Backcheck
Recap · NJD at PHI

Flyers pull away from the Devils

The Flyers won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

By the ModelJul 11, 5:15 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
NJD
New Jersey Devils
3
Home
PHI
Philadelphia Flyers
6
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.96Expected goals3.90
50% share for the better side
35Shot attempts (SOG)29
1High-danger chances5
71Corsi (all attempts)48
Score-adjusted: 66% / 34%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

The 6–3 scoreline suggested a Flyers rout, but expected goals told another story: 3.90–3.96, nearly even, with New Jersey holding the thin edge. Variance, not dominance, decided this game.

Philadelphia held 45% of shot attempts (29–35) while dominating the high-danger count 5–1, yet squeezed only a marginal xG advantage through shot quality—0.081 expected goals per shot versus New Jersey's 0.056. The Flyers overperformed their xG by 2.10 goals; the Devils underperformed by 0.96.

D. Vladar (PHI) was solid in net, saving 32 of 35 and outperforming expectations by 0.96 goals. J. Allen (NJD) paid the price on the other side: 23 of 29 saved, falling 2.10 short. The Flyers' efficiency on the rush—four goals from 33 chances—was where the game turned. New Jersey's power play was sharp: two goals on twelve shots (1.16 xG), yet it wasn't enough to overcome Philadelphia's finishing.

Trevor Zegras's wrist shot from the high slot (P3, 15:21) marked the pivot. The Flyers also converted two low-danger opportunities—the sort of chances Allen should stop. Six goals told a story xG never predicted.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NJD0 / 1 · 0.19 xG
PHI1 / 5 · 1.13 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NJD3 / 27 · 3.02 xG
PHI3 / 19 · 2.09 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NJD0 / 43 · 0.74 xG
PHI2 / 24 · 0.67 xG

PHI went 2-for-24 from low danger on 0.67 expected goals — 1.3 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NJD
3 G · 3.96 xG · -1.0
PHI
6 G · 3.90 xG · +2.1
01234567
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
J. AllenNJD
-2.1
D. VladarPHI
+1.0

NJD finished -1.0 against expected, PHI +2.1 — J. Allen (NJD) allowed 2.1 more goals than expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NJD
WRIST2/35
SNAP0/6
TIP IN1/5
BACKHAND0/8
SLAP0/3
DEFLECTED0/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
BAT0/1
OTHER0/11
PHI
WRIST4/21
SNAP2/16
TIP IN0/4
BACKHAND0/1
SLAP0/1
DEFLECTED0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
BAT0/0
OTHER0/4
NJD
PHI
Off the rush
2 G on 25 · 1.54 xG
4 G on 33 · 3.27 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 10 · 1.16 xG
1 G on 5 · 0.48 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: NJD went 2-for-35, PHI 4-for-21. PHI scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
J. Bratt
#63 · L · NJD
0 G · 3 A · 6 SOG · 20:50 TOI · +1
N. Hischier
#13 · C · NJD
2 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 20:11 TOI · +1
N. Cates
#27 · L · PHI
1 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 16:28 TOI · +3
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • J. Allen (NJD) gave up 2.1 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
  • PHI generated far more dangerous chances — 0.081 xG/shot vs 0.056. Quality over quantity.
  • PHI scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
  • PHI was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 33 rush chances.
  • NJD was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 25 rush chances.
  • PHI created 5 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • NJD created 10 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • PHI outperformed their expected goals by 2.1 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.
  • NJD power play was dominant — 2 PPG on 12 PP shots (1.16 xG).
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · NJD at PHI · 7:00 PM ET

Devils at Flyers: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 5:34 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

53%
PHI
Model favorite
47%
53%
NJD50PHI

PHI by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score NJD 2.32.5 PHI; 19% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

NJD← edge
edge →PHI
50.0%5v5 xG%51.0%
51.0%Corsi%48.0%
2.45xGF / 602.26
2.50xGA / 602.20
1.66Goals for / gm1.96
2.23Goals against / gm1.82
0.971PDO — luck, not skill1.008

PHI holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.971 vs 1.008) says PHI has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects the Flyers at 53% win probability in a game that splits 2.3–2.5 goals. This is about as close to a pick'em as the market offers.

The Devils' underlying metrics reveal the standoff: they drive possession at 51.0% Corsi but run cold at a PDO of 0.971, primed for positive regression. The Flyers edge in shot quality (51.0% xG%) but operate at a PDO of 1.008 that's already performing to expectation—no margin for mean reversion there.

Form deepens the mystery. New Jersey sits underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10 games, which doesn't square with their territorial edge. A regression-based rebound is plausible; a deeper pattern is not evident.

Goaltending introduces an unforced wildcard. D. Vladar faces a back-to-back start, as does J. Allen. Either could yield a tired starter or a backup—a lottery ticket in a game this tight.

Timo Meier generates 1.08 xG per 60 with 13 goals and 3 high-danger goals at a 6.7% shooting rate, signaling his volume is backed by quality. Jack Hughes operates at 0.88 xG/60 with 18 goals at 11.5% shooting, well above his underlying rate. Owen Tippett mirrors Hughes at 0.88 xG/60 with 19 goals and 2 high-danger goals at 12.1% shooting. Both are outperforming their chances, which is a key variable in a game this tight.

Christian Dvorak (0.81 xG/60, 12 goals, 3 high-danger goals) anchors Philadelphia's depth and compounds New Jersey's defensive vulnerabilities. Johnathan Kovacevic is flagged as New Jersey's weak link. Both teams sit at 0% on high-danger and rebound goal rates—a statistical impossibility that suggests either sample noise or rigid structural suppression of those attack avenues.

Players to Watch

  • Timo Meier (NJD): 1.08 xG/60, 13 goals, 3 high-danger goals, 6.7% shooting
  • Jack Hughes (NJD): 0.88 xG/60, 18 goals, 11.5% shooting
  • Owen Tippett (PHI): 0.88 xG/60, 19 goals, 2 high-danger goals, 12.1% shooting
  • Christian Dvorak (PHI): 0.81 xG/60, 12 goals, 3 high-danger goals, 11.2% shooting

When possession metrics converge, form fractures, and goaltending randomizes, the model's 53% nod to the Flyers is a coin flip. Neither team has built separation.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NJD
Timo Meier13G 15A
1.08 xG/60 · 3 HD · 6.7% sh
Jack Hughes18G 17A
0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.5% sh
PHI
Owen Tippett19G 18A
0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.1% sh
Christian Dvorak12G 21A
0.81 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.2% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters