Motion-blurred skater in a Colorado Avalanche sweater

Breakdown · MTL at COL

Avalanche run the Canadiens off the ice on the underlying numbers

FinalSat, Nov 29

MTLMontreal Canadiens2 COLColorado Avalanche7

The verdict · earned

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

MTL 2 · COL 7

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 6:13 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 7–2 victory looked more decisive than the underlying play deserved. The Avalanche controlled expected goals 4.60–2.66 (63–37%), a margin that doesn't justify a five-goal scoreline.

The gap came down to goaltending and finishing. J. Dobes surrendered 2.4 goals beyond expectation — well below the workload of 36 shots he faced. Colorado's M. Blackwood, meanwhile, stopped all six high-danger chances, outperforming his xG by 0.66.

Denver was lethal on the rush: four goals on 32 chances. Montreal was effective too—two goals on 23—but at a lower rate. Most striking: Montreal was 0-for-6 on high-danger chances, a drought unlikely to repeat.

Colorado's shot volume (36–23) and high-danger count (8–6) showed sustained pressure, yet the 4.60 xG tells a different story than the 7–2 scoreline. The Avalanche outperformed their expected goals by 2.4 — whether elite finishing or variance, it's the difference between a blowout and a competitive game.

Final: MTL 2 – COL 7

Data: NHL API, MoneyPuck xG model

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Nov 29

MTL

COL

Avalanche run the Canadiens off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 2.7 – 4.6Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Avalanche earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

MTL

2.66

COL

4.60

37% of the chances63%

The board read MTL 2, COL 7. The chances read MTL 2.7, COL 4.6.

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

Luck check

COL

+2.4

goals above expected

COL4.60 expected · 7 scored

Expected

Scored

MTL2.66 expected · 2 scored

Expected

Scored

The Avalanche scored 2.4 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 07:32COLB. Nelson0–1
P1 13:25COLG. Landeskog0–2
P2 00:50COLB. Burns0–3
P2 03:55COLB. Nelson0–4
P2 08:27MTLI. Demidov1–4
P2 19:05COLN. MacKinnon1–5
P3 02:51COLD. Toews1–6

+2 more on the full breakdown

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

Where the shots came from

MTL

34 shots

Final

89 shots

COL

55 shots

MTL COL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 2 in

shots · 7 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

MTLCOL

0 / 6

1.36 xG

High danger

2 / 8

1.83 xG

1 / 11

0.83 xG

Medium

5 / 17

1.86 xG

1 / 28

0.48 xG

Low

0 / 48

0.91 xG

The Canadiens went 0 for 6 from the slot.

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

In the net

M. Blackwood

+0.7

COL · 21/23

J. Dobes

−2.4

MTL · 29/36

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Avalanche run the Canadiens off the ice on the underlying numbers

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 12–14

07:32COLB. Nelson(A. Lehkonen, J. Kiviranta)0–1
13:25COLG. Landeskog(B. Nelson, R. Colton)0–2

2ndshots 5–10

00:50COLB. Burns(B. Nelson)0–3
03:55COLB. Nelson(M. Necas, A. Lehkonen)0–4
08:27MTLI. Demidov(J. Slafkovský, O. Kapanen)1–4
19:05COLN. MacKinnon(G. Landeskog, C. Makar)1–5

3rdshots 6–12

02:51COLD. Toews(M. Necas, N. MacKinnon)1–6
05:10MTLL. Hutsonpower play(C. Caufield, N. Suzuki)2–6
06:52COLG. Landeskogpower play(N. MacKinnon, M. Necas)2–7

score reads MTL–COL

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

4.60

COL chances

Goals their shots were worth

+2.4

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.051

COL puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

61.9%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.66Expected goals4.60

COL 63% of the chance quality

23Shots on goal36

6High-danger chances8

45All attempts (Corsi)73

Adjusted for score: MTL 44% · COL 56%

Faceoffs · COL won71%off48%neu50%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

MTL0 / 6 · 1.36 xG

COL2 / 8 · 1.83 xG

Medium dangermid-range

MTL1 / 11 · 0.83 xG

COL5 / 17 · 1.86 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

MTL1 / 28 · 0.48 xG

COL0 / 48 · 0.91 xG

COL went 5-for-17 from medium danger on 1.86 expected goals — 3.1 above expected.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

MTL

2 G · 2.66 xG · -0.7

COL

7 G · 4.60 xG · +2.4

012345678

MTL finished -0.7 against expected, COL +2.4.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

MTL

WRIST0/19

SNAP1/8

SLAP1/2

BACKHAND0/4

TIP IN0/1

DEFLECTED0/0

OTHER0/11

COL

WRIST4/31

SNAP2/15

SLAP0/5

BACKHAND0/1

TIP IN1/2

DEFLECTED0/1

OTHER0/18

MTL

COL

Off the rush

2 G on 23

2.24 xG

4 G on 32

2.89 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 2

0.25 xG

1 G on 6

0.92 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: MTL went 0-for-19, COL 4-for-31. COL 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. Dobes

MTL · 29/36 · .806

-2.4

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/81.8-0.2

Medium5/171.9-3.1

Low0/480.9+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

M. Blackwood

COL · 21/23 · .913

+0.7

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/61.4+1.4

Medium1/110.8-0.2

Low1/280.5-0.5

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

89 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

MTL

34 shots

Final

89 shots

COL

55 shots

MTL COL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — MTL 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

2 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 17:00 on ice · +3

M. Necas

#88 · C · COL

0 G · 3 A · 3 SOG · 18:06 on ice · +2

G. Landeskog

#92 · L · COL

2 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 16:12 on ice · +3

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Nov 29

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 6:31 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 enters at 60% win probability, with the projected scoreline centered around 3.0 goals for the Avalanche and 2.4 for Montreal. The advantage rests on one foundation: Colorado controls the territorial battle.

At 5v5, the Avalanche own 57.0% xG and 57.0% Corsi against Montreal's 48.0% xG and 49.0% Corsi. Those gaps—nine points in xG, eight in Corsi—show Colorado generates better chances from anywhere on the ice and tilts play into Montreal's end with consistency. This is the game's largest edge.

The caveat is mutual: both teams are running hot. Colorado's PDO sits at 1.021, Montreal's at 1.018. PDO regresses, which means both teams' actual results have benefited from luck. Colorado's momentum—9-0-1 in their last 10—masks underlying regression waiting to happen. Montreal's slump at -7 goal differential over the same stretch carries the opposite implication: their luck ran worse than their process deserved.

Recent form and underlying process are in tension here. Colorado is hotter and deeper in the hole on PDO. Once luck normalizes, their edge shrinks but doesn't disappear.

The goaltending matchup introduces fatigue. S. Wedgewood takes a back-to-back for Colorado; S. Montembeault for Montreal. Both are live starters, though both carry the standard second-game wear.

Colorado's offensive edge flows through Artturi Lehkonen and Ross Colton. Lehkonen generates 1.11 xG per 60 with 18G 22A (6 HD goals, 14.9% shooting)—a profile of volume and finishing. Colton carries similar volume at 1.10 xG per 60 but has just 7G 15A; his 4.9% shooting rate flags him as underperforming his chances.

Montreal counters with Cole Caufield and Oliver Kapanen. Caufield (33G 16A, 0.97 xG/60, 1 HD goal, 20.0% shooting) is the heavier threat—his goal total is real, though his limited HD production suggests his damage comes elsewhere. Kapanen (19G 12A, 0.83 xG/60, 4 HD goals, 17.8% shooting) operates at lower volume and sits on elevated shooting luck.

The model's lean is grounded. Colorado's process edge is substantial, and both teams' PDO suggests room for regression that currently favors the Avalanche. Once that evens out, so does the game—but for now, Colorado owns the matchup.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

COL 60%

60%

COL

Model favorite

40%

60%

MTL50COL

COL by 20 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score MTL 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

MTL← edge

edge →COL

48.0%57.0%

49.0%57.0%

2.413.03

2.622.30

2.242.63

1.961.56

1.0181.021

COL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.018 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

MTL

4-4-2

-7 GD · 1d rest

COL

9-0-1

+30 GD · 1d rest

1.018

MTL 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.
The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — 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.
S. Wedgewood is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
S. Montembeault is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Avalanche are the hotter team by points pace (9-0-1 in their last 10).
The Canadiens are underwater at -7 goal differential over 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

MTL

Expected in goal

S. Montembeault

back-to-back.968 last start

Backup Jakub Dobes · +17.3 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

S. Wedgewood

back-to-back.949 last start

Backup Scott Wedgewood · +23.1 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

MTL

Cole Caufield33G 16A

0.97 xG/60 · 1 HD · 20.0% sh

Oliver Kapanen19G 12A

0.83 xG/60 · 4 HD · 17.8% 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

Back to the front page