Backcheck
Recap · NYR at PIT

Rangers pull away from the Penguins

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

By the ModelJun 16, 2:24 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
NYR
New York Rangers
6
Home
PIT
Pittsburgh Penguins
1
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

4.00Expected goals2.92
58% share for the better side
30Shot attempts (SOG)19
10High-danger chances5
60Corsi (all attempts)46
Score-adjusted: 51% / 49%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

I. Shesterkin stole this game, which made the 6-1 scoreline feel like a rout even in a competitive underlying matchup. NYR's netminder saved 1.92 goals above expected—the margin of dominance. A. Silovs gave up 2.00 more than expected, inverting the equation on Pittsburgh's side.

The underlying control favored New York: 58% of 5v5 expected goals (4.00–2.92) and 10 high-danger chances to Pittsburgh's five. Yet the teams remained reasonably close in shot volume—Pittsburgh held 39% of attempts (19–30 on goal). The edge wasn't crushing, but it was clear.

Pittsburgh's killer flaw: zero conversions on five high-danger chances. That won't happen often, and it explains the gap between a competitive game state and a lopsided final score. NYR answered with ruthless efficiency, scoring twice from low-danger spots—the kind of margin that separates wins from route jobs. The Rangers were equally lethal on the rush, netting three goals on 23 chances.

Taylor Raddysh's wrist shot from the doorstep (P3, 14:12) marked the turning point, tilting a manageable deficit into a rout.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NYR1 / 10 · 2.16 xG
PIT0 / 5 · 1.28 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NYR3 / 11 · 1.41 xG
PIT0 / 10 · 1.17 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NYR2 / 39 · 0.43 xG
PIT1 / 31 · 0.47 xG

NYR went 3-for-11 from medium danger on 1.41 expected goals — 1.6 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NYR
6 G · 4.00 xG · +2.0
PIT
1 G · 2.92 xG · -1.9
01234567
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
I. ShesterkinNYR
+1.9
A. SilovsPIT
-2.0

NYR finished +2.0 against expected, PIT -1.9 — A. Silovs (PIT) allowed 2.0 more goals than expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NYR
WRIST4/22
BACKHAND0/5
SNAP0/2
TIP IN0/3
SLAP0/2
DEFLECTED2/2
WRAP AROUND0/1
BAT0/1
OTHER0/22
PIT
WRIST1/23
BACKHAND0/2
SNAP0/3
TIP IN0/2
SLAP0/3
DEFLECTED0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
BAT0/0
OTHER0/12
NYR
PIT
Off the rush
3 G on 23 · 2.81 xG
1 G on 20 · 2.00 xG
Off rebounds
2 G on 5 · 0.76 xG
0 G on 3 · 0.41 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: NYR went 4-for-22, PIT 1-for-23. NYR scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
A. Fox
#23 · D ·
2 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 23:41 TOI · +3
S. Carrick
#39 · C ·
0 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 15:36 TOI · +3
N. Laba
#42 · C ·
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 12:43 TOI · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • I. Shesterkin (NYR) stopped 1.9 goals above expected.
  • A. Silovs (PIT) gave up 2.0 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
  • Open game — 15 high-danger chances combined (PIT 5, NYR 10).
  • PIT couldn't convert — 0/5 on high-danger chances. That won't happen often.
  • NYR scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • NYR was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 23 rush chances.
  • PIT created 3 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • NYR created 5 rebound opportunities (2 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • PIT underperformed xG by 1.9 — wasted quality chances.
  • NYR outperformed their expected goals by 2.0 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.
  • I. Shesterkin (NYR) saved 1.9 goals above expected — stole the show.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · NYR at PIT · 7:00 PM ET

Rangers at Penguins: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJun 16, 2:23 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

54%
PIT
Model favorite
46%
54%
NYR50PIT

PIT by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NYR 2.42.7 PIT; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

NYR← edge
edge →PIT
48.0%5v5 xG%51.0%
49.0%Corsi%50.0%
2.26xGF / 602.66
2.40xGA / 602.55
1.88Goals for / gm2.45
1.90Goals against / gm2.12
1.009PDO — luck, not skill1.012

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

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.4–2.7 goals game with Pittsburgh at 55% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

Pittsburgh owns the underlying play, generating 51.0% of 5v5 expected goals to New York's 48.0%, though both teams are shot-efficient (Pittsburgh's 1.012 PDO, New York's 1.009) and their Corsi counts nearly matched (Pittsburgh 50.0%, New York 49.0%). The difference is in the fine grain—Pittsburgh's edge in expected goals could compound in a tight game.

The Rangers anchor on Adam Sykora at 0.91 xG/60 with a 20.0% shooting rate (3G 1A)—high volume and accuracy in one player. Gabe Perreault fills secondary duty at 0.79 xG/60 with 8G and 11A, including 2 high-danger goals on a 13.1% shooting rate. Pittsburgh's response is Rickard Rakell: 1.01 xG/60, 13G 13A, and 3 high-danger goals on a 12.1% shooting rate—the true matchup problem.

Roster depth favors Pittsburgh on paper. Filip Hallander has been their scoring catalyst at 1.28 xG/60, but he's on injured reserve and recovering through AHL conditioning games. That's a significant loss for a thin lineup.

Both teams feature defensive weak links: Vincent Iorio for New York, Caleb Jones for Pittsburgh. Neither has converted high-danger or rebound chances at notable rates (0% for both), suggesting youth on the blue line. The matchup tilts Pittsburgh—but only slightly. This is a genuine coin flip.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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
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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters