Motion-blurred skater in a Nashville Predators sweater

Breakdown · COL at NSH

Predators edge the Avalanche in a shootout

Final / OTTue, Dec 9

COLColorado Avalanche3 NSHNashville Predators4

The verdict · coin flip

The Predators won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

COL 3 · NSH 4

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 7:46 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 generated slightly more expected goals (3.92 to 3.71), yet Nashville won—a result that hinged on efficiency. The Predators produced 0.074 xG per shot vs. 0.050 for the Avalanche, a gap that manifested in high-danger chances (8–5 Predators). That edge carried through the shootout, where Ryan O'Reilly's conversion decided it.

The Avalanche's inefficiency ran deeper than volume. Despite 42 shot attempts to Nashville's 31, Colorado underperformed their xG model by 0.92 goals, a sign of low-danger chances at distance rather than slot-area production. J. Saros (0.929 SV%, +0.92 variance) also outplayed S. Wedgewood (0.903 SV%, +0.71 variance). N. MacKinnon, C. Makar, and M. Necas combined for four assists and a goal, yet Colorado's volume couldn't overcome Nashville's execution.

Data: NHL API, MoneyPuck xG model

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · SO · Dec 9

COL

NSH

Predators edge the Avalanche in a shootout

Chances 3.9 – 3.7Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

Dead even on chances. The Predators took it anyway.

Expected goals · chance value

COL

3.92

NSH

3.71

51% of the chances49%

The board read COL 3, NSH 4. The chances read COL 3.9, NSH 3.7.

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

Luck check

NSH

+0.3

goals above expected

NSH3.71 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

COL3.92 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 01:12COLB. Nelson1–0
P1 04:05NSHJ. MarchessaultPP1–1
P1 05:30NSHR. Schaefer1–2
P1 10:21COLA. Lehkonen2–2
P3 12:58NSHB. Skjei2–3
P3 19:52COLC. MakarPP3–3
SO 00:00NSHR. O'ReillyPP3–3

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

Where the shots came from

COL

61 shots

Final

106 shots

NSH

45 shots

COL NSH GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 3 in

shots · 4 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

COLNSH

1 / 5

1.11 xG

High danger

1 / 8

1.85 xG

1 / 18

1.82 xG

Medium

1 / 12

1.32 xG

1 / 56

0.99 xG

Low

1 / 30

0.54 xG

High-danger looks: COL 1 of 5, NSH 1 of 8.

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

In the net

B+

J. Saros

+0.9

NSH · 39/42

S. Wedgewood

+0.7

COL · 28/31

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Predators edge the Avalanche in a shootout

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 13–11

01:12COLB. Nelson(J. Manson, B. Burns)1–0
04:05NSHJ. Marchessaultpower play(R. O'Reilly, F. Forsberg)1–1
05:30NSHR. Schaefer(F. Svechkov)1–2
10:21COLA. Lehkonen(M. Necas, N. MacKinnon)2–2

2ndshots 13–6no goals

3rdshots 12–9

12:58NSHB. Skjei(A. Wilsby, L. Evangelista)2–3
19:52COLC. Makarpower play(M. Necas, N. MacKinnon)3–3

OTshots 4–5no goals

00:00NSHR. O'Reillypower play3–3

score reads COL–NSH

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.71

NSH chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.3

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.022

NSH puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

38.8%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.92Expected goals3.71

COL 51% of the chance quality

42Shots on goal31

5High-danger chances8

79All attempts (Corsi)50

Adjusted for score: COL 62% · NSH 38%

Faceoffs · NSH won38%off63%neu52%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

COL1 / 5 · 1.11 xG

NSH1 / 8 · 1.85 xG

Medium dangermid-range

COL1 / 18 · 1.82 xG

NSH1 / 12 · 1.32 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

COL1 / 56 · 0.99 xG

NSH1 / 30 · 0.54 xG

NSH went 1-for-8 from high danger on 1.85 expected goals — 0.9 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

COL

3 G · 3.92 xG · -0.9

NSH

4 G · 3.71 xG · +0.3

012345

COL finished -0.9 against expected, NSH +0.3.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

COL

WRIST1/32

SNAP1/15

TIP IN0/5

BACKHAND1/2

SLAP0/4

DEFLECTED0/0

WRAP AROUND0/0

OTHER0/21

NSH

WRIST2/24

SNAP1/7

TIP IN0/4

BACKHAND0/3

SLAP0/0

DEFLECTED0/2

WRAP AROUND0/2

OTHER0/8

COL

NSH

Off the rush

1 G on 37

3.07 xG

1 G on 23

2.13 xG

Off rebounds

1 G on 2

0.36 xG

1 G on 8

0.97 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: COL went 1-for-32, NSH 2-for-24.

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

S. Wedgewood

COL · 28/31 · .903

+0.7

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/81.9+0.8

Medium1/121.3+0.3

Low1/300.5-0.5

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

J. Saros

NSH · 39/42 · .929

+0.9

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/51.1+0.1

Medium1/181.8+0.8

Low1/561.0-0.0

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

106 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

COL

61 shots

Final

106 shots

NSH

45 shots

COL NSH GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — COL left, NSH 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

N. MacKinnon

#29 · C · COL

0 G · 2 A · 7 SOG · 28:22 on ice

M. Necas

#88 · C · COL

0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 25:36 on ice

C. Makar

#8 · D · COL

1 G · 0 A · 6 SOG · 30:19 on ice

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Dec 9

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 7:44 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

The model projects Colorado at 55% win probability—a 2.8–2.5 victory built on Colorado's edge in territorial and underlying play.

Colorado enters running hot. The Avalanche have gone 8-1-1 over their last ten. Nashville sits at -8 goal differential over the same span, trailing both on the scoreboard and beneath the surface.

The numbers explain the gap. Colorado holds 57.0% xG% at 5v5 and 57.0% Corsi%, dominating both chance creation and possession. Nashville's 49.0% xG% and 50.0% Corsi% show the inverse: a team generating fewer chances and controlling less territory, the dynamic that produces goal differentials like -8.

Colorado's 1.021 PDO is the caveat. The Avalanche are benefiting from unsustainably good luck on both ends; their results have inflated beyond what their underlying play alone predicts. Nashville (0.992 PDO) is running cold by contrast—which means Colorado's edge may narrow even if the model's analytical read holds.

Players to Watch

COL

Artturi Lehkonen — 1.11 xG/60, 18G 22A, 6 HD goals, 14.9% shooting
Ross Colton — 1.10 xG/60, 7G 15A, 1 HD goals, 4.9% shooting

NSH

Zachary L'Heureux — 0.85 xG/60, 4G 0A, 1 HD goals, 16.0% shooting
Filip Forsberg — 0.80 xG/60, 23G 17A, 4 HD goals, 13.6% shooting

Colorado's advantage is built on sustaining possession pressure through sixty minutes. Nashville's path is tighter: tighten defensively and hope PDO regression accelerates. The model favors Colorado. The underlying play is why.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

COL 55%

55%

COL

Model favorite

55%

45%

COL50NSH

COL by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score COL 2.8–2.5 NSH; 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 →NSH

57.0%49.0%

57.0%50.0%

3.032.48

2.302.58

2.631.84

1.562.21

1.0210.992

COL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.021 vs 0.992) 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

+18 GD · 2d rest

NSH

5-5-0

-8 GD · 2d rest

1.021

COL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.992

NSH 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 49.0%.
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 49.0%.
The Avalanche drive Corsi at 57.0% — expect territorial tilt.
The Avalanche are the hotter team by points pace (8-1-1 in their last 10).
The Predators are underwater at -8 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

COL

Expected in goal

M. Blackwood

2 days rest.920 last start

Backup Scott Wedgewood · +23.1 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

NSH

Expected in goal

J. Saros

2 days rest.842 last start

Backup Juuse Saros · -9.3 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

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

NSH

Zachary L'Heureux4G 0A

0.85 xG/60 · 1 HD · 16.0% sh

Filip Forsberg23G 17A

0.80 xG/60 · 4 HD · 13.6% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page