Motion-blurred skater in a Edmonton Oilers sweater

Breakdown · CBJ at EDM

Oilers edge the Blue Jackets in overtime

Final / OTMon, Nov 10

CBJColumbus Blue Jackets4 EDMEdmonton Oilers5

The verdict · coin flip

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

CBJ 4 · EDM 5

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:27 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 Oilers won 5-4 in overtime despite expected goals suggesting a near-dead heat—a 3.33-3.45 split favoring Columbus. Edmonton overperformed their model by 1.67 goals, driven by superior shot quality and clinical finishing.

The edge was clear in high-danger chances: Edmonton converted at nearly double Columbus's rate (7-3). The Oilers generated 0.065 xG per attempt compared to Columbus's 0.048, a shot-quality gap that carried into rush situations—Edmonton scored four times off 23 rush chances, Columbus three times off 30. Quantity lost to quality.

Greaves saved at 0.792, costing Columbus roughly 1.67 goals against expected—a decisive shortfall. Skinner's 0.818 mark was also below expected (by 0.55), but the Oilers' ability to capitalize on three low-danger opportunities—chances goalies usually convert—nullified any net advantage.

The Oilers' control was comfortable without being dominant: 52% of shot attempts (24–22 on goal). J. Roslovic ended it from the doorstep at 00:56 of overtime, a culmination of the Oilers' high-danger pressure throughout.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · OT · Nov 10

CBJ

EDM

Oilers edge the Blue Jackets in overtime

Chances 3.5 – 3.3Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Oilers took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value

CBJ

3.45

EDM

3.33

51% of the chances49%

The board read CBJ 4, EDM 5. The chances read CBJ 3.5, EDM 3.3.

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

Luck check

EDM

+1.7

goals above expected

EDM3.33 expected · 5 scored

Expected

Scored

CBJ3.45 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

The Oilers scored 1.7 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

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

Every goal, in order

P1 11:42CBJI. Provorov1–0
P1 17:28EDMJ. Walman1–1
P2 01:39CBJS. Monahan2–1
P2 18:02CBJB. Jenner3–1
P3 00:58EDMC. McDavid3–2
P3 04:19CBJA. Fantilli4–2
P3 13:39EDMC. McDavid4–3

+2 more on the full breakdown

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

Where the shots came from

CBJ

45 shots

Final

81 shots

EDM

36 shots

CBJ EDM GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 4 in

shots · 5 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

CBJEDM

0 / 3

0.83 xG

High danger

2 / 7

1.77 xG

3 / 15

1.93 xG

Medium

0 / 9

1.04 xG

1 / 54

0.69 xG

Low

3 / 35

0.51 xG

The Blue Jackets went 0 for 3 from the slot.

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

In the net

S. Skinner

−0.6

EDM · 18/22

J. Greaves

−1.7

CBJ · 19/24

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Oilers edge the Blue Jackets in overtime

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 5–7

11:42CBJI. Provorov(D. Severson, A. Fantilli)1–0
17:28EDMJ. Walman(V. Podkolzin, J. Roslovic)1–1

2ndshots 10–6

01:39CBJS. Monahan(K. Johnson, B. Jenner)2–1
18:02CBJB. Jenner(D. Fabbro, Z. Werenski)3–1

3rdshots 6–9

00:58EDMC. McDavid(M. Ekholm)3–2
04:19CBJA. Fantilli(K. Marchenko)4–2
13:39EDMC. McDavid(E. Bouchard)4–3
19:02EDMJ. Walmanshorthanded4–4

OTshots 1–2

00:56EDMJ. Roslovic(J. Walman)4–5

score reads CBJ–EDM

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.33

EDM chances

Goals their shots were worth

+1.7

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.042

EDM puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

41.5%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.45Expected goals3.33

CBJ 51% of the chance quality

22Shots on goal24

3High-danger chances7

72All attempts (Corsi)51

Adjusted for score: CBJ 55% · EDM 45%

Faceoffs · EDM won65%off26%neu57%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

CBJ0 / 3 · 0.83 xG

EDM2 / 7 · 1.77 xG

Medium dangermid-range

CBJ3 / 15 · 1.93 xG

EDM0 / 9 · 1.04 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

CBJ1 / 54 · 0.69 xG

EDM3 / 35 · 0.51 xG

EDM went 3-for-35 from low danger on 0.51 expected goals — 2.5 above expected.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

CBJ

4 G · 3.45 xG · +0.6

EDM

5 G · 3.33 xG · +1.7

0123456

CBJ finished +0.6 against expected, EDM +1.7.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

CBJ

SNAP2/13

WRIST0/19

BACKHAND1/6

TIP IN1/5

SLAP0/2

WRAP AROUND0/0

OTHER0/27

EDM

SNAP1/21

WRIST2/4

BACKHAND2/5

TIP IN0/3

SLAP0/2

WRAP AROUND0/1

OTHER0/15

CBJ

EDM

Off the rush

3 G on 30

2.80 xG

4 G on 23

2.37 xG

Off rebounds

1 G on 2

0.33 xG

0 G on 5

0.64 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: CBJ went 2-for-13, EDM 1-for-21. EDM 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

J. Greaves

CBJ · 19/24 · .792

-1.7

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/71.8-0.2

Medium0/91.0+1.0

Low3/350.5-2.5

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

S. Skinner

EDM · 18/22 · .818

-0.6

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/30.8+0.8

Medium3/151.9-1.1

Low1/540.7-0.3

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

81 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

CBJ

45 shots

Final

81 shots

EDM

36 shots

CBJ EDM GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — CBJ left, EDM 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

J. Walman

#96 · D · EDM

2 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 22:13 on ice · +2

C. McDavid

#97 · C · EDM

2 G · 0 A · 5 SOG · 23:32 on ice · +2

J. Roslovic

#28 · C · EDM

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 21:50 on ice · +3

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Nov 10

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:25 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

Projections put this as a 2.5–2.7 goal game with Edmonton favored at 52% win probability. That's essentially a pick'em.

The matchup quality explains the tightness. Both teams sit at 52.0% expected-goal share at 5v5, while Columbus slightly edges Edmonton in possession at 51.0% Corsi to 50.0%. Edmonton's PDO of 0.982 suggests they're running cold and due for positive regression, while Columbus runs slightly lucky at 1.003.

The talent advantage leans Edmonton's way. Connor McDavid has 25 goals and 33 assists with 0.92 expected goals per 60 minutes, converting at 13.7%. Zach Hyman operates at 1.23 xG/60 with 14 goals on 13.0% shooting. Columbus counters with Boone Jenner at 0.98 xG/60, 11 goals, and 21 assists, though his 9.6% shooting rate suggests possible regression. Mathieu Olivier adds depth at 0.89 xG/60 with 13.3% shooting.

Edmonton's recent form clouds the picture. They're minus-7 over their last 10 games, though their PDO suggests underlying play has been stronger than results indicate.

The goaltending situation could matter. C. Pickard and E. Merzlikins both face back-to-back considerations, making fatigue a potential factor.

Defensively, Conor Garland for Columbus and Jake Walman for Edmonton figure as potential weak links. Neither team's goals are coming from high-danger or rebound situations—both sit at 0% for each category.

At 52%, Edmonton's model edge is real but narrow. The Oilers have superior individual talent. Columbus has structural balance. Variance matters more than established advantage here.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

EDM 52%

52%

EDM

Model favorite

48%

52%

CBJ50EDM

EDM by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score CBJ 2.5–2.7 EDM; 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 →EDM

52.0%52.0%

51.0%50.0%

2.632.64

2.432.47

2.122.13

1.982.29

1.0030.982

The season numbers split 3–3 — no clear process edge — and the luck row (1.003 vs 0.982) says CBJ has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

CBJ

6-4-0

+1 GD · 1d rest

EDM

4-3-3

-7 GD · 1d rest

1.003

CBJ PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.982

EDM PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch

The Oilers' PDO is 0.982 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Things to watch

C. Pickard is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
E. Merzlikins is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Oilers are underwater at -7 goal differential over their last 10.
The Oilers' PDO is 0.982 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

CBJ

Expected in goal

E. Merzlikins

back-to-back.833 last start

Backup Jet Greaves · +16.5 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.

EDM

Expected in goal

C. Pickard

back-to-back.762 last start

Backup Connor Ingram · +1.7 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

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

EDM

Zach Hyman14G 13A

1.23 xG/60 · 1 HD · 13.0% sh

Connor McDavid25G 33A

0.92 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page