Motion-blurred skater in a San Jose Sharks sweater
Breakdown · COL at SJS

Sharks steal one from the Avalanche against the run of play

The verdict · stolen

The Sharks stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.13–2.09 and won anyway.

COL 2 · SJS 3
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:11 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 Sharks won 3-2 in overtime despite being thoroughly dominated in expected goals. The Avalanche generated 4.13 xG to San Jose's 2.09—a 66%-34% split. That the home team left with one point is the only surprise here.

Y. Askarov made it happen. His 37 saves came at a 0.974 save percentage, nearly 3.13 goals above what the underlying metrics predicted. For Colorado, M. Blackwood faced the inverse: 20 saves on 23 shots, 0.870 SV%, 0.91 goals below expected. The Sharks won a goaltending lottery.

Colorado controlled the puck and created quality chances. They generated five high-danger scoring opportunities to San Jose's one. They crashed the net effectively—four rebound chances, one converted. Yet they underperformed their xG by 2.13 goals overall. A team that should have won left with nothing.

The Sharks were lethal on the rush: three goals on 21 attempts, a rate that doesn't sustain. They capitalized twice from low-danger positions—the kind of finishes that goaltenders have to steal back. Philipp Kurashev's wrist shot from the top of the circles at 01:48 of overtime finished it, giving him two goals in 20:20.

Colorado had chances. C. Makar found assignments in 25:22; D. Toews did the same in 23:39. The gap between their control of play and the scoreboard reflected the gap between what should happen and what did.

Three Stars

  • #96 P. Kurashev (SJS) — 2G in 20:20
  • #8 C. Makar (COL) — 1A in 25:22
  • #7 D. Toews (COL) — 1A in 23:39
The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · OT · Nov 1
COL
2
SJS
3

Sharks steal one from the Avalanche against the run of play

Chances 4.1 – 2.1Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Avalanche deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
COL
4.13
SJS
2.09
66% of the chances34%

The board read COL 2, SJS 3. The chances read COL 4.1, SJS 2.1.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
SJS
+0.9
goals above expected
SJS2.09 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
COL4.13 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

The Avalanche left 2.1 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 00:30COLM. Necas1–0
  2. P1 18:21SJSM. Celebrini1–1
  3. P2 04:07SJSP. Kurashev1–2
  4. P2 09:10COLN. MacKinnon2–2
  5. OT 01:48SJSP. Kurashev2–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
COL
59 shots
2
Final
88 shots
SJS
29 shots
3
COL attackSJS attack
COL SJS Goal
59
shots · 2 in
29
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
COLSJS
1 / 5
1.22 xG
High danger
1 / 1
0.22 xG
1 / 19
2.02 xG
Medium
0 / 14
1.50 xG
0 / 50
0.89 xG
Low
2 / 30
0.37 xG

High-danger looks: COL 1 of 5, SJS 1 of 1.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
Y. Askarov
+3.1
SJS · 37/38
D-
M. Blackwood
−0.9
COL · 20/23
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Sharks steal one from the Avalanche against the run of play

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 15–6
  1. 00:30COLM. Necas(C. Makar, D. Toews)1–0
  2. 18:21SJSM. Celebrini(T. Toffoli, S. Mukhamadullin)1–1
2ndshots 16–5
  1. 04:07SJSP. Kurashev(T. Dellandrea, J. Klingberg)1–2
  2. 09:10COLN. MacKinnon(A. Lehkonen, V. Nichushkin)2–2
3rdshots 7–9no goals
    OTshots 1–3
    1. 01:48SJSP. Kurashev(A. Wennberg)2–3

    score reads COL–SJS

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    2.09
    SJS chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    +0.9
    Finishing
    Goals above what those chances were worth
    1.040
    SJS puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    37.8%
    Shot attempts
    Under half — they were outshot
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    4.13Expected goals2.09
    COL 66% of the chance quality
    39Shots on goal23
    5High-danger chances1
    74All attempts (Corsi)45
    Adjusted for score: COL 61% · SJS 39%
    Faceoffs · SJS won52%off56%neu45%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    COL1 / 5 · 1.22 xG
    SJS1 / 1 · 0.22 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    COL1 / 19 · 2.02 xG
    SJS0 / 14 · 1.50 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    COL0 / 50 · 0.89 xG
    SJS2 / 30 · 0.37 xG

    SJS went 2-for-30 from low danger on 0.37 expected goals — 1.6 above expected.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    COL
    2 G · 4.13 xG · -2.1
    SJS
    3 G · 2.09 xG · +0.9
    012345

    COL finished -2.1 against expected, SJS +0.9.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    COL
    WRIST1/37
    SLAP0/6
    SNAP0/6
    TIP IN0/3
    BACKHAND0/4
    DEFLECTED0/1
    BAT0/1
    OTHER1/16
    SJS
    WRIST2/16
    SLAP0/8
    SNAP1/1
    TIP IN0/3
    BACKHAND0/0
    DEFLECTED0/1
    BAT0/0
    OTHER0/16
    COL
    SJS
    Off the rush
    1 G on 36
    2.74 xG
    3 G on 21
    1.97 xG
    Off rebounds
    1 G on 4
    0.69 xG
    0 G on 0
    0.00 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: COL went 1-for-37, SJS 2-for-16. SJS scored 3 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
    M. Blackwood
    COL · 20/23 · .870
    -0.9
    saved above expected
    D-
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/10.2-0.8
    Medium0/141.5+1.5
    Low2/300.4-1.6

    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

    Y. Askarov
    SJS · 37/38 · .974
    +3.1
    saved above expected
    A+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/51.2+0.2
    Medium1/192.0+1.0
    Low0/500.9+0.9

    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

    88 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    COL
    59 shots
    2
    Final
    88 shots
    SJS
    29 shots
    3
    COL attackSJS attack
    COL SJS Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — COL left, SJS 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
    P. Kurashev
    #96 · C · SJS
    2 G · 0 A · 5 SOG · 20:20 on ice · +1
    C. Makar
    #8 · D · COL
    0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 25:22 on ice · -2
    D. Toews
    #7 · D · COL
    0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 23:39 on ice · -1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Sat, Nov 1
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:08 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 projects a 2.8 - 2.4 Avalanche victory with Colorado at 56% win probability.

    Colorado enters with tangible form advantage. The Avalanche are 5-1-4 over their last 10 games while San Jose sits -10 in goal differential over the same stretch. At 5v5, this advantage extends to underlying metrics: Colorado leads in expected goals at 57.0% and Corsi at 57.0%, suggesting territorial control drives the matchup.

    The Sharks' 48.0% xG and 47.0% Corsi indicate San Jose will be reactive. When a team trails in both shot quality and volume, it compounds defensively—the Avalanche will dictate pace and positioning.

    One caveat: Colorado's PDO sits at 1.021, indicating the Avalanche have converted at rates above sustainable levels. Expect regression here. San Jose's 0.998 PDO suggests the Sharks are converting at exact sustainable rates, leaving little room for positive regression to close the gap. This is not a case of unsustainable luck favoring Colorado; it's the opposite—the model detects hot shooting that will normalize over time.

    Both goaltenders are on back-to-backs. A. Nedeljkovic and S. Wedgewood may see backup starts or tired first-line appearances depending on coach preference. This creates variance in execution quality that raw models cannot fully capture.

    Players driving Colorado: Artturi Lehkonen leads with 1.11 xG/60 and has compiled 18G 22A with 6 high-danger goals against a 14.9% shooting percentage. Ross Colton generates 1.10 xG/60, matching Lehkonen's shot quality, but has only 7G 15A with 1 high-danger goal on a concerning 4.9% shooting rate. Colton's low conversion may represent either unsustainable underperformance or a structural issue with shot selection; the model treats it as regression likely, meaning upside is priced in.

    For San Jose: Pavol Regenda carries 1.10 xG/60 with 5G 1A and 2 high-danger goals on 16.1% shooting, suggesting strong underlying play but limited output from linemates. Igor Chernyshov trails at 0.91 xG/60 with 6G 8A and a 15.0% shooting percentage—he is the Sharks' secondary creator but generates lower-quality chances. Notably, Regenda is marked likely out.

    The structural advantage belongs to Colorado. The Avalanche generate superior volume and quality; the Sharks defend a deficit in both. PDO regression concerns are real but secondary to Colorado's edge in play-driving metrics. The 56% win probability reflects appropriate confidence in the team controlling both the puck and the game's shape.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    COL 56%
    56%
    COL
    Model favorite
    56%
    44%
    COL50SJS

    COL by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score COL 2.8–2.4 SJS; 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
    COL← edge
    edge →SJS
    57.0%48.0%
    57.0%47.0%
    3.032.33
    2.302.56
    2.631.99
    1.562.32
    1.0210.998

    COL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.021 vs 0.998) says COL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    COL
    5-1-4
    +9 GD · 1d rest
    SJS
    3-6-1
    -10 GD · 1d rest
    1.021
    COL PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    0.998
    SJS PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    What decides it

    Keys to the game

    Where the edges live
    • The Avalanche own the underlying play — 57.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
    • The Avalanche drive Corsi at 57.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    Regression watch
    • The Avalanche's PDO is 1.021 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Things to watch
    • The Avalanche own the underlying play — 57.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
    • The Avalanche drive Corsi at 57.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    • A. Nedeljkovic is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • S. Wedgewood is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • The Avalanche are the hotter team by points pace (5-1-4 in their last 10).
    • The Sharks are underwater at -10 goal differential over their last 10.
    • The Avalanche's PDO is 1.021 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    COL
    Expected in goal
    S. Wedgewood
    back-to-back.913 last start
    Backup Scott Wedgewood · +23.1 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.

    SJS
    Expected in goal
    A. Nedeljkovic
    back-to-back.935 last start
    Backup Yaroslav Askarov · -18.9 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
    COL
    Artturi Lehkonen18G 22A
    1.11 xG/60 · 6 HD · 14.9% sh
    Ross Colton7G 15A
    1.10 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.9% sh
    SJS
    Pavol Regenda5G 1A
    1.10 xG/60 · 2 HD · 16.1% sh
    Igor Chernyshov6G 8A
    0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next