Motion-blurred skater in a Columbus Blue Jackets sweater

Breakdown · CBJ at NJD

Blue Jackets hold off the Devils

FinalMon, Dec 1

CBJColumbus Blue Jackets5 NJDNew Jersey Devils3

The verdict · stolen

The Blue Jackets stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.51–4.20 and won anyway.

CBJ 5 · NJD 3

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 6:32 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 Blue Jackets beat the Devils 5–3, but the underlying numbers said the Devils deserved better. New Jersey held 57% of shot attempts (33–25) and led expected goals 4.20–3.51, yet left with nothing.

The gap was purely goaltending. E. Merzlikins stopped 30 of 33 shots and beat his xG model by 1.20 goals; J. Allen faced just 25 shots but gave up 1.49 more than expected, a split that swung nearly three goals in Columbus's favor.

The Devils were lethal in transition, scoring 3 times on 31 rush chances. The Blue Jackets matched them, scoring 4 times on just 21 rush attempts—an efficiency advantage that turned the tide. New Jersey's power play was dominant (2 goals on 23 shots, 1.48 xG), but it could not overcome the even-strength margin.

C. Coyle (1–2 in 20:27) and Z. Werenski (2 assists in 26:57) led Columbus's offense. Miles Wood's wrist shot from the high slot in period three (13:31) marked the turning point. N. Hischier (1–1 in 23:51) led New Jersey's charge.

This was a game where shot quality mattered less than shot conversion. The Devils created the better chances; the Blue Jackets simply scored more of theirs.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Dec 1

CBJ

NJD

Blue Jackets hold off the Devils

Chances 3.5 – 4.2Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Devils deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

CBJ

3.51

NJD

4.20

45% of the chances55%

The board read CBJ 5, NJD 3. The chances read CBJ 3.5, NJD 4.2.

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

Luck check

CBJ

+1.5

goals above expected

CBJ3.51 expected · 5 scored

Expected

Scored

NJD4.20 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 01:26NJDN. HischierPP0–1
P1 03:03NJDO. Palat0–2
P1 09:54CBJD. MateychukPP1–2
P2 01:28CBJS. Monahan2–2
P3 06:40CBJC. Coyle3–2
P3 07:14CBJS. Monahan4–2
P3 11:51NJDT. MeierPP4–3

+1 more on the full breakdown

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

Where the shots came from

CBJ

32 shots

Final

84 shots

NJD

52 shots

CBJ NJD GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 5 in

shots · 3 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

CBJNJD

1 / 5

1.90 xG

High danger

2 / 6

1.40 xG

4 / 10

1.23 xG

Medium

0 / 15

1.81 xG

0 / 28

0.38 xG

Low

1 / 44

0.98 xG

High-danger looks: CBJ 1 of 5, NJD 2 of 6.

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

In the net

B+

E. Merzlikins

+1.2

CBJ · 30/33

D-

J. Allen

−1.5

NJD · 20/25

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Blue Jackets hold off the Devils

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 8–10

01:26NJDN. Hischierpower play(J. Bratt, D. Mercer)0–1
03:03NJDO. Palat(A. Gritsyuk)0–2
09:54CBJD. Mateychukpower play(C. Coyle, I. Provorov)1–2

2ndshots 11–14

01:28CBJS. Monahan(C. Sillinger, Z. Werenski)2–2

3rdshots 6–9

06:40CBJC. Coyle(Z. Werenski, M. Wood)3–2
07:14CBJS. Monahan(I. Lundeström)4–2
11:51NJDT. Meierpower play(J. Bratt, N. Hischier)4–3
13:31CBJM. Wood(C. Coyle)5–3

score reads CBJ–NJD

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.51

CBJ chances

Goals their shots were worth

+1.5

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.070

CBJ puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

39.8%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.51Expected goals4.20

NJD 55% of the chance quality

25Shots on goal33

5High-danger chances6

43All attempts (Corsi)65

Adjusted for score: CBJ 39% · NJD 61%

Faceoffs · NJD won44%off45%neu18%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

CBJ1 / 5 · 1.90 xG

NJD2 / 6 · 1.40 xG

Medium dangermid-range

CBJ4 / 10 · 1.23 xG

NJD0 / 15 · 1.81 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

CBJ0 / 28 · 0.38 xG

NJD1 / 44 · 0.98 xG

CBJ went 4-for-10 from medium danger on 1.23 expected goals — 2.8 above expected.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

CBJ

5 G · 3.51 xG · +1.5

NJD

3 G · 4.20 xG · -1.2

0123456

CBJ finished +1.5 against expected, NJD -1.2.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

CBJ

WRIST2/19

SNAP1/5

BACKHAND1/3

SLAP0/2

TIP IN1/3

DEFLECTED0/0

POKE0/0

OTHER0/11

NJD

WRIST2/18

SNAP1/8

BACKHAND0/8

SLAP0/8

TIP IN0/7

DEFLECTED0/2

POKE0/1

OTHER0/13

CBJ

NJD

Off the rush

4 G on 21

2.14 xG

3 G on 31

2.60 xG

Off rebounds

1 G on 2

0.38 xG

0 G on 5

0.81 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: CBJ went 2-for-19, NJD 2-for-18. CBJ 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

E. Merzlikins

CBJ · 30/33 · .909

+1.2

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/61.4-0.6

Medium0/151.8+1.8

Low1/441.0-0.0

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

J. Allen

NJD · 20/25 · .800

-1.5

saved above expected

D-

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/51.9+0.9

Medium4/101.2-2.8

Low0/280.4+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

84 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

CBJ

32 shots

Final

84 shots

NJD

52 shots

CBJ NJD GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — CBJ left, NJD 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

C. Coyle

#3 · C · CBJ

1 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 20:27 on ice · +2

Z. Werenski

#8 · D · CBJ

0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 26:57 on ice · +3

N. Hischier

#13 · C · NJD

1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 23:51 on ice · -2

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Dec 1

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 6:23 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

This is as close to a pick'em as the models get: 2.6 goals for Columbus, 2.6 for New Jersey, win probability split at 50-50.

The underlying shot metrics favor Columbus ever so slightly. The Blue Jackets hold a 52.0% expected goals share at 5v5, a full two percentage points above the Devils' 50.0%. Their Corsi rates match at 51.0% each. But that edge masks a deeper mismatch: Columbus is punching above its xG with a 1.003 PDO, while New Jersey is running cold at 0.971. The Devils are due for positive regression.

Columbus's recent form complicates the picture. Over their last 10 games, the Blue Jackets sit at minus-7 in goal differential. That's a significant drag on a team that, by underlying metrics, should be competitive here.

The goaltending question is worth watching. J. Markstrom is on a back-to-back and could either see a backup start or take the ice fatigued—either way, advantage unclear.

Columbus's offensive load falls on Boone Jenner (11 goals, 0.98 xG per 60 minutes, 9.6% shooting rate) and Mathieu Olivier (12 goals, 0.89 xG per 60, 13.3% shooting). Olivier's finishing rate is a red flag for reversion; Jenner's volume carries more stability. New Jersey counters with Timo Meier (13 goals, 1.08 xG per 60, 6.7% shooting) and Jack Hughes (18 goals, 0.88 xG per 60, 11.5% shooting). Hughes has paced the offense despite a lower expected output—unsustainable production from a blue-chip player.

Both teams generate heavy chances in uncommon ways. Columbus posts 0% of its scoring from high-danger plays and 0% from rebounds. The Devils mirror that: 0% high-danger, 0% rebound. Those zeros hide the real vulnerabilities. Conor Garland is Columbus's defensive weak link; Johnathan Kovacevic carries that burden for New Jersey.

The edge goes to New Jersey if regression arrives tonight. Until then, treat this like the toss-up it is.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

NJD 50%

50%

NJD

Model favorite

50%

CBJ50NJD

NJD by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score CBJ 2.6–2.6 NJD; 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

CBJ← edge

edge →NJD

52.0%50.0%

51.0%51.0%

2.632.45

2.432.50

2.121.66

1.982.23

1.0030.971

CBJ holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.003 vs 0.971) says CBJ has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

CBJ

4-2-4

-7 GD · 2d rest

NJD

5-4-1

-2 GD · 1d rest

1.003

CBJ PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.971

NJD PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch

The Devils' PDO is 0.971 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Things to watch

J. Markstrom is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Blue Jackets are underwater at -7 goal differential over their last 10.
The Devils' PDO is 0.971 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

CBJ

Expected in goal

J. Greaves

2 days rest.833 last start

Backup Jet Greaves · +16.5 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

NJD

Expected in goal

J. Markstrom

back-to-back.871 last start

Backup Jacob Markstrom · -11.9 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

CBJ

Boone Jenner11G 21A

0.98 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.6% sh

Mathieu Olivier12G 9A

0.89 xG/60 · 1 HD · 13.3% sh

NJD

Timo Meier13G 15A

1.08 xG/60 · 3 HD · 6.7% sh

Jack Hughes18G 17A

0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.5% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page