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

Avalanche shut out the Sharks, 6-0

The verdict · earned

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

SJS 0 · COL 6
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 5:47 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's 6-0 victory looked like a blowout. But the underlying metrics revealed a closer contest: the Avalanche controlled 4.89 expected goals to the Sharks' 3.06, a 62-38 split. The separation came from execution: Colorado overperformed their xG by 1.11 goals, while San Jose underperformed by 3.06. The Sharks generated quality chances and wasted them.

Colorado dominated the shot battle. They controlled 62% of attempts (42–26) and generated high-danger chances at a 7–4 margin. M. Blackwood's 26 saves (1.000 SV%) exceeded expectation by 3.06 goals. That performance alone accounted for roughly half the margin.

San Jose's goaltending could not match Colorado's standards. Y. Askarov allowed 1.79 goals above expectation; A. Nedeljkovic saved only +0.68. M. Blackwood's +3.06 outperformance proved decisive.

Colorado finished ruthlessly. They scored 2 on the rush (35 chances), converted 1 of 6 rebounds, and added 2 low-danger goals—the type of finishing that exploits defensive breakdowns. San Jose created 7 rebound chances and converted zero. Their inability to capitalize at the net mirrored their missed scoring opportunities elsewhere.

Artturi Lehkonen's snap shot from the slot (P3, 16:15) served as the turning point.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 26
SJS
0
COL
6

Avalanche shut out the Sharks, 6-0

Chances 3.1 – 4.9Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Avalanche earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
SJS
3.06
COL
4.89
39% of the chances62%

The board read SJS 0, COL 6. The chances read SJS 3.1, COL 4.9.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
COL
+1.1
goals above expected
COL4.89 expected · 6 scored
Expected
Scored
SJS3.06 expected · 0 scored
Expected
Scored

The Sharks left 3.1 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 03:39COLR. Colton0–1
  2. P1 19:07COLN. MacKinnonPP0–2
  3. P2 03:44COLS. Malinski0–3
  4. P2 04:51COLJ. Manson0–4
  5. P2 05:00COLJ. Kiviranta0–5
  6. P3 16:15COLA. Lehkonen0–6
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
SJS
39 shots
0
Final
101 shots
COL
62 shots
6
SJS attackCOL attack
SJS COL Goal
39
shots · 0 in
62
shots · 6 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
SJSCOL
0 / 4
0.81 xG
High danger
2 / 7
1.72 xG
0 / 13
1.66 xG
Medium
2 / 20
2.12 xG
0 / 45
0.59 xG
Low
2 / 57
1.05 xG

The Sharks went 0 for 4 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
M. Blackwood
+3.1
COL · 26/26
A+
A. Nedeljkovic
+2.9
SJS · 21/23
+1 more on the full breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Avalanche shut out the Sharks, 6-0

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 5–15
  1. 03:39COLR. Colton0–1
  2. 19:07COLN. MacKinnonpower play(C. Makar, G. Landeskog)0–2
2ndshots 17–11
  1. 03:44COLS. Malinski(A. Lehkonen, M. Necas)0–3
  2. 04:51COLJ. Manson(V. Olofsson, P. Kelly)0–4
  3. 05:00COLJ. Kiviranta(I. Ivan, Z. Bardakov)0–5
3rdshots 4–16
  1. 16:15COLA. Lehkonen(N. MacKinnon, M. Necas)0–6

score reads SJS–COL

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.89
COL chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.1
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.071
COL puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
57.5%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.06Expected goals4.89
COL 62% of the chance quality
26Shots on goal42
4High-danger chances7
62All attempts (Corsi)84
Adjusted for score: SJS 49% · COL 51%
Faceoffs · COL won56%off56%neu41%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
SJS0 / 4 · 0.81 xG
COL2 / 7 · 1.72 xG
Medium dangermid-range
SJS0 / 13 · 1.66 xG
COL2 / 20 · 2.12 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
SJS0 / 45 · 0.59 xG
COL2 / 57 · 1.05 xG

SJS went 0-for-13 from medium danger on 1.66 expected goals — 1.7 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
SJS
0 G · 3.06 xG · -3.1
COL
6 G · 4.89 xG · +1.1
01234567

SJS finished -3.1 against expected, COL +1.1.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
SJS
WRIST0/29
SNAP0/3
TIP IN0/3
SLAP0/1
BACKHAND0/3
OTHER0/23
COL
WRIST2/30
SNAP3/10
TIP IN0/7
SLAP1/9
BACKHAND0/6
OTHER0/22
SJS
COL
Off the rush
0 G on 19
1.63 xG
2 G on 35
2.78 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 7
0.83 xG
1 G on 6
0.99 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: SJS went 0-for-29, COL 2-for-30. 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
Y. Askarov
SJS · 15/19 · .789
+0.9
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/71.7-0.3
Medium2/202.1+0.1
Low2/571.1-0.9

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

A. Nedeljkovic
SJS · 21/23 · .913
+2.9
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/71.7-0.3
Medium2/202.1+0.1
Low2/571.1-0.9

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

M. Blackwood
COL · 26/26 · 1.000
+3.1
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/40.8+0.8
Medium0/131.7+1.7
Low0/450.6+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

101 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
SJS
39 shots
0
Final
101 shots
COL
62 shots
6
SJS attackCOL attack
SJS COL Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — SJS 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
M. Necas
#88 · C · COL
0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 18:36 on ice · +2
A. Lehkonen
#62 · L · COL
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 18:29 on ice · +2
N. MacKinnon
#29 · C · COL
1 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 18:19 on ice · +3
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, 5:44 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

Colorado's projection: 61% win probability in a forecasted 2.3–2.9 outcome. The edge rests on dominant underlying play, though unsustainable PDO complicates the path to victory.

Colorado enters 9–0–1 over their last 10 against a Sharks team absent Pavol Regenda. That's a significant loss: Regenda's 1.10 xG/60, 5 goals at 16.1% shooting, and 2 high-danger conversions made him San Jose's primary threat. Without him, San Jose's offense flattens.

The core advantage is Colorado's possession profile. The Avalanche generate 57.0% of expected goals and control 57.0% of shot attempts at 5v5, against San Jose's 48.0% and 47.0% respectively. This structural dominance should produce territorial control and sustained offensive volume. The complication: Colorado's PDO of 1.021 sits well above San Jose's neutral 0.998. Regression should occur within this matchup.

Artturi Lehkonen anchors Colorado's attack at 1.11 xG/60, 18 goals, 22 assists, with 6 high-danger goals and 14.9% shooting. His conversion rate mirrors Colorado's overall PDO luck—elevated and vulnerable to correction. Ross Colton (1.10 xG/60, 7G, 15A) operates at 4.9% shooting, running below-market efficiency and a candidate for reversion upward.

San Jose leans on Igor Chernyshov as Regenda's replacement: 0.91 xG/60, 6 goals, 8 assists at 15.0% shooting. The tactical risk cuts two ways. First, Chernyshov doubles as San Jose's defensive weak link, meaning Colorado's possession advantage will pressure him. Second, his elevated shooting rate suggests his own PDO inflation, so San Jose's scoring output could contract sharply.

Nazem Kadri represents Colorado's defensive vulnerability. If San Jose capitalizes in transition, the margin compresses.

The verdict: Colorado's structural edge should endure despite PDO regression. Regenda's absence seals the outcome.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

COL 61%
61%
COL
Model favorite
39%
61%
SJS50COL

COL by 22 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score SJS 2.3–2.9 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
SJS← edge
edge →COL
48.0%57.0%
47.0%57.0%
2.333.03
2.562.30
1.992.63
2.321.56
0.9981.021

COL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.998 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
SJS
7-3-0
+7 GD · 2d rest
COL
9-0-1
+25 GD · 2d rest
0.998
SJS 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.
  • The Avalanche are the hotter team by points pace (9-0-1 in their last 10).
  • The Avalanche's PDO is 1.021 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
SJS
Expected in goal
Y. Askarov
2 days rest.971 last start
Backup Yaroslav Askarov · -18.9 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

COL
Expected in goal
S. Wedgewood
2 days rest1.000 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
SJS
Pavol Regenda5G 1A
1.10 xG/60 · 2 HD · 16.1% sh
Igor Chernyshov6G 8A
0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% 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