Motion-blurred skater in a Colorado Avalanche sweater
Breakdown · NYI at COL

Avalanche pull away from the Islanders

The verdict · coin flip

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

NYI 1 · COL 4
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 4:23 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

Colorado won 4–1, but the underlying numbers suggested a closer contest. Expected goals split 3.48–3.22 in the Avalanche's favor—a two-goal lead on paper that became a three-goal margin on the scoreboard.

The explanation: goaltending variance. The Islanders underperformed their expected goals by 2.22; S. Wedgewood (COL) overperformed by the same margin. I. Sorokin (NYI) finished with 24 saves on 27 shots (0.889 SV%), while Wedgewood stopped 28 of 29 (0.966 SV%). Colorado's net-minder stole this game.

Colorado controlled shot attempts at 49%, holding 28 shots to New York's 29. High-danger chances went 5–2 in the Avalanche's favor. The hosts were lethal in transition, scoring two goals on 23 rush chances—an efficiency rate most teams cannot sustain. New York created six rebound opportunities and converted none.

The Islanders underperformed their expected goals while Colorado's goaltending refused to bend. That gap determined the outcome.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 16
NYI
1
COL
4

Avalanche pull away from the Islanders

Chances 3.2 – 3.5Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Avalanche took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value
NYI
3.22
COL
3.48
48% of the chances52%

The board read NYI 1, COL 4. The chances read NYI 3.2, COL 3.5.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
COL
+0.5
goals above expected
COL3.48 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
NYI3.22 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Islanders left 2.2 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 02:05NYIE. Heineman1–0
  2. P2 04:32COLR. Colton1–1
  3. P2 05:51COLV. Olofsson1–2
  4. P3 19:25COLM. NecasEN1–3
  5. P3 19:44COLB. Nelson1–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
NYI
45 shots
1
Final
86 shots
COL
41 shots
4
NYI attackCOL attack
NYI COL Goal
45
shots · 1 in
41
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
NYICOL
0 / 2
0.41 xG
High danger
1 / 5
1.67 xG
1 / 22
2.36 xG
Medium
2 / 12
1.23 xG
0 / 32
0.46 xG
Low
1 / 40
0.58 xG

High-danger looks: NYI 0 of 2, COL 1 of 5.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
S. Wedgewood
+2.2
COL · 28/29
B
I. Sorokin
+0.5
NYI · 24/27
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Avalanche pull away from the Islanders

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 7–7
  1. 02:05NYIE. Heineman(T. DeAngelo, K. Palmieri)1–0
2ndshots 11–10
  1. 04:32COLR. Colton(C. Makar, B. Nelson)1–1
  2. 05:51COLV. Olofsson(S. Malinski)1–2
3rdshots 11–11
  1. 19:25COLM. Necasempty net1–3
  2. 19:44COLB. Nelson(B. Burns, P. Kelly)1–4

score reads NYI–COL

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.48
COL chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.5
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.052
COL puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
50.4%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.22Expected goals3.48
COL 52% of the chance quality
29Shots on goal28
2High-danger chances5
56All attempts (Corsi)57
Adjusted for score: NYI 51% · COL 49%
Faceoffs · COL won46%off32%neu48%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NYI0 / 2 · 0.41 xG
COL1 / 5 · 1.67 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NYI1 / 22 · 2.36 xG
COL2 / 12 · 1.23 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NYI0 / 32 · 0.46 xG
COL1 / 40 · 0.58 xG

NYI went 1-for-22 from medium danger on 2.36 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NYI
1 G · 3.22 xG · -2.2
COL
4 G · 3.48 xG · +0.5
012345

NYI finished -2.2 against expected, COL +0.5.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
NYI
WRIST0/26
SNAP0/7
SLAP0/6
TIP IN0/2
BACKHAND0/1
DEFLECTED1/1
WRAP AROUND0/2
OTHER0/11
COL
WRIST1/21
SNAP1/11
SLAP0/3
TIP IN2/3
BACKHAND0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/16
NYI
COL
Off the rush
0 G on 27
1.98 xG
2 G on 23
1.98 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 6
0.95 xG
0 G on 2
0.26 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: NYI went 0-for-26, COL 1-for-21. COL 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
I. Sorokin
NYI · 24/27 · .889
+0.5
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/51.7+0.7
Medium2/121.2-0.8
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

S. Wedgewood
COL · 28/29 · .966
+2.2
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/20.4+0.4
Medium1/222.4+1.4
Low0/320.5+0.5

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

86 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
NYI
45 shots
1
Final
86 shots
COL
41 shots
4
NYI attackCOL attack
NYI COL Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — NYI left, COL 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. Nelson
#11 · C · COL
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 19:04 on ice · +1
C. Makar
#8 · D · COL
0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 25:06 on ice · +1
K. Palmieri
#21 · C · NYI
0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 22:19 on ice
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sun, Nov 16
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 4:22 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 2.4–3.0 game favoring Colorado at 60% win probability. That lean is built on territorial dominance, but the Avalanche carry a specific fragility into this matchup.

Colorado controls the underlying game by a significant margin. The Avalanche generate 57.0% xG at 5v5 compared to the Islanders' 48.0%, translating to command of the most dangerous areas. That edge extends to shot attempts: Colorado's 57.0% Corsi means they dictate pace and positioning, forcing the Islanders into reactive play.

The catch: Colorado's 1.021 PDO suggests fortune has been working in their favor. The Islanders sit at 0.993, implying they've been unlucky. PDO regression is rarely dramatic, but it's one of the few measurable forces that can compress a model's confidence. If the Avalanche cool slightly while the Islanders regress toward average, the game tightens.

Goaltending adds another angle. D. Rittich faces a back-to-back; monitor whether Colorado deploys their backup or leans on a fatigued starter. Either scenario introduces risk that the model's 60% projection already prices in, but fatigue matters most in close games.

Offensively, the Islanders rely on Anders Lee's efficiency. Lee generates 1.20 xG per 60 minutes with 9 goals and 20 assists on only 6.4% shooting—he's creating chances but finishing at a conservative rate relative to his opportunity. That shooting percentage offers upside if variance swings his way, but it also signals unsustainability in his favor. Bo Horvat carries 18 goals on 12.8% shooting, a more durable marker of scoring prowess.

Colorado counters with Artturi Lehkonen, who generates 1.11 xG per 60 with 18 goals, 22 assists, and 6 hard-area goals. Lehkonen's 14.9% shooting rate marks him as a finisher who habitually converts; that's the harder nut to play against. Ross Colton, generating 1.10 xG per 60 with 7 goals and 15 assists, contributes more in volume than finishing, but his shot-creation rate keeps Colorado dangerous.

The Islanders' 0% hard-area and rebound-goal rates—alongside Alexander Romanov's defensive vulnerabilities—suggest their back end will absorb sustained pressure. Colorado's parallel gap at net-front dominance seems less concerning given their overall volume; they generate enough that secondary chances cascade into scoring opportunities.

The model's 60% edge reflects a real quality gap. Colorado's PDO is the only meaningful brake on what might otherwise be a stronger lean.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

COL 60%
60%
COL
Model favorite
40%
60%
NYI50COL

COL by 20 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score NYI 2.4–3.0 COL; 17% 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
NYI← edge
edge →COL
48.0%57.0%
49.0%57.0%
2.483.03
2.692.30
1.782.63
1.941.56
0.9931.021

COL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.993 vs 1.021) says COL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
NYI
6-3-1
+0 GD · 1d rest
COL
7-1-2
+19 GD · 2d rest
0.993
NYI PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.021
COL 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.
  • D. Rittich is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Avalanche's PDO is 1.021 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
NYI
Expected in goal
D. Rittich
back-to-back.933 last start
Backup Ilya Sorokin · +25.3 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.

COL
Expected in goal
M. Blackwood
2 days rest.857 last start
Backup Scott Wedgewood · +23.1 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
NYI
Anders Lee9G 20A
1.20 xG/60 · 2 HD · 6.4% sh
Bo Horvat18G 10A
0.87 xG/60 · 3 HD · 12.8% sh
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
Keep going

Where to next