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

Avalanche run the Rangers off the ice on the underlying numbers

The verdict · earned

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

COL 3 · NYR 2
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 7:10 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 had one high-danger chance. New York had seven. Colorado won 3-2 in overtime—a contradiction resolved by two facts: I. Shesterkin's elite goaltending and the Avalanche's decisive edge in shot quality.

The Avalanche controlled 65% of 5v5 expected goals (4.45–2.37). Their shot quality was the differentiator: 0.061 xG per attempt vs 0.039 for New York, a gap that reflects dominance even when shot volume barely favored Colorado (42–27 on goal). On rush chances, Colorado converted twice on 30 attempts. On high-danger looks, they couldn't convert their one chance—while Shesterkin went 100% SV against New York's seven HD attempts.

The goaltending numbers tell the story. I. Shesterkin (NYR) stopped 39 of 42 for a 0.929 SV%, but the real number is +1.45 against expected—elite performance that kept the Rangers alive. The Avalanche underperformed their own xG by the same margin, suggesting variance that, without Shesterkin's brilliance, would have been even wider. M. Blackwood (COL) was steady at 0.926 SV% on 27 shots.

Nathan MacKinnon's backhander from the high slot at 02:46 of overtime decided it—a goal that capped the Avalanche's underlying dominance.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · OT · Dec 6
COL
3
NYR
2

Avalanche run the Rangers off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 4.5 – 2.4Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Avalanche earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
COL
4.45
NYR
2.37
65% of the chances35%

The board read COL 3, NYR 2. The chances read COL 4.5, NYR 2.4.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
COL
−1.4
goals above expected
COL4.45 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
NYR2.37 expected · 2 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. P2 07:06COLP. Kelly1–0
  2. P3 04:23NYRC. Sheary1–1
  3. P3 15:26COLN. MacKinnon2–1
  4. P3 19:18NYRA. PanarinPP2–2
  5. OT 02:46COLN. MacKinnon3–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
COL
52 shots
3
Final
96 shots
NYR
44 shots
2
COL attackNYR attack
COL NYR Goal
52
shots · 3 in
44
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
COLNYR
0 / 7
1.86 xG
High danger
0 / 1
0.24 xG
3 / 16
1.75 xG
Medium
1 / 9
1.17 xG
0 / 50
0.84 xG
Low
1 / 51
0.95 xG

High-danger looks: COL 0 of 7, NYR 0 of 1.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
I. Shesterkin
+1.4
NYR · 39/42
B
M. Blackwood
+0.4
COL · 25/27
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Avalanche run the Rangers 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 9–11no goals
    2ndshots 13–8
    1. 07:06COLP. Kelly(S. Malinski, M. Necas)1–0
    3rdshots 19–8
    1. 04:23NYRC. Sheary(V. Trocheck, J. Miller)1–1
    2. 15:26COLN. MacKinnon(M. Necas, J. Manson)2–1
    3. 19:18NYRA. Panarinpower play(M. Zibanejad, A. Lafrenière)2–2
    OTshots 1–0
    1. 02:46COLN. MacKinnon(C. Makar, M. Necas)3–2

    score reads COL–NYR

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    4.45
    COL chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    −1.4
    Finishing
    Goals below what those chances were worth
    1.008
    COL puck luck
    About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
    54.5%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    4.45Expected goals2.37
    COL 65% of the chance quality
    42Shots on goal27
    7High-danger chances1
    73All attempts (Corsi)61
    Adjusted for score: COL 53% · NYR 47%
    Faceoffs · NYR won52%off52%neu75%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    COL0 / 7 · 1.86 xG
    NYR0 / 1 · 0.24 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    COL3 / 16 · 1.75 xG
    NYR1 / 9 · 1.17 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    COL0 / 50 · 0.84 xG
    NYR1 / 51 · 0.95 xG

    COL went 0-for-7 from high danger on 1.86 expected goals — 1.9 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    COL
    3 G · 4.45 xG · -1.4
    NYR
    2 G · 2.37 xG · -0.4
    012345

    COL finished -1.4 against expected, NYR -0.4.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    COL
    WRIST0/31
    SNAP0/4
    BACKHAND1/5
    SLAP0/4
    TIP IN1/3
    WRAP AROUND0/2
    POKE0/1
    BAT1/1
    DEFLECTED0/1
    OTHER0/21
    NYR
    WRIST0/24
    SNAP1/7
    BACKHAND0/4
    SLAP1/5
    TIP IN0/4
    WRAP AROUND0/0
    POKE0/0
    BAT0/0
    DEFLECTED0/0
    OTHER0/17
    COL
    NYR
    Off the rush
    2 G on 30
    2.37 xG
    1 G on 19
    1.32 xG
    Off rebounds
    1 G on 5
    0.72 xG
    0 G on 5
    0.54 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: COL went 0-for-31, NYR 0-for-24. 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
    M. Blackwood
    COL · 25/27 · .926
    +0.4
    saved above expected
    B
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/10.2+0.2
    Medium1/91.2+0.2
    Low1/510.9-0.1

    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

    I. Shesterkin
    NYR · 39/42 · .929
    +1.4
    saved above expected
    B+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/71.9+1.9
    Medium3/161.8-1.3
    Low0/500.8+0.8

    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

    96 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    COL
    52 shots
    3
    Final
    96 shots
    NYR
    44 shots
    2
    COL attackNYR attack
    COL NYR Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — COL left, NYR 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 · 3 A · 3 SOG · 22:12 on ice · +2
    N. MacKinnon
    #29 · C · COL
    2 G · 0 A · 7 SOG · 24:56 on ice · +3
    C. Makar
    #8 · D · COL
    0 G · 1 A · 7 SOG · 27:40 on ice · -1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Sat, Dec 6
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 11, 7:07 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 Colorado 2.7–2.4 New York game with the Avalanche at 56% win probability. This lean reflects Colorado's dominance across underlying metrics.

    Colorado is 8-1-1 in their last 10, establishing momentum. At 5v5, the Avalanche control 57.0% expected goals and 57.0% shot attempts — territorial dominance that means sustained pressure. New York sits at 48.0% xG and 49.0% Corsi, which means defending almost the entire night.

    The catch is PDO. Colorado runs 1.021, indicating luck has lifted their results beyond underlying play. New York's 1.009 sits closer to neutral. If Colorado's high-danger conversion and goaltending regress, the Rangers close the gap substantially.

    Both goaltenders arrive on back-to-backs. I. Shesterkin for New York and M. Blackwood for Colorado face the fatigue cost that flattens performance. Don't bank on either stealing this one.

    The matchup turns on four players. Artturi Lehkonen leads Colorado at 1.11 xG/60, yielding 18 goals, 22 assists, and 6 high-danger goals on a 14.9% shooting rate. He is New York's defensive focus. Ross Colton (1.10 xG/60, 7 goals, 15 assists, 1 HD goal) complements him, though a 4.9% shooting rate limits his secondary edge.

    Adam Sykora (0.91 xG/60, 3 goals, 1 assist) carries minimal volume for New York, but a 20.0% shooting rate hints at finishing upside. Gabe Perreault (0.79 xG/60, 8 goals, 11 assists) offers secondary production, though 13.1% conversion and 2 high-danger goals suggest he runs on variance.

    Defensive exposure exists on both sides. Nazem Kadri for Colorado and Vincent Iorio for New York are weak links that compound over 60 minutes.

    Colorado's underlying edge looks durable even accounting for PDO regression. The Rangers face outmatched possession and shot creation — the metrics that predict outcomes. Colorado's 56% win probability holds unless New York steals one on goaltending luck.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    COL 56%
    56%
    COL
    Model favorite
    56%
    44%
    COL50NYR

    COL by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score COL 2.7–2.4 NYR; 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
    COL← edge
    edge →NYR
    57.0%48.0%
    57.0%49.0%
    3.032.26
    2.302.40
    2.631.88
    1.561.90
    1.0211.009

    COL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.021 vs 1.009) says COL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    COL
    8-1-1
    +22 GD · 1d rest
    NYR
    5-5-0
    +1 GD · 1d rest
    1.021
    COL PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    1.009
    NYR 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.
    • I. Shesterkin is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • M. Blackwood is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • The Avalanche are the hotter team by points pace (8-1-1 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
    COL
    Expected in goal
    M. Blackwood
    back-to-back.878 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.

    NYR
    Expected in goal
    I. Shesterkin
    back-to-back.926 last start
    Backup Igor Shesterkin · +21.3 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
    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
    NYR
    Adam Sykora3G 1A
    0.91 xG/60 · 0 HD · 20.0% sh
    Gabe Perreault8G 11A
    0.79 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.1% sh
    Keep going

    Where to next