Motion-blurred skater in a Winnipeg Jets sweater

Breakdown · WPG at VAN

Jets hold off the Canucks

FinalTue, Nov 11

The verdict · earned

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

WPG 5 · VAN 3

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:35 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

Winnipeg beat Vancouver 5-3, but the scoreboard overstates the Jets' control. Expected goals told a tighter story: Winnipeg 4.96, Vancouver 4.47, with the Canucks generating 7 high-danger chances to the Jets' 6.

The gap between play and result came down to goaltending. Vancouver underperformed its expected goals by 1.47. T. Demko bore the cost: in relief, he stopped 5 of 8 shots (0.625 SV%), performing 1.63 goals below expectation. Starter K. Lankinen (20 saves, 0.952 SV%) was the inverse—2.59 goals above expected—yet the combined effect still fell short. For Winnipeg, C. Hellebuyck (30/33, +1.47 vs expected) maintained efficiency, allowing the lead to hold despite possession favoring Vancouver.

Both teams scored three rush goals each—Vancouver from 28 chances, Winnipeg from 24. On the power play, each team scored twice. Winnipeg did so on 0.59 expected goals; Vancouver on 0.90, the difference illustrating Winnipeg's finishing precision despite Vancouver's strategic advantage.

Alex Iafallo's wrist shot from the slot (third period, 19:12) proved pivotal. Vancouver chased with 8 rebound chances created but converted none—an offensive drought that crystallized the underlying deficit.

Q. Hughes led with 3 assists, J. Morrissey contributed 1 goal and 2 assists, and E. Pettersson added 2 assists—playmakers in a game far closer than the 5-3 final suggested.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Nov 11

WPG

VAN

Jets hold off the Canucks

Chances 5.0 – 4.5Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Jets earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

WPG

4.96

VAN

4.47

53% of the chances47%

The board read WPG 5, VAN 3. The chances read WPG 5.0, VAN 4.5.

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

Luck check

WPG

+0.0

goals above expected

WPG4.96 expected · 5 scored

Expected

Scored

VAN4.47 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

Both sides finished close to what their chances were worth. This one was earned on the ice.

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

Every goal, in order

P1 04:57WPGJ. Toews1–0
P1 10:21VANK. Sherwood1–1
P1 11:58VANJ. DeBruskPP1–2
P1 14:38WPGJ. MorrisseyPP2–2
P1 14:53WPGN. Niederreiter3–2
P3 00:48WPGG. VilardiPP4–2
P3 18:30VANB. BoeserPP4–3

+1 more on the full breakdown

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

Where the shots came from

WPG

45 shots

Final

95 shots

VAN

50 shots

WPG VAN GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 5 in

shots · 3 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

WPGVAN

2 / 6

2.86 xG

High danger

2 / 7

1.54 xG

2 / 13

1.55 xG

Medium

1 / 18

2.07 xG

1 / 40

0.56 xG

Low

0 / 43

0.86 xG

The Jets buried 2 of 6 high-danger looks.

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

In the net

A+

K. Lankinen

+4.0

VAN · 20/21

T. Demko

+2.0

VAN · 5/8

+1 more on the full breakdown

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Jets hold off the Canucks

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 8–12

04:57WPGJ. Toews(J. Morrissey, C. Perfetti)1–0
10:21VANK. Sherwood(Q. Hughes)1–1
11:58VANJ. DeBruskpower play(Q. Hughes, E. Pettersson)1–2
14:38WPGJ. Morrisseypower play2–2
14:53WPGN. Niederreiter(A. Lowry, A. Iafallo)3–2

2ndshots 13–10no goals

3rdshots 9–11

00:48WPGG. Vilardipower play(K. Connor, J. Morrissey)4–2
18:30VANB. Boeserpower play(E. Pettersson, Q. Hughes)4–3
19:12WPGA. Iafalloempty net(N. Niederreiter, L. Stanley)5–3

score reads WPG–VAN

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

4.96

WPG chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.0

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.041

WPG 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

4.96Expected goals4.47

WPG 53% of the chance quality

30Shots on goal33

6High-danger chances7

59All attempts (Corsi)68

Adjusted for score: WPG 42% · VAN 58%

Faceoffs · VAN won40%off40%neu40%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

WPG2 / 6 · 2.86 xG

VAN2 / 7 · 1.54 xG

Medium dangermid-range

WPG2 / 13 · 1.55 xG

VAN1 / 18 · 2.07 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

WPG1 / 40 · 0.56 xG

VAN0 / 43 · 0.86 xG

VAN went 1-for-18 from medium danger on 2.07 expected goals — 1.1 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

WPG

5 G · 4.96 xG · +0.0

VAN

3 G · 4.47 xG · -1.5

0123456

WPG finished +0.0 against expected, VAN -1.5.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

WPG

WRIST1/23

TIP IN0/6

SNAP0/6

SLAP1/3

BACKHAND1/4

DEFLECTED2/2

POKE0/1

OTHER0/14

VAN

WRIST2/27

TIP IN0/8

SNAP1/5

SLAP0/8

BACKHAND0/2

DEFLECTED0/0

POKE0/0

OTHER0/18

WPG

VAN

Off the rush

3 G on 24

2.59 xG

3 G on 28

2.75 xG

Off rebounds

1 G on 2

0.26 xG

0 G on 8

0.89 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: WPG went 1-for-23, VAN 2-for-27. WPG 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

C. Hellebuyck

WPG · 30/33 · .909

+1.5

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/71.5-0.5

Medium1/182.1+1.1

Low0/430.9+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

K. Lankinen

VAN · 20/21 · .952

+4.0

saved above expected

A+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/62.9+0.9

Medium2/131.6-0.5

Low1/400.6-0.4

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

T. Demko

VAN · 5/8 · .625

+2.0

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/62.9+0.9

Medium2/131.6-0.5

Low1/400.6-0.4

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

95 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

WPG

45 shots

Final

95 shots

VAN

50 shots

WPG VAN GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — WPG left, VAN 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

Q. Hughes

#43 · D · VAN

0 G · 3 A · 4 SOG · 28:17 on ice

J. Morrissey

#44 · D · WPG

1 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 24:23 on ice · +1

E. Pettersson

#40 · C · VAN

0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 24:23 on ice

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Nov 11

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:34 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 2.6–2.5 game favoring Winnipeg with the Jets at 51% win probability—about as close to a toss-up as you'll find. The underlying play supports it.

Winnipeg owns the five-on-five possession battle, posting 48.0% expected goals and 49.0% Corsi compared to Vancouver's 44.0% xG and 46.0% Corsi. The edge is real but not vast. What's closer still is the goaltending setup: both K. Lankinen and E. Comrie face back-to-back starts, so expect either a backup appearance or a starter running on fumes.

Vancouver's salvation is regression. The Canucks are running a 0.974 PDO—cold as it gets—while sitting minus-7 in goal differential over their last 10. Luck normalizes. With Winnipeg's PDO at 0.998, the Canucks have room to catch up in close play.

The Jets' edge rests on two forwards. Nino Niederreiter carries 0.87 xG/60 with 6 goals, 6 assists, and an 8.6% shooting rate despite 3 high-danger chances. Kyle Connor complements him with 0.83 xG/60, 25 goals, 30 assists, and a 13.0% shooting rate on just 2 high-danger goals—an outlier in his favor. Vancouver counters with Filip Chytil, who's crushing volume at 1.03 xG/60 but has only 3 goals and no assists, a 15.0% shooting rate catching up slowly on 1 high-danger chance. Drew O'Connor offers deeper lineup production at 0.85 xG/60, 13 goals, 11 assists, 11.8% shooting, and 3 high-danger goals.

Winnipeg's structural weak point is Colin Miller on the back line. Vancouver's is Victor Mancini.

The team that executes in transition wins this. Vancouver has to make Niederreiter and Connor uncomfortable in space. Winnipeg has to force the Canucks into low-danger looks. With both goalies worn down, the team controlling the middle period likely controls the game.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

WPG 51%

51%

WPG

Model favorite

51%

49%

WPG50VAN

WPG by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score WPG 2.6–2.5 VAN; 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 →VAN

48.0%44.0%

49.0%46.0%

2.342.22

2.552.81

1.901.60

2.102.56

0.9980.974

WPG holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.998 vs 0.974) says WPG has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

WPG

5-5-0

-1 GD · 1d rest

VAN

4-5-1

-7 GD · 1d rest

0.998

WPG PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.974

VAN PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Jets own the underlying play — 48.0% 5v5 xG vs 44.0%.

Regression watch

The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Things to watch

The Jets own the underlying play — 48.0% 5v5 xG vs 44.0%.
K. Lankinen is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
E. Comrie is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Canucks are underwater at -7 goal differential over their last 10.
The Canucks' PDO is 0.974 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

WPG

Expected in goal

E. Comrie

back-to-back.810 last start

Backup Connor Hellebuyck · +5.5 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.

VAN

Expected in goal

K. Lankinen

back-to-back.844 last start

Backup Kevin Lankinen · -19.3 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

VAN

Filip Chytil3G 0A

1.03 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh

Drew O'Connor13G 11A

0.85 xG/60 · 3 HD · 11.8% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page