Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Columbus Blue Jackets sweater
← Sat, Nov 1 · the slate
Breakdown · STL at CBJ

J. Greaves stands tall as the Blue Jackets edge the Blues

FinalSat, Nov 1
STLSt. Louis Blues2CBJColumbus Blue Jackets3
The verdict · stolen

The Blue Jackets stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 4.63–3.99 and won anyway.

STL 2 · CBJ 3
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:16 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 Blue Jackets edged the Blues 3–2, but underlying metrics suggested the opposite result. Expected goals split 4.63–3.99 in favor of the Blues — a 54% to 46% split — yet they lost despite their territorial edge.

The Blues underperformed their expected goals by 2.63, a missed opportunity. Columbus underperformed by only 0.99. The difference was goaltending: J. Greaves (CBJ) stopped 2.63 goals above expected, while J. Hofer (STL) gained only 0.99.

J. Greaves was 100% on 9 high-danger shots. The Blues found 9 high-danger chances but converted zero, a rarity. Columbus created 6 rebound opportunities and converted 2; the Blues created 9 and converted none.

Where the Blues thrived: the rush. They scored 2 goals on 31 rush chances — precision finishing in transition that nearly flipped the result.

Nick Bjugstad's snap shot from the high slot (P3, 09:48) proved to be the turning point, putting Columbus in control.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 1
STL
2
CBJ
3

J. Greaves stands tall as the Blue Jackets edge the Blues

Chances 4.6 – 4.0Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Blues deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
STL
4.63
CBJ
3.99
54% of the chances46%

The board read STL 2, CBJ 3. The chances read STL 4.6, CBJ 4.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
CBJ
−1.0
goals above expected
CBJ3.99 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
STL4.63 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

The Blues left 2.6 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 03:37STLJ. Faulk1–0
  2. P1 04:38CBJC. Coyle1–1
  3. P2 11:55CBJZ. Werenski1–2
  4. P3 05:07CBJS. MonahanPP1–3
  5. P3 09:48STLN. Bjugstad2–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
STL
55 shots
2
Final
100 shots
CBJ
45 shots
3
STL attackCBJ attack
STL CBJ Goal
55
shots · 2 in
45
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
STLCBJ
0 / 9
2.01 xG
High danger
1 / 5
1.82 xG
1 / 14
1.70 xG
Medium
2 / 15
1.54 xG
1 / 45
0.91 xG
Low
0 / 39
0.63 xG

The Blues went 0 for 9 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
J. Greaves
+2.6
CBJ · 37/39
B+
J. Hofer
+1.0
STL · 32/35
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

J. Greaves stands tall as the Blue Jackets edge the Blues

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 14–17
  1. 03:37STLJ. Faulk(O. Sundqvist, D. Holloway)1–0
  2. 04:38CBJC. Coyle(C. Sillinger, I. Provorov)1–1
2ndshots 7–10
  1. 11:55CBJZ. Werenski(D. Mateychuk)1–2
3rdshots 18–8
  1. 05:07CBJS. Monahanpower play(Z. Werenski, K. Marchenko)1–3
  2. 09:48STLN. Bjugstad2–3

score reads STL–CBJ

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.99
CBJ chances
Goals their shots were worth
−1.0
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.021
CBJ puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
46.5%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.63Expected goals3.99
STL 54% of the chance quality
39Shots on goal35
9High-danger chances5
68All attempts (Corsi)59
Adjusted for score: STL 55% · CBJ 45%
Faceoffs · CBJ won47%off47%neu41%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
STL0 / 9 · 2.01 xG
CBJ1 / 5 · 1.82 xG
Medium dangermid-range
STL1 / 14 · 1.70 xG
CBJ2 / 15 · 1.54 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
STL1 / 45 · 0.91 xG
CBJ0 / 39 · 0.63 xG

STL went 0-for-9 from high danger on 2.01 expected goals — 2.0 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
STL
2 G · 4.63 xG · -2.6
CBJ
3 G · 3.99 xG · -1.0
012345

STL finished -2.6 against expected, CBJ -1.0.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
STL
WRIST1/26
SNAP1/15
SLAP0/6
BACKHAND0/2
TIP IN0/4
DEFLECTED0/1
POKE0/1
OTHER0/13
CBJ
WRIST0/19
SNAP1/15
SLAP0/3
BACKHAND1/5
TIP IN1/1
DEFLECTED0/2
POKE0/0
OTHER0/14
STL
CBJ
Off the rush
2 G on 31
2.44 xG
0 G on 24
1.77 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 9
1.48 xG
2 G on 6
1.30 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: STL went 1-for-26, CBJ 0-for-19. STL 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
J. Hofer
STL · 32/35 · .914
+1.0
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/51.8+0.8
Medium2/151.5-0.5
Low0/390.6+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

J. Greaves
CBJ · 37/39 · .949
+2.6
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/92.0+2.0
Medium1/141.7+0.7
Low1/450.9-0.1

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

100 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
STL
55 shots
2
Final
100 shots
CBJ
45 shots
3
STL attackCBJ attack
STL CBJ Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — STL left, CBJ 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
Z. Werenski
#8 · D · CBJ
1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 25:48 on ice
J. Faulk
#72 · D · STL
1 G · 0 A · 1 SOG · 24:54 on ice
I. Provorov
#9 · D · CBJ
0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 23:46 on ice
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, 2:14 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 2.4–2.6 goal range for this matchup. The Blue Jackets are favored at 55% win probability, which is about as close to a pick'em as professional hockey gets.

Columbus owns the underlying play. Their 5v5 expected goal share is 52.0% to St. Louis's 49.0%—a slim edge in shot quality, but real. The territorial dominance reads clearer: the Blue Jackets' 51.0% Corsi% means they'll control more of the game played in the offensive zone, dictating tempo and chance generation.

Neither team is running surprisingly hot or cold on the bounce. St. Louis's PDO sits at 1.000, Columbus at 1.003; when luck is this evenly distributed, execution matters more than randomness.

St. Louis leans on Jimmy Snuggerud and Dylan Holloway for offensive burden. Snuggerud has 15 goals and 22 assists at a 0.86 expected goals per 60, backed by an 11.9% shooting rate. Holloway tracks similarly: 13 goals, 24 assists, and 0.82 xG/60 on a 10.8% clip.

Columbus counters with a marginally sharper pair. Boone Jenner's 0.98 xG/60 with 11 goals and 21 assists shows higher-quality minute output, while Mathieu Olivier pairs 0.89 xG/60 with 12 goals and 9 assists at a 13.3% shooting rate.

When teams project this close on expected goals, possession metrics, and puck luck, tight-game execution and goaltending become the tiebreaker. Expect grinding hockey where position and discipline override dominance.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

CBJ 55%
55%
CBJ
Model favorite
45%
55%
STL50CBJ

CBJ by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score STL 2.4–2.6 CBJ; 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
STL← edge
edge →CBJ
49.0%52.0%
48.0%51.0%
2.342.63
2.402.43
2.002.12
2.121.98
1.0001.003

CBJ holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.000 vs 1.003) says CBJ has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · No games yet
STL
0-0-0
+0 GD · 0d rest
CBJ
0-0-0
+0 GD · 0d rest
1.000
STL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.003
CBJ PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Blue Jackets own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
  • The Blue Jackets drive Corsi at 51.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Things to watch
  • The Blue Jackets own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
  • The Blue Jackets drive Corsi at 51.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG
STL
Jimmy Snuggerud15G 22A
0.86 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.9% sh
Dylan Holloway13G 24A
0.82 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.8% sh
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
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page