Backcheck
Recap · PIT at NYR

Penguins shut out the Rangers, 3-0

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

By the ModelJun 16, 1:42 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
PIT
Pittsburgh Penguins
3
Home
NYR
New York Rangers
0
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

4.21Expected goals2.91
59% share for the better side
31Shot attempts (SOG)25
7High-danger chances5
61Corsi (all attempts)60
Score-adjusted: 47% / 53%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Pittsburgh proved that volume isn't destiny. New York mustered 45% of shot attempts (25–31 on goal) but collected just 41% of expected goals—a gap that became insurmountable when the Rangers couldn't bury their chances.

The Penguins controlled the underlying numbers decisively. Pittsburgh generated 4.21 xG to New York's 2.91, a 59–41 split. More importantly, PIT's average shot carried 0.069 xG, vs. 0.049 for NYR—evidence of a cleaner attack. Pittsburgh converted 2 goals on 26 rush attempts; the Rangers managed 0 on five high-danger chances.

A. Silovs was the story that didn't need to be told. The Pittsburgh goalie stopped all 25 shots and saved 2.91 goals above expected. I. Shesterkin, meanwhile, made 28 of 29 saves (+3.21 above expected) and still watched his team get shut out. His performance was excellent. His offense wasn't.

The turning point came early: Blake Lizotte's wrist shot from the wing at 18:08 of the first period. From there, New York couldn't recover. The Rangers' 0-for-5 on high-danger chances underperformed even pessimistic expectations. They created five rebound opportunities and converted none. That won't happen often—but it happened tonight.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
PIT2 / 7 · 2.40 xG
NYR0 / 5 · 1.13 xG
Medium dangermid-range
PIT1 / 14 · 1.34 xG
NYR0 / 10 · 1.16 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
PIT0 / 40 · 0.47 xG
NYR0 / 45 · 0.62 xG

NYR went 0-for-10 from medium danger on 1.16 expected goals — 1.2 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
PIT
3 G · 4.21 xG · -1.2
NYR
0 G · 2.91 xG · -2.9
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
A. SilovsPIT
+2.9
I. ShesterkinNYR
+3.2

PIT finished -1.2 against expected, NYR -2.9 — I. Shesterkin (NYR) saved 3.2 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
PIT
WRIST2/24
SNAP0/8
BACKHAND1/6
SLAP0/0
TIP IN0/1
WRAP AROUND0/2
OTHER0/20
NYR
WRIST0/17
SNAP0/8
BACKHAND0/3
SLAP0/6
TIP IN0/4
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/22
PIT
NYR
Off the rush
2 G on 26 · 2.81 xG
0 G on 21 · 1.62 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 5 · 0.82 xG
0 G on 5 · 0.84 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: PIT went 2-for-24, NYR 0-for-17. PIT scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
E. Malkin
#71 · C ·
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 16:28 TOI · +2
J. Brazeau
#16 · R ·
2 G · 0 A · 6 SOG · 12:49 TOI · +2
R. Shea
#5 · D ·
0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 22:31 TOI · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • A. Silovs (PIT) stopped 2.9 goals above expected.
  • PIT had the higher quality looks — 0.069 xG/shot vs 0.049.
  • NYR couldn't convert — 0/5 on high-danger chances. That won't happen often.
  • PIT was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 26 rush chances.
  • NYR created 5 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • PIT created 5 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • NYR underperformed xG by 2.9 — wasted quality chances.
  • A. Silovs (PIT) saved 2.9 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • A. Silovs was a wall on HD chances — 100% SV on 5 high-danger shots.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · PIT at NYR · 8:00 PM ET

Penguins at Rangers: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJun 16, 1:41 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

50%
PIT
Model favorite
50%
50%
PIT50NYR

PIT by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score PIT 2.52.5 NYR; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

PIT← edge
edge →NYR
51.0%5v5 xG%48.0%
50.0%Corsi%49.0%
2.66xGF / 602.26
2.55xGA / 602.40
2.45Goals for / gm1.88
2.12Goals against / gm1.90
1.012PDO — luck, not skill1.009

PIT holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.012 vs 1.009) says PIT has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.5–2.5 game with the Rangers at exactly 50% win probability. This is a true pick'em.

The teams are similarly matched on underlying metrics. Pittsburgh produces more quality chances (51.0% 5v5 expected goals to 48.0%) and controls possession marginally better (50.0% Corsi to 49.0%). Both teams carry similar PDO readings (Pittsburgh 1.012, New York 1.009), suggesting neither is riding unusual luck.

Pittsburgh's single meaningful edge is recent form. The Penguins are 5-1-1 in ten games. The model barely tilts toward Pittsburgh because of it.

New York counters with efficient depth. Adam Sykora generates 0.91 expected goals per 60 minutes at a 20.0% shooting percentage. Gabe Perreault has done the same—8 goals, 11 assists, 0.79 xG/60, with two high-danger chances finished.

Pittsburgh answers with Rickard Rakell: 13 goals, 13 assists, 1.01 xG/60, 12.1% shooting. The Penguins had also tracked Filip Hallander (1.28 xG/60) as a threat, but he's out on injured reserve following an AHL conditioning stint.

Both teams are equally cold on high-danger goals and rebounds—0% for each. Caleb Jones is Pittsburgh's defensive weak link; Vincent Iorio is New York's. It's a metric that signals regression is coming for one of them.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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
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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters