Backcheck
Recap · SJS at NYR

Sharks edge the Rangers in overtime

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

By the ModelJul 11, 1:11 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
SJS
San Jose Sharks
6
Home
NYR
New York Rangers
5
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.47Expected goals3.09
53% share for the better side
24Shot attempts (SOG)28
8High-danger chances5
46Corsi (all attempts)63
Score-adjusted: 40% / 60%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Both teams overperformed their expected goals—the Rangers by 1.91 goals and the Sharks by 2.53—which means this 6-5 result masks a nearly even underlying game.

The Sharks' 3.47 xG to 3.09 barely justified their one-goal advantage. New York controlled play with 54% of shot attempts (28–24 on goal), but generated fewer high-quality looks (5 high-danger chances vs. 8). San Jose's win came down to goaltending and variance. A. Nedeljkovic made 23 of 28 shots while allowing 1.91 fewer goals than expected—an elite performance on the moments that counted, stopping all five high-danger attempts. I. Shesterkin faced a softer workload (18/24 saves) but still allowed 2.53 more than expected, partly betrayed by the Rangers' finishing: they scored twice from low-danger spots.

New York was lethal on the rush (4 goals on 26 chances) while San Jose converted twice on 22. Yet both offenses ran hot overall. The Sharks proved sharper in shot quality: 0.075 xG per attempt vs. the Rangers' 0.049, a genuine edge despite New York's volume advantage.

Will Smith's slap shot from the high slot at 01:38 of overtime decided it—a fitting finish for a forward with 2 goals and 2 assists.

The clearest takeaway: both goaltenders leaked and both offenses clicked. Under those conditions, San Jose's superior offensive quality was enough. A. Nedeljkovic's perfection on dangerous chances ultimately settled a contest where expected goals wanted to call it nearly even.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
SJS3 / 8 · 2.16 xG
NYR0 / 5 · 1.13 xG
Medium dangermid-range
SJS3 / 7 · 0.69 xG
NYR3 / 14 · 1.38 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
SJS0 / 31 · 0.62 xG
NYR2 / 44 · 0.57 xG

SJS went 3-for-7 from medium danger on 0.69 expected goals — 2.3 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
SJS
6 G · 3.47 xG · +2.5
NYR
5 G · 3.09 xG · +1.9
01234567
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
A. NedeljkovicSJS
-1.9
I. ShesterkinNYR
-2.5

SJS finished +2.5 against expected, NYR +1.9 — I. Shesterkin (NYR) allowed 2.5 more goals than expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
SJS
WRIST4/20
SNAP1/5
SLAP1/8
DEFLECTED0/1
TIP IN0/1
BACKHAND0/0
OTHER0/11
NYR
WRIST3/18
SNAP1/10
SLAP1/6
DEFLECTED0/4
TIP IN0/3
BACKHAND0/1
OTHER0/21
SJS
NYR
Off the rush
2 G on 22 · 2.11 xG
4 G on 26 · 2.39 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 2 · 0.59 xG
0 G on 1 · 0.05 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: SJS went 4-for-20, NYR 3-for-18. NYR scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
M. Celebrini
#71 · C · SJS
3 G · 2 A · 5 SOG · 22:40 TOI · +2
W. Smith
#2 · C · SJS
2 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 19:40 TOI · +2
W. Eklund
#72 · L · SJS
0 G · 3 A · 4 SOG · 20:51 TOI · -1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • A. Nedeljkovic (SJS) gave up 1.9 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
  • SJS had the higher quality looks — 0.075 xG/shot vs 0.049.
  • NYR 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 — 4 goals on 26 rush chances.
  • SJS was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 22 rush chances.
  • NYR outperformed their expected goals by 1.9 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.
  • SJS outperformed their expected goals by 2.5 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.
  • A. Nedeljkovic was a wall on HD chances — 100% SV on 5 high-danger shots.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · SJS at NYR · 7:00 PM ET

Sharks at Rangers: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 12:51 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

53%
NYR
Model favorite
47%
53%
SJS50NYR

NYR by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score SJS 2.42.5 NYR; 19% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

SJS← edge
edge →NYR
48.0%5v5 xG%48.0%
47.0%Corsi%49.0%
2.33xGF / 602.26
2.56xGA / 602.40
1.99Goals for / gm1.88
2.32Goals against / gm1.90
0.998PDO — luck, not skill1.009

NYR holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.998 vs 1.009) says NYR has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects a 2.4–2.5 goal game with New York at 53% win probability. That's as close to a coin flip as the numbers get. San Jose arrives wounded: minus-16 in goal differential over the last ten signals a team that's collapsing, not just variance-unlucky.

The underlying rate statistics are nearly identical. Both teams generate 48.0% xG at even strength. San Jose lags slightly in puck possession (47.0 Corsi% vs. New York's 49.0%), but luck margins offset the imbalance. The Sharks' 0.998 PDO sits below parity, suggesting positive regression; the Rangers' 1.009 shows they're running hot.

San Jose loses Pavol Regenda to an inactive listing, forcing Igor Chernyshov into the focal-point role for an offense already underwater. New York must contain Chernyshov, while San Jose must account for Adam Sykora's efficiency and Gabe Perreault's secondary involvement. Defensively, San Jose leaks through Chernyshov; New York's weak link is Vincent Iorio.

Players to Watch

San Jose

  • Pavol Regenda — 1.10 xG/60, 5G 1A, 2 HD goals, 16.1% shooting
  • Igor Chernyshov — 0.91 xG/60, 6G 8A, 1 HD goal, 15.0% shooting

New York

  • Adam Sykora — 0.91 xG/60, 3G 1A, 20.0% shooting
  • Gabe Perreault — 0.79 xG/60, 8G 11A, 2 HD goals, 13.1% shooting

Neither offense generates high-danger chances or rebounds at meaningful rates. Both carry 0% HD goal rates and 0% rebound rates, flattening the playmaking premium. This is a possession game masquerading as a skill contest—marginal edges in puck control and individual finishing decide it.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

SJS
Pavol Regenda5G 1A
1.10 xG/60 · 2 HD · 16.1% sh
Igor Chernyshov6G 8A
0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% 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