Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Washington Capitals sweater
← Wed, Nov 26 · the slate
Breakdown · WPG at WSH

Capitals hold off the Jets

FinalWed, Nov 26
WPGWinnipeg Jets3WSHWashington Capitals4
The verdict · stolen

The Capitals stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.56–2.75 and won anyway.

WPG 3 · WSH 4
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 5:44 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 Capitals' 4–3 win defied the underlying play. Washington held 62% of shot attempts (35–21) but lost the underlying battle decisively: 2.75 expected goals versus Winnipeg's 3.56. The Jets controlled 56% of expected goals at 5v5—the Capitals should not have won.

Goaltending split the margin. E. Comrie (WPG) finished −1.25 against his xG line, making 31 saves on 35 shots (0.886 SV%). C. Lindgren (WSH) was +0.56 above his. The Capitals overperformed their xG by 1.25 goals—they scored 4 on chances valued at 2.75—while Winnipeg finished true to its 3.56 at 3 goals.

Winnipeg's precision in the high-danger zone offset its volume advantage: 3 of 7 chances (43%) found the net while Washington converted just 1 from high-danger. The Capitals scored the other two from low-value areas—the kind of finishes where goalies earn their pay.

Mark Scheifele's snap from the doorstep in the third period (15:11) proved the turning point. Both teams matched efficiency off the rush, each converting 2 goals (Washington on 29 chances, Winnipeg on 23). Winnipeg created the better game; Washington took the better outcome.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 26
WPG
3
WSH
4

Capitals hold off the Jets

Chances 3.6 – 2.8Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Jets deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
WPG
3.56
WSH
2.75
56% of the chances44%

The board read WPG 3, WSH 4. The chances read WPG 3.6, WSH 2.8.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
WSH
+1.3
goals above expected
WSH2.75 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
WPG3.56 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
  1. P1 06:38WSHJ. Carlson0–1
  2. P1 14:21WSHJ. Chychrun0–2
  3. P1 19:38WPGG. Vilardi1–2
  4. P2 01:24WPGG. VilardiPP2–2
  5. P2 05:22WSHA. Ovechkin2–3
  6. P3 05:25WSHC. McMichael2–4
  7. P3 15:11WPGM. Scheifele3–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
WPG
37 shots
3
Final
81 shots
WSH
44 shots
4
WPG attackWSH attack
WPG WSH Goal
37
shots · 3 in
44
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
WPGWSH
3 / 7
1.53 xG
High danger
0 / 1
0.20 xG
0 / 14
1.61 xG
Medium
2 / 18
1.92 xG
0 / 39
0.42 xG
Low
2 / 41
0.63 xG

High-danger looks: WPG 3 of 7, WSH 0 of 1.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B
C. Lindgren
+0.6
WSH · 18/21
D-
E. Comrie
−1.3
WPG · 31/35
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Capitals hold off the Jets

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 6–12
  1. 06:38WSHJ. Carlson(T. Wilson)0–1
  2. 14:21WSHJ. Chychrun(S. Milano, E. Frank)0–2
  3. 19:38WPGG. Vilardi(K. Connor)1–2
2ndshots 7–15
  1. 01:24WPGG. Vilardipower play(J. Morrissey, K. Connor)2–2
  2. 05:22WSHA. Ovechkin(M. Roy, A. Beauvillier)2–3
3rdshots 8–8
  1. 05:25WSHC. McMichael2–4
  2. 15:11WPGM. Scheifele(K. Connor, D. DeMelo)3–4

score reads WPG–WSH

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
2.75
WSH chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.3
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.017
WSH puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
50.0%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.56Expected goals2.75
WPG 56% of the chance quality
21Shots on goal35
7High-danger chances1
60All attempts (Corsi)60
Adjusted for score: WPG 55% · WSH 45%
Faceoffs · WSH won32%off53%neu69%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
WPG3 / 7 · 1.53 xG
WSH0 / 1 · 0.20 xG
Medium dangermid-range
WPG0 / 14 · 1.61 xG
WSH2 / 18 · 1.92 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
WPG0 / 39 · 0.42 xG
WSH2 / 41 · 0.63 xG

WPG went 0-for-14 from medium danger on 1.61 expected goals — 1.6 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
WPG
3 G · 3.56 xG · -0.6
WSH
4 G · 2.75 xG · +1.3
012345

WPG finished -0.6 against expected, WSH +1.3.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
WPG
SNAP2/19
SLAP0/7
WRIST0/3
TIP IN1/4
BACKHAND0/2
DEFLECTED0/2
OTHER0/23
WSH
SNAP2/23
SLAP1/9
WRIST0/6
TIP IN0/3
BACKHAND1/3
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/16
WPG
WSH
Off the rush
2 G on 23
2.48 xG
2 G on 29
2.18 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 2
0.46 xG
0 G on 3
0.22 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: WPG went 2-for-19, WSH 2-for-23. WPG 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
E. Comrie
WPG · 31/35 · .886
-1.3
saved above expected
D-
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/10.2+0.2
Medium2/181.9-0.1
Low2/410.6-1.4

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

C. Lindgren
WSH · 18/21 · .857
+0.6
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger3/71.5-1.5
Medium0/141.6+1.6
Low0/390.4+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

81 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
WPG
37 shots
3
Final
81 shots
WSH
44 shots
4
WPG attackWSH attack
WPG WSH Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — WPG left, WSH 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
K. Connor
#81 · L · WPG
0 G · 3 A · 2 SOG · 22:45 on ice · +1
G. Vilardi
#13 · C · WPG
2 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 17:55 on ice · +1
J. Morrissey
#44 · D · WPG
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 26:02 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Wed, Nov 26
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 6:02 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 2.5–2.7 goal spread with Washington at 54% win probability. This is about as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

The underlying metrics tell a story of competitive balance. Winnipeg's xG% stands at 48.0%, Corsi at 49.0%. Washington mirrors the Corsi at 49.0% but edges out on expected goals at 50.0%. The Capitals' PDO of 1.018, though, suggests regression risk—they're running hot on the difference between shots taken and quality. Winnipeg sits at 0.998, closer to neutral.

Washington's rest advantage could matter here. The Capitals come in on one day off; Winnipeg has three. That gap isn't massive, but it's real, especially against the Jets' pace. Goaltending introduces another wrinkle: L. Thompson is on a back-to-back, which means Washington may roll out a backup or push a tired starter into the crease.

Both teams' key offensive drivers tell you where this game hinges. For Winnipeg, Nino Niederreiter (0.87 xG/60, 6G 6A, 3 hard-chance goals, 8.6% shooting) and Kyle Connor (0.83 xG/60, 25G 30A, 2 hard-chance goals, 13.0% shooting) are the primary vectors. Connor's shooting percentage is elite; Niederreiter's hard-chance production is what matters most.

Washington counters with Alex Ovechkin (0.97 xG/60, 19G 17A, 2 hard-chance goals, 13.8% shooting), whose expected-goal rate edges the Winnipeg forwards, and Anthony Beauvillier (0.89 xG/60, 14G 9A, 2 hard-chance goals, 10.4% shooting). Ovechkin's per-60 rate anchors the Capitals' offense.

The defensive picture is murkier. Winnipeg shows a 0% hard-chance goal rate and 0% rebound rate, which either reflects elite discipline or small-sample noise. Colin Miller is the identified weak link on the back end. Washington carries the same hard-chance and rebound rates—another data point suggesting sample size may be playing tricks. Declan Chisholm is the defensive vulnerability to target.

What tilts this to a coin flip is the statistical proximity: nearly identical Corsi rates, separated only by expected-goal generation and PDO variance. The rest advantage matters only at the margins. Washington's regression risk is real, but one game doesn't force a correction. The goaltending situation could swing it, but we won't know the starter until warmups.

This is a game where model confidence is low, and that's the point.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

WSH 54%
54%
WSH
Model favorite
46%
54%
WPG50WSH

WSH by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score WPG 2.5–2.7 WSH; 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 →WSH
48.0%50.0%
49.0%49.0%
2.342.62
2.552.62
1.902.18
2.101.79
0.9981.018

WSH holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.998 vs 1.018) says WSH has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
WPG
4-6-0
-4 GD · 3d rest
WSH
5-4-1
+6 GD · 1d rest
0.998
WPG PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.018
WSH PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch
  • The Capitals' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • L. Thompson is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Capitals' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.
  • The Jets have 2 more days of rest.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
WPG
Expected in goal
E. Comrie
3 days rest.900 last start
Backup Connor Hellebuyck · +5.5 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

WSH
Expected in goal
L. Thompson
back-to-back.957 last start
Backup Logan Thompson · +29.3 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
WSH
Alex Ovechkin19G 17A
0.97 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.8% sh
Anthony Beauvillier14G 9A
0.89 xG/60 · 2 HD · 10.4% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page