That is the beat's story, and it is worth reading.
Devils pull away from the Islanders
The Devils earned this one.
The board read NJD 4, NYI 1. The chances read NJD 3.6, NYI 3.2.
The Islanders left 2.2 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.
L. Evangelista makes it 1–0.
The Islanders went 0 for 4 from the slot.
Devils pull away from 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 breakdownWrist shot from 15 feet, a 17% chance (off the rush), past I. Sorokin. Win probability moved 15 points.On the ice: D. Hamilton, C. Brown, J. Siegenthaler, C. Glass, A. Lombardi · against K. Palmieri, C. Cizikas, O. Palat, A. Romanov, M. Kessel
Wrist shot from 37 feet, a 6% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past I. Sorokin. Win probability moved 15 points.On the ice: D. Hamilton, J. Siegenthaler, T. Meier, N. Hischier, L. Evangelista · against S. Mayfield, A. Duclair, I. George, C. Ritchie, V. Eklund
Wrist shot from 5 feet, a 23% chance, past I. Sorokin. 4s after a NJD shot by J. Siegenthaler. Win probability moved 10 points.On the ice: B. Dillon, A. Mantha, J. Bratt, D. Chisholm, J. Hughes · against A. Pelech, B. Horvat, S. Holmstrom, M. Maccelli, M. Kessel
Snap shot from 13 feet, a 22% chance (off the rush), past I. Sorokin.On the ice: B. Dillon, T. Meier, N. Hischier, D. Chisholm, L. Evangelista · against K. Palmieri, J. Pageau, E. Heineman, M. Kessel, K. Aitcheson
Wrist shot from 22 feet, a 17% chance, past J. Allen. 9s after a NYI miss by S. Holmstrom.On the ice: J. Pageau, R. Pulock, A. Romanov, E. Heineman, V. Eklund · against B. Pesce, T. Meier, N. Hischier, L. Evangelista, L. Hughes
score reads NJD–NYI
NYI went 0-for-4 from high danger on 1.05 expected goals — 1.1 left on the table.
NJD finished +0.4 against expected, NYI -2.2.
Wrist shots carried the volume: NJD went 3-for-28, NYI 1-for-13. NJD scored 3 of theirs off the rush.
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 →
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
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
Best skater on the ice by our rating: J. Siegenthaler (NJD), 21:40 of ice, 0-2, 70% of the expected goals while he was out.
| Skater | TOI | G-A | SOG | ixG | xG% | PD/PT | Impact | /60 | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| J. SiegenthalerD | 21:40 | 0-2 | 2 | 0.29 | 70 | 0/0 | 2.07 | 5.72 | A+ |
| L. EvangelistaR | 14:57 | 2-0 | 3 | 0.59 | 53 | 0/1 | 1.81 | 7.27 | A+ |
| N. HischierC | 16:10 | 0-1 | 3 | 0.49 | 80 | 0/0 | 1.52 | 5.66 | A+ |
| D. HamiltonD | 19:52 | 1-0 | 2 | 0.23 | 65 | 0/0 | 1.47 | 4.45 | A |
| E. RodriguesC | 13:02 | 0-2 | 1 | 0.37 | 43 | 1/1 | 1.26 | 5.80 | A |
| A. GritsyukR | 14:53 | 1-0 | 2 | 0.20 | 34 | 0/0 | 0.79 | 3.17 | A |
| J. HughesC | 17:34 | 0-1 | 2 | 0.30 | 40 | 0/0 | 0.68 | 2.33 | B |
| C. BrownR | 14:09 | 0-0 | 3 | 0.32 | 65 | 0/0 | 0.47 | 1.97 | B |
| L. HughesD | 23:31 | 0-1 | 1 | 0.04 | 42 | 0/0 | 0.47 | 1.21 | B |
| A. LombardiC | 11:16 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.19 | 77 | 0/0 | 0.31 | 1.63 | C |
| C. GlassC | 12:53 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.02 | 69 | 0/0 | 0.30 | 1.40 | C |
| A. ManthaR | 12:33 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.00 | 52 | 1/0 | 0.23 | 1.08 | C |
| B. DillonD | 17:39 | 0-0 | 2 | 0.04 | 54 | 0/0 | 0.24 | 0.83 | C |
| D. MercerC | 14:35 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.33 | 59 | 0/1 | 0.19 | 0.80 | C |
| T. MeierR | 13:32 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.11 | 52 | 0/0 | 0.15 | 0.66 | D |
| J. BrattL | 16:12 | 0-0 | 2 | 0.06 | 49 | 0/0 | 0.15 | 0.55 | D |
| D. ChisholmD | 16:48 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.04 | 43 | 0/1 | -0.21 | -0.75 | F |
| B. PesceD | 19:33 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.00 | 21 | 0/0 | -0.40 | -1.23 | F |
| Skater | TOI | G-A | SOG | ixG | xG% | PD/PT | Impact | /60 | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E. HeinemanL | 17:36 | 0-0 | 4 | 0.97 | 72 | 1/0 | 1.30 | 4.42 | A |
| K. PalmieriC | 18:16 | 0-1 | 1 | 0.19 | 45 | 0/0 | 0.76 | 2.49 | A |
| S. HolmstromR | 22:32 | 1-0 | 2 | 0.45 | 34 | 0/0 | 0.68 | 1.81 | B |
| A. DuclairL | 18:25 | 0-0 | 2 | 0.57 | 55 | 0/0 | 0.44 | 1.43 | B |
| C. CizikasC | 14:04 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.12 | 69 | 0/0 | 0.37 | 1.58 | B |
| B. HorvatC | 17:36 | 0-1 | 0 | 0.10 | 33 | 1/0 | 0.39 | 1.33 | B |
| V. EklundR | 15:07 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.32 | 55 | 0/0 | 0.31 | 1.23 | C |
| A. RomanovD | 18:18 | 0-0 | 2 | 0.18 | 42 | 0/0 | 0.23 | 0.75 | C |
| M. MaccelliL | 18:02 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.11 | 48 | 1/0 | 0.20 | 0.66 | C |
| M. KesselD | 15:28 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.01 | 51 | 0/0 | 0.15 | 0.60 | D |
| J. PageauC | 15:17 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.04 | 53 | 0/0 | 0.14 | 0.54 | D |
| R. PulockD | 17:41 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.00 | 52 | 0/0 | 0.14 | 0.47 | D |
| A. PelechD | 16:27 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.00 | 51 | 0/0 | 0.07 | 0.24 | D |
| O. PalatL | 14:51 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.10 | 37 | 0/0 | 0.04 | 0.16 | D |
| I. GeorgeD | 10:43 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.03 | 44 | 0/0 | -0.05 | -0.26 | D |
| C. RitchieC | 17:08 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.00 | 37 | 1/0 | -0.07 | -0.23 | F |
| K. AitchesonD | 16:10 | 0-0 | 2 | 0.01 | 34 | 0/1 | -0.26 | -0.97 | F |
| S. MayfieldD | 12:58 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.00 | 35 | 0/1 | -0.47 | -2.15 | F |
xG% = share of expected goals while on the ice · PD/PT = penalties drawn / taken · “in N min” = a per-60 rate far above the raw total. Impact = 0.75 G + 0.7 A1 + 0.55 A2 + 0.075 SOG + 0.05 BLK + 0.15 penalties drawn − 0.15 taken + 0.01 faceoff wins − 0.01 losses + 0.3 individual xG + 0.5 on-ice xG for − 0.5 on-ice xG against. Rating = 65% impact + 35% impact per 60, as a percentile among the skaters in this game.
Scratched, NJD: N. Bjugstad, S. Noesen, C. White, R. Tufte, D. Rittich, J. Boqvist and 31 more. Scratched, NYI: S. Varlamov, B. Schenn, T. DeAngelo, P. Engvall, M. Highmore, M. Barzal and 32 more. Referees Jake Brenk and Alex Lepkowski; linesmen Shandor Alphonso and Anthony Lapointe.
NJD Created 3.62 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 7 high-danger shots (1.44 xG) and 29 rush shots (2.64 xG).
NYI Created 3.19 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 4 high-danger shots (1.05 xG) and 21 rush shots (2.55 xG).
NJD Allowed 3.19 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 4 high-danger shots (1.05 xG) and 21 rush shots (2.55 xG).
NYI Allowed 3.62 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 7 high-danger shots (1.44 xG) and 29 rush shots (2.64 xG).
NJD Rush shots 29–21, rush xG 2.64–2.55 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).
NYI Rush shots 21–29, rush xG 2.55–2.64 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).
NJD 1-for-2 on the power play (50%; league ≈21%) with 0.67 PP xG.
NYI 0-for-4 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 0.47 PP xG.
NJD +2.19 goals saved above expected on 15 shots against.
NYI -0.38 goals saved above expected on 26 shots against.
NJD Took 4 penalties for 8 PIM vs 2 for 4 on the other side.
NYI Took 2 penalties for 4 PIM vs 4 for 8 on the other side.
Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral
NJD Finishing +0.38 goals vs xG plus +2.19 GSAx of save luck = +2.57 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.
NYI Finishing -2.19 goals vs xG plus -0.38 GSAx of save luck = -2.57 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.
Gave up 29 rush shots worth 2.64 xG (3 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.
Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.
3 goals on 29 rush shots worth 2.64 xG.
J. Allen stopped 14 of 15 (0.933) — +2.19 goals saved above expected in a 3-goal game.
Scored 1 on 3.19 xG — -2.19 vs expected. The looks were there; the finish will come back.
Gave up 21 rush shots worth 2.55 xG (0 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.
Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.
0 goals on 21 rush shots worth 2.55 xG.
Each club shoots toward its own end — NJD 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.
Split squads and prospects, not the club that will take the ice in October. The rates below are last season's; this exhibition will not count toward season records, form, rankings or player numbers.
The model projects a NJD 3.3 - 3.3 NYI game with the Devils at 50% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.
Keys to the game
| Metric | NJD | NYI |
|---|---|---|
| xG% | 50.7% | 47.7% |
| Corsi% | 51.3% | 49.0% |
| PDO | 0.971 | 0.992 |
Rates from 2025-26 — the 2026-27 sample isn't live yet.
NJD
NYI
NJD
NYI
Data: NHL API, Backcheck xG model
NJD by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score NJD 3.3–3.3 NYI; 16% chance it's tied after 60.
NJD holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.971 vs 0.992) says NYI has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.
Ilya Sorokin: +31.4 GSAx over 55 games (0.906 SV%).
S. Varlamov projects to start on no rest, the second night of a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or tired legs.
Test the goalie early with traffic and second-chance pressure.
Jacob Markstrom: -16.2 GSAx over 44 games.
Shoot from everywhere — volume beats a cold crease.
Lenni Hameenaho is on ice for 2.55 xGA/60 and 22 high-danger shots against this season.
Hunt matchups against Lenni Hameenaho's shifts with the top line.
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.