Motion-blurred skater in a Winnipeg Jets sweater

Breakdown · WPG at CGY

Jets hold off the Flames

FinalMon, Oct 20

The verdict · coin flip

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

WPG 2 · CGY 1

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 12:30 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

The Jets won 2-1 despite Calgary dominating shot volume: the Flames held 55% of shot attempts (33-27 on goal) while high-danger chances went 3-4. Expected goals nearly split even—3.27 Calgary, 3.30 Winnipeg. Yet one team finished, and one did not.

C. Hellebuyck's save percentage of 0.970 was decisive—2.3 goals saved above expectation. Calgary's problem was two-fold: execution and bad luck. The Flames underperformed their expected goals by 2.27, while Winnipeg underperformed by 1.30. That gap suggests Calgary wasted chances more than Winnipeg got unlucky.

Where the Jets separated themselves: shot quality. Winnipeg averaged 0.072 xG per attempt; Calgary averaged 0.045. On the rush, Winnipeg was lethal—two goals on 21 chances, a conversion that offset Calgary's rebound work (three opportunities, zero conversions).

Mark Scheifele's wrist shot from the doorstep (P3, 15:06) proved the difference.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Oct 20

WPG

CGY

Jets hold off the Flames

Chances 3.3 – 3.3Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Jets took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value

WPG

3.30

CGY

3.27

50% of the chances50%

The board read WPG 2, CGY 1. The chances read WPG 3.3, CGY 3.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations

Luck check

WPG

−1.3

goals above expected

WPG3.30 expected · 2 scored

Expected

Scored

CGY3.27 expected · 1 scored

Expected

Scored

The Flames left 2.3 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season

Every goal, in order

P2 13:22CGYR. Andersson0–1
P3 02:41WPGJ. ToewsPP1–1
P3 15:06WPGM. Scheifele2–1

NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model

Where the shots came from

WPG

34 shots

Final

82 shots

CGY

48 shots

WPG CGY GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 2 in

shots · 1 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

WPGCGY

2 / 4

0.86 xG

High danger

0 / 3

0.63 xG

0 / 16

2.00 xG

Medium

0 / 18

1.92 xG

0 / 26

0.44 xG

Low

1 / 51

0.72 xG

The Flames went 0 for 3 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance

In the net

C. Hellebuyck

+2.3

WPG · 32/33

B+

D. Wolf

+1.3

CGY · 25/27

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Jets hold off the Flames

A model, not a newsroom. Every number on these frames comes from the NHL's play-by-play and our own models. Nothing was watched, guessed or heard from anyone.

Read the full breakdown

backcheckreport.com

01 / 08 · Final

Every goal, in order

How it happened

NHL play-by-play

1stshots 7–9no goals

2ndshots 14–12

13:22CGYR. Andersson(A. Klapka, R. Lomberg)0–1

3rdshots 6–12

02:41WPGJ. Toewspower play(N. Pionk, N. Niederreiter)1–1
15:06WPGM. Scheifele(K. Connor, J. Morrissey)2–1

score reads WPG–CGY

Source · NHL play-by-play (api-web.nhle.com)

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.30

WPG chances

Goals their shots were worth

−1.3

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.030

WPG puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

39.0%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.30Expected goals3.27

WPG 50% of the chance quality

27Shots on goal33

4High-danger chances3

46All attempts (Corsi)72

Adjusted for score: WPG 40% · CGY 60%

Faceoffs · CGY won59%off15%neu25%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

WPG2 / 4 · 0.86 xG

CGY0 / 3 · 0.63 xG

Medium dangermid-range

WPG0 / 16 · 2.00 xG

CGY0 / 18 · 1.92 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

WPG0 / 26 · 0.44 xG

CGY1 / 51 · 0.72 xG

WPG went 0-for-16 from medium danger on 2.00 expected goals — 2.0 left on the table.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

WPG

2 G · 3.30 xG · -1.3

CGY

1 G · 3.27 xG · -2.3

01234

WPG finished -1.3 against expected, CGY -2.3.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

WPG

WRIST1/19

SLAP0/7

TIP IN1/3

BACKHAND0/3

SNAP0/2

DEFLECTED0/0

OTHER0/12

CGY

WRIST0/29

SLAP1/6

TIP IN0/8

BACKHAND0/2

SNAP0/2

DEFLECTED0/1

OTHER0/24

WPG

CGY

Off the rush

2 G on 21

2.22 xG

0 G on 33

2.61 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 5

0.81 xG

0 G on 3

0.30 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: WPG went 1-for-19, CGY 0-for-29. WPG scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types

New to these numbers?

Two things happened in this game: who created the better chances, and who put the puck in the net. They are not the same thing, and this page separates them on purpose.

The one to watch is expected goals— the best single read on who deserved to win. When it disagrees with the scoreboard, that disagreement is usually the story. Nothing here is a projection; every figure is computed from this game's play-by-play. Full glossary →

xG: Expected goals. Every shot scored by how often that exact look goes in. 2.5 xG means the chances were worth about two and a half goals.
HD: High-danger chances — shots from the slot and the crease, where shots actually become goals.
Corsi: Every shot attempt, including the ones that missed or got blocked. A rough read on who had the puck.
Adj.: Score-adjusted. Teams that trail shoot more and teams that lead sit back, so this corrects the attempt count for the scoreboard.
GSAx: Goals saved above expected. A positive number means the goalie stopped more than an average goalie would have on those shots.
PDO: Shooting % plus save % — a luck gauge. It sits near 1.000 over a season, so a game far from it usually means the bounces decided it.

Shot by shot

In the net

Graded on goals saved above expected

C. Hellebuyck

WPG · 32/33 · .970

+2.3

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/30.6+0.6

Medium0/181.9+1.9

Low1/510.7-0.3

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

D. Wolf

CGY · 25/27 · .926

+1.3

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/40.9-1.1

Medium0/162.0+2.0

Low0/260.4+0.4

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

82 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

WPG

34 shots

Final

82 shots

CGY

48 shots

WPG CGY GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — WPG left, CGY right — the way you would watch it. A dot's size is how dangerous the look was, from distance and angle; it is a proxy for shot quality, not the xG model the article is written from. Hover a dot for the shooter and the clock.

Ranked from the box score

Three stars

Points first

Three stars · computed, not voted

N. Pionk

#4 · D · WPG

0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 25:24 on ice

R. Andersson

#4 · D · CGY

1 G · 0 A · 6 SOG · 25:18 on ice · +1

J. Morrissey

#44 · D · WPG

0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 22:22 on ice

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Oct 20

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJun 16, 3:13 PMEdited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

The model can barely choose between these teams: 2.5-2.6 expected goals against each other, with Calgary at 51% win probability. This is as close to a pick'em as analytical projections get.

Winnipeg is the hotter team on the standings (6-4-0 in their last 10), while Calgary has cratered, sitting -23 in goal differential over the same stretch. But the season-long 5v5 numbers are nearly identical—Winnipeg holds a 48.0% expected goals share to Calgary's 47.0%, and both teams post 49.0% Corsi. The real divergence is in luck: Winnipeg's PDO of 0.998 suggests efficient finish, while Calgary's 0.985 PDO indicates a team running cold and due for positive regression.

Winnipeg's offense rides Nino Niederreiter and Kyle Connor. Niederreiter carries 0.87 xG/60 with 6 goals and 6 assists, including 3 high-danger goals on 8.6% shooting. Connor's 25 goals and 30 assists include 2 high-danger goals on elite 13.0% shooting—the kind of efficiency that anchors playoff contenders. Calgary counters with Blake Coleman at 0.89 xG/60 (16 goals, 12 assists, 2 HD goals) and Matt Coronato at 0.80 xG/60 (10 goals, 16 assists). Coleman's output at the top line gives Calgary a credible threat.

Winnipeg's Colin Miller is a defensive liability. The wildcard is D. Wolf facing this game on a back-to-back, with potential for either a backup appearance or a visibly fatigued starter. That decision could tilt an otherwise balanced matchup.

Players to Watch

Nino Niederreiter (Winnipeg) — 0.87 xG/60, 6G 6A, 3 HD goals, 8.6% shooting
Kyle Connor (Winnipeg) — 0.83 xG/60, 25G 30A, 2 HD goals, 13.0% shooting
Blake Coleman (Calgary) — 0.89 xG/60, 16G 12A, 2 HD goals, 11.4% shooting
Matt Coronato (Calgary) — 0.80 xG/60, 10G 16A, 6.6% shooting

Data: MoneyPuck 5v5 models, NHL API

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

CGY 51%

51%

CGY

Model favorite

49%

51%

WPG50CGY

CGY by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score WPG 2.5–2.6 CGY; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates

Season rates · 5v5

Tale of the tape

NHL stats API · our xG

WPG← edge

edge →CGY

48.0%47.0%

49.0%49.0%

2.342.36

2.552.66

1.901.76

2.102.15

0.9980.985

WPG holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.998 vs 0.985) says WPG has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

WPG

6-4-0

+6 GD · 2d rest

CGY

2-7-1

-23 GD · 1d rest

0.998

WPG PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.985

CGY PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch

CGY PDO is 0.985 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Things to watch

D. Wolf is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
WPG is the hotter team by points pace (6-4-0 in their last 10).
CGY is underwater at -23 goal differential over the last 10.
CGY PDO is 0.985 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

WPG

Expected in goal

C. Hellebuyck

2 days rest.968 last start

Backup Connor Hellebuyck · +5.5 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

CGY

Expected in goal

D. Wolf

back-to-back.737 last start

Backup Dustin Wolf · -1.8 GSAx this season

Back-to-back: the backup often gets this one. Treat the starter as unconfirmed.

No completed game on file for this club yet.

Lineups are the players who dressed in each club's last game, with their minutes; clubs confirm tonight's at warm-up. Every player this preview names was in that lineup.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG

WPG

Nino Niederreiter6G 6A

0.87 xG/60 · 3 HD · 8.6% sh

Kyle Connor25G 30A

0.83 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.0% sh

CGY

Blake Coleman16G 12A

0.89 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.4% sh

Matt Coronato10G 16A

0.80 xG/60 · 0 HD · 6.6% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page