Motion-blurred skater in a Columbus Blue Jackets sweater
Breakdown · CBJ at DAL

E. Merzlikins stands tall as the Blue Jackets edge the Stars

The verdict · earned

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

CBJ 5 · DAL 1
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 12:37 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 scoreline (5-1) overstates Columbus's dominance. The underlying metrics were closer — expected goals split 56-44 in favor of the Blue Jackets (4.76–3.83) — but E. Merzlikins' 0.957 save percentage carried the load. He stopped 2.83 goals above expectation, while Dallas compounded the problem by underperforming their own xG by the same margin.

Columbus won the underlying battle on multiple fronts: they out-attempted Dallas 29–23 and won high-danger chances 8–7. The decisive edge was the power play — 2 goals on 5 shots (0.40 xG) against Dallas's ineffectual man-advantage work.

Kent Johnson's wrist shot from the point (P3, 17:00) signaled the tonal shift. B. Jenner (1G, 1A in 14:40) and A. Fantilli (1G, 1A in 13:40) capitalized on the momentum. Columbus was lethal in transition, scoring 4 goals on 28 rush attempts, while Dallas created 3 rebound chances and converted none. Columbus also created 3 rebounds without capitalizing, but the difference was finishing.

J. Oettinger faced 28 shots and stopped 24 (0.857), but the team's inefficiency determined the outcome. Dallas generated quality chances (3.83 xG) yet left with a single goal — a 2.83-goal shortfall that defined the night.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Oct 21
CBJ
5
DAL
1

E. Merzlikins stands tall as the Blue Jackets edge the Stars

Chances 4.8 – 3.8Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Blue Jackets earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
CBJ
4.76
DAL
3.83
55% of the chances45%

The board read CBJ 5, DAL 1. The chances read CBJ 4.8, DAL 3.8.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
CBJ
+0.2
goals above expected
CBJ4.76 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
DAL3.83 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Stars left 2.8 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 04:33CBJA. Fantilli1–0
  2. P1 18:42CBJB. JennerPP2–0
  3. P2 11:58DALT. Seguin2–1
  4. P3 07:21CBJD. Mateychuk3–1
  5. P3 14:26CBJD. VoronkovPP4–1
  6. P3 17:00CBJK. JohnsonEN5–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
CBJ
45 shots
5
Final
83 shots
DAL
38 shots
1
CBJ attackDAL attack
CBJ DAL Goal
45
shots · 5 in
38
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
CBJDAL
2 / 8
3.03 xG
High danger
1 / 7
1.78 xG
3 / 10
1.14 xG
Medium
0 / 14
1.62 xG
0 / 41
0.60 xG
Low
0 / 25
0.43 xG

The Blue Jackets buried 2 of 8 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
E. Merzlikins
+2.8
CBJ · 22/23
B+
J. Oettinger
+0.8
DAL · 24/28
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

E. Merzlikins stands tall as the Blue Jackets edge the Stars

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 14–5
  1. 04:33CBJA. Fantilli(B. Jenner, K. Johnson)1–0
  2. 18:42CBJB. Jennerpower play(C. Coyle, D. Severson)2–0
2ndshots 6–13
  1. 11:58DALT. Seguin(C. Blackwell, A. Erne)2–1
3rdshots 9–5
  1. 07:21CBJD. Mateychuk(E. Chinakhov, Z. Aston-Reese)3–1
  2. 14:26CBJD. Voronkovpower play(S. Monahan, K. Marchenko)4–1
  3. 17:00CBJK. Johnsonempty net(A. Fantilli)5–1

score reads CBJ–DAL

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.76
CBJ chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.2
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.063
CBJ puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
56.2%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.76Expected goals3.83
CBJ 55% of the chance quality
29Shots on goal23
8High-danger chances7
59All attempts (Corsi)46
Adjusted for score: CBJ 51% · DAL 49%
Faceoffs · DAL won60%off53%neu62%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
CBJ2 / 8 · 3.03 xG
DAL1 / 7 · 1.78 xG
Medium dangermid-range
CBJ3 / 10 · 1.14 xG
DAL0 / 14 · 1.62 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
CBJ0 / 41 · 0.60 xG
DAL0 / 25 · 0.43 xG

CBJ went 3-for-10 from medium danger on 1.14 expected goals — 1.9 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
CBJ
5 G · 4.76 xG · +0.2
DAL
1 G · 3.83 xG · -2.8
0123456

CBJ finished +0.2 against expected, DAL -2.8.

Source · Backcheck xG model
Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
CBJ
SNAP3/24
BACKHAND0/9
SLAP0/4
WRIST1/5
TIP IN0/1
DEFLECTED1/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
BAT0/0
OTHER0/14
DAL
SNAP0/28
BACKHAND0/0
SLAP0/4
WRIST0/2
TIP IN0/2
DEFLECTED1/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
BAT0/1
OTHER0/8
CBJ
DAL
Off the rush
4 G on 28
1.97 xG
1 G on 25
2.94 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3
0.38 xG
0 G on 3
0.47 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: CBJ went 3-for-24, DAL 0-for-28. CBJ scored 4 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
E. Merzlikins
CBJ · 22/23 · .957
+2.8
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/71.8+0.8
Medium0/141.6+1.6
Low0/250.4+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

J. Oettinger
DAL · 24/28 · .857
+0.8
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/83.0+1.0
Medium3/101.1-1.9
Low0/410.6+0.6

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

83 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
CBJ
45 shots
5
Final
83 shots
DAL
38 shots
1
CBJ attackDAL attack
CBJ DAL Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — CBJ left, DAL 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
B. Jenner
#38 · C · CBJ
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 14:40 on ice · +1
A. Fantilli
#19 · C · CBJ
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 13:40 on ice · +1
K. Johnson
#91 · C · CBJ
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 13:18 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Oct 21
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 12:35 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

Dallas enters at 51% win probability in a model projecting an essentially even game—2.5 expected goals apiece. This is as close to a pick'em as NHL matchmaking produces.

The Stars own a 7-3-0 stretch that papers over a narrower advantage. Columbus controls the puck decisively at 51.0% Corsi, while Dallas generates only 47.0% of shot attempts. Expected goals tell a similar story: no meaningful 5v5 edge, with Columbus at 52.0% and Dallas at 51.0%. Yet Dallas lives unsustainably. Its 1.024 PDO reveals a team converting chances at rates regression will punish and allowing far fewer rebound goals than talent predicts. Columbus sits neutral at 1.003.

Boone Jenner anchors Columbus's attack. His 0.98 expected goals per 60 minutes arrives with 11 goals and 21 assists, though a 9.6% shooting rate signals he has hit the high end of variance. He has converted two high-danger chances, suggesting genuine quality underpins the volume. Mathieu Olivier provides secondary thrusts at 0.89 xG/60 with 12 goals, but his 13.3% shooting rate will not endure—one high-danger goal among his totals means he is punching above expected output.

Jason Robertson forms Dallas's entire offensive identity. His 0.96 xG/60 and 25-goal season drive the Stars, and his 12.4% shooting rate feels more durable than Olivier's. Michael Bunting chips in 8 goals and 14 assists, yet at 0.83 xG/60, he depends more on system efficiency than personal generation. Neither team sustains high-danger conversion at 0% or rebound goals at 0%, a matching void that points to incomplete tracking or circumstantial fortune.

Defensively, Columbus leans on Conor Garland, whose perimeter responsibilities and penalty-kill demands leave him exposed. Dallas's Tyler Myers carries similar liabilities. The model likes Dallas slightly. The underlying numbers suggest this is genuinely even—Columbus generates more shots, Dallas converts at unsustainable rates. Expect the Stars to target Garland while Jenner's volume and Dallas's regression toward league norms trade blows.

Three Stars

  • Boone Jenner (CBJ) — 0.98 xG/60, 11G 21A, consistent volume threat
  • Jason Robertson (DAL) — 0.96 xG/60, 25G 21A, Dallas's core creation
  • Michael Bunting (DAL) — 8G 14A, secondary scoring, elevated efficiency
What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DAL 51%
51%
DAL
Model favorite
49%
51%
CBJ50DAL

DAL by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score CBJ 2.5–2.5 DAL; 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
CBJ← edge
edge →DAL
52.0%51.0%
51.0%47.0%
2.632.36
2.432.29
2.122.07
1.981.68
1.0031.024

CBJ holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.003 vs 1.024) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
CBJ
3-7-0
-4 GD · 3d rest
DAL
7-3-0
+5 GD · 3d rest
1.003
CBJ PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.024
DAL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Blue Jackets drive Corsi at 51.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Blue Jackets drive Corsi at 51.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • The Stars are the hotter team by points pace (7-3-0 in their last 10).
  • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
CBJ
Expected in goal
J. Greaves
3 days rest.917 last start
Backup Jet Greaves · +16.5 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

DAL
Expected in goal
J. Oettinger
3 days rest.905 last start
Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 GSAx this season

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
CBJ
Boone Jenner11G 21A
0.98 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.6% sh
Mathieu Olivier12G 9A
0.89 xG/60 · 1 HD · 13.3% sh
DAL
Jason Robertson25G 21A
0.96 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.4% sh
Michael Bunting8G 14A
0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 7.6% sh
Keep going

Where to next