After a brief hiatus from playoff hockey in the nation’s capitol, the Washington Capitals squeaked their way into the 2024 postseason festivities; earning a match-up with the President’s Trophy winning New York Rangers in the first round.

Although the gap in standings points was quite considerable (the Rangers finished with 114 points, the Caps with 91), the two squads split the season series 2-2-0, with each team scoring nine goals in those four games.

This series could be a lot closer than most folks expect, but spoiler alert: the underlying metrics don’t exactly show the Caps as a team that should have made the playoffs at all. But, to be fair, no team with a -37 goal differential is going to have amazing underlying stats.

In this post, we’re going to take a look at each teams’ performance throughout the entire 2023-24 season, since the trade deadline, and in head-to-head match-ups in key analytical categories, namely possession metrics and scoring chance generation.

We’ll also identify some areas to watch for potential mismatches. The statistics used in this post are courtesy of Natural Stat Trick, Hockey Reference, and HockeyViz. If you’d like to learn more about the statistical terms used in this post, please check out our NHL Analytics Glossary.

Season Long Performance

First up, let’s take a look at the most zoomed-out view of each teams’ performance in possession and chance generation metrics during five-on-five play this season:

It’s no surprise to see the Rangers have performed better across the board in possession metrics, considering where these two teams ended up in the standings, even if both squads ended up making the playoffs. The Caps are clearly not analytical darlings this season, which is a result of: one, generating the second lowest amount of shots on goal during five-on-five play this season (1686) and allowing the tenth most shots on goal (1960). On top of that, as mentioned earlier, you’re not going to look good on paper in any regard when you have a -37 goal differential.

Those discrepancies between shots on goal generated vs allowed are going to impact possession metrics greatly, considering all of these are effectively measuring how often you shoot (and not necessarily how long each team is possessing the puck). It’s a general inference that if you shoot (or attempt to shoot) more often than your opponents, you likely possess the puck at a higher rate than your opponents. The Caps clearly do not.

This also tells the story of two teams: one is in the prime of their contention window, the other was a seller at the trade deadline that rallied as a group and defied all odds and expectations to squeak into the playoffs.

Here’s how each team fared in chance generation metrics:

Interestingly enough, this is a pretty close differential between these two teams. While the Caps had struggled with shot generation squaring up with their opponents, they were much closer in terms of chance generation and limiting scoring chances and high-danger chances against. In fact, you can see here that the Caps were actually slightly more effective in High Danger Goals For percentage (HDGF%) than the Rangers were, even though the Rangers owned a higher share percentage of high danger chances for (HDCF%) during the entirety of the season.

Shockingly, the Capitals’ high-danger performance wasn’t even buoyed by their goaltenders — the Caps actually had the 10th-ranked high-danger shooting percentage in the league at 19.41% and the 5th worst high danger save percentage at 79.6%. The Rangers’ netminding duo was slightly better at 81.36%, but their high danger shooting percentage was the 7th worst in the league at 15.84%.

Performance since the trade deadline

I thought looking at the metrics since the trade deadline was a good way of displaying each team’s actual playoff roster. It gives us the clearest picture of how each team performs with their likely contributors in the postseason. That being said, here’s how each team performed since the March 8th trade deadline day:

I’m going to beat the same drum as in the previous section here: this is a tale of a team that bought at the deadline matching up against a team that was a seller at the deadline. The Caps aren’t a high flying offensive team, or even that great of a defensive team, they’re a team that can play you close and score goals when they mean the most.

Here’s each squads’ chance generation metric performance since the trade deadline:

Again, a similar story to the season long snapshot of each teams’ performance. The Caps trail slightly behind in scoring chance for percentage (SCF%) and HDCF%, but pace ahead of the Rangers in HDGF%. That’s ultimately rather interesting because the Rangers are a much more effective team at finishing on shots and scoring chances than the Capitals are. Here’s a view at the Caps’ finishing chart versus the Rangers’ finishing chart (via HockeyViz):

The reality is, the Rangers scored more goals than were expected in all situations, where the Caps struggled in that regard. We’ve seen over the course of the past decade or so that teams that tend to score more goals than expected are more successful than teams that have a negative goals for to expected ratio.

Head-to-Head Performance

Now, I mentioned in the introduction to this post that this series could be closer than a lot of the national pundits might think. There’s a good reason for this, and here’s a peek:

The Caps were the better team during five-on-five play this season when matched up directly with the Rangers, owning a higher share of goals for percentage (GF%) and expected goals for percentage (xGF%). Even with unblocked shot attempts (Fenwick For / FF%) and shots for percentage (SF%) trailing behind the Rangers in their four matchups, the Capitals still owned better marks in GF% and xGF%. Here’s how the quality of chances generated breaks down:

The differential in xGF% comes down to a much higher rate of scoring chances generated by the Capitals. Even with the Rangers having an advantage in high danger chances generated, the Caps completely dominated them in HDGF%. The Rangers’ netminding duo had a 73.68% high danger save percentage against the Capitals head-to-head, and their skaters had a 14.29% high danger shooting percentage. Compare that to the Caps’ netminders posting an 85.71% high danger save percentage and a 26.32% high danger shooting percentage.

Wrapping it all up

The x-factor for this series is going to be Charlie Lindgren. In three games played against the Rangers this season, he went 2-1-0, posting a .955 save percentage, a 1.35 GAA (only 4 goals allowed) and a shutout. All it takes is for a goaltender to get hot at the right time (looking at you 2010 Jaroslav Halak) for a team to make noise in the playoffs.

Make no mistake about it: at a zoomed out view of this series, it’s pretty clear why the Rangers are a favorite to win the series, and potentially even the Stanley Cup. But, the more you zoom in — especially when you get to head-to-head statistics — the closer this series looks. The Capitals have been playing playoff intensity level hockey for at least the past month, so we know that they can show up for a series, especially as an underdog.

By Justin Trudel