Backcheck
Recap · PIT at NJD

Penguins run the Devils off the ice on the underlying numbers

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

By the ModelJul 12, 11:02 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
PIT
Pittsburgh Penguins
5
Home
NJD
New Jersey Devils
2
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

5.02Expected goals2.47
67% share for the better side
30Shot attempts (SOG)21
7High-danger chances5
63Corsi (all attempts)42
Score-adjusted: 56% / 44%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

New Jersey's 41 percent shot-attempt share belied the underlying reality—their expected goals totaled 2.47 for a 33 percent split, revealing how much volume masked inferior shot quality. Pittsburgh's efficiency at 0.080 expected goals per attempt versus 0.059 compounded the deficit into the 5-2 final.

The Penguins created eight rebound opportunities with one conversion. The Devils created three with none, illustrating Pittsburgh's edge in net-front positioning. Both teams scored two goals on the rush—an even split in transition—but the underlying advantage proved decisive elsewhere.

E. Chinakhov finished with 1G, 2A in 14:23, leading the night. E. Karlsson added 1G, 1A in 22:30, his wrist shot from the wing in the third period serving as a momentum inflection. E. Malkin chipped in 1G, 1A in 17:13.

J. Allen stopped 25 of 29 shots (0.862 SV%) and posted a plus-1.02 performance versus expected, suggesting he made saves the underlying metrics didn't forecast. S. Skinner turned aside 19 of 21 (0.905 SV%), solid against superior threats.

High-danger chances finished 7–5 in Pittsburgh's favor, crystallizing the pattern: New Jersey generated volume without corresponding danger.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
PIT2 / 7 · 2.56 xG
NJD1 / 5 · 1.08 xG
Medium dangermid-range
PIT2 / 17 · 1.88 xG
NJD0 / 8 · 0.84 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
PIT1 / 39 · 0.58 xG
NJD1 / 29 · 0.55 xG

NJD went 0-for-8 from medium danger on 0.84 expected goals — 0.8 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
PIT
5 G · 5.02 xG · -0.0
NJD
2 G · 2.47 xG · -0.5
0123456
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
S. SkinnerPIT
+0.5
J. AllenNJD
+1.0

PIT finished -0.0 against expected, NJD -0.5 — J. Allen (NJD) saved 1.0 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
PIT
WRIST3/18
SNAP1/6
SLAP0/10
BACKHAND0/6
TIP IN1/4
WRAP AROUND0/1
OTHER0/18
NJD
WRIST1/16
SNAP0/7
SLAP0/2
BACKHAND1/2
TIP IN0/3
WRAP AROUND0/2
OTHER0/10
PIT
NJD
Off the rush
2 G on 23 · 1.77 xG
2 G on 21 · 1.84 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 8 · 0.95 xG
0 G on 3 · 0.31 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: PIT went 3-for-18, NJD 1-for-16. PIT scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
E. Chinakhov
#59 · R · PIT
1 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 14:23 TOI · +2
E. Karlsson
#65 · D · PIT
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 22:30 TOI
E. Malkin
#71 · C · PIT
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 17:13 TOI · +3
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • NJD had the shot volume but the chances weren't dangerous.
  • J. Allen (NJD) stopped 1.0 goals above expected.
  • PIT had the higher quality looks — 0.080 xG/shot vs 0.059.
  • NJD was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 21 rush chances.
  • PIT was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 23 rush chances.
  • NJD created 3 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • PIT created 8 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · PIT at NJD · 7:00 PM ET

Penguins at Devils: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 12, 11:00 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

51%
NJD
Model favorite
49%
51%
PIT50NJD

NJD by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score PIT 2.62.6 NJD; 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 →NJD
51.0%5v5 xG%50.0%
50.0%Corsi%51.0%
2.66xGF / 602.45
2.55xGA / 602.50
2.45Goals for / gm1.66
2.12Goals against / gm2.23
1.012PDO — luck, not skill0.971

PIT holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.012 vs 0.971) says PIT has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects 2.6-2.6 with New Jersey at 51% win probability. This is as close to a pick'em as exists.

Statistically, these teams are nearly matched at even strength. Pittsburgh's expected-goals edge (51.0% xG%) mirrors New Jersey's Corsi advantage (51.0%), suggesting parity in shot generation. The Devils carry a PDO of 0.971—running cold and due for positive regression. Pittsburgh arrives on four days of rest; New Jersey on two.

Rickard Rakell remains Pittsburgh's primary offensive engine. His 13 goals and 12.1% shooting percentage far exceed his 1.01 xG/60, implying unusually hot finishing. Filip Hallander provided secondary generation at 1.28 xG/60 but is likely out on IR pending evaluation.

New Jersey counters with Jack Hughes, who leads with 18 goals despite 0.88 xG/60—evidence of elite finishing running hot. Timo Meier's 1.08 xG/60 and 13 goals arrive with just 6.7% shooting, well below his underlying output and ripe for regression toward the mean.

Defensively, Caleb Jones represents Pittsburgh's weak link, with Johnathan Kovacevic filling that role for New Jersey.

The Devils' statistical cold snap and rest disadvantage cut against them. Rakell's elite conversion is Pittsburgh's primary edge. Meier and Hughes's underlying metrics suggest New Jersey is overdue for correction, though this matchup is tight enough that it barely shifts the odds. The rest advantage tilts this toward Pittsburgh, but only marginally.

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
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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters