Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Colorado Avalanche sweater
← Sun, Dec 21 · the slate
Breakdown · COL at MIN

Avalanche run the Wild off the ice on the underlying numbers

FinalSun, Dec 21
COLColorado Avalanche5MINMinnesota Wild1
The verdict · earned

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

COL 5 · MIN 1
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 9:23 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 5, Minnesota 1—a margin that exceeds the underlying numbers. The Avalanche controlled 63% of expected goals (5.78–3.39), but Minnesota compounded the xG deficit with poor finish: 0 goals on 5 high-danger chances. That conversion gap explains the wider scoreline.

Nathan MacKinnon's wrist shot from the doorstep (P3, 17:35) exemplified Colorado's precision. They scored four times on 31 rush attempts—converting half-chances into goals where Minnesota couldn't. Blackwood's goaltending widened the gap: 0.966 save percentage, 2.4 goals above expected, and a perfect 5-for-5 stop rate on high-danger chances.

Wallstedt played capably (1.78 goals above expected), but Minnesota's –2.39 underperformance on xG tells the real story: one goal on 3.39 expected is variance that won't repeat. The rebound battle tilted Minnesota's way (seven opportunities created, one converted against Colorado's six, none), but marginal advantages in messy chances can't erase advantages in precision and goaltending.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Dec 21
COL
5
MIN
1

Avalanche run the Wild off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 5.8 – 3.4Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Avalanche earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
COL
5.78
MIN
3.39
63% of the chances37%

The board read COL 5, MIN 1. The chances read COL 5.8, MIN 3.4.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
COL
−0.8
goals above expected
COL5.78 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
MIN3.39 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Wild left 2.4 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 18:28COLM. Necas1–0
  2. P2 13:37COLN. MacKinnonPP2–0
  3. P2 18:33COLC. MakarPP3–0
  4. P3 05:15MINR. Hartman3–1
  5. P3 15:52COLB. Nelson4–1
  6. P3 17:35COLN. MacKinnonEN5–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
COL
62 shots
5
Final
112 shots
MIN
50 shots
1
COL attackMIN attack
COL MIN Goal
62
shots · 5 in
50
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
COLMIN
1 / 5
2.35 xG
High danger
0 / 5
1.07 xG
3 / 21
2.45 xG
Medium
1 / 14
1.39 xG
1 / 63
0.98 xG
Low
0 / 43
0.94 xG

The Wild went 0 for 5 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
M. Blackwood
+2.4
COL · 28/29
A
J. Wallstedt
+1.8
MIN · 37/41
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Avalanche run the Wild 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 14–7
  1. 18:28COLM. Necas(C. Makar, G. Landeskog)1–0
2ndshots 19–13
  1. 13:37COLN. MacKinnonpower play(B. Nelson, C. Makar)2–0
  2. 18:33COLC. Makarpower play(B. Nelson, G. Landeskog)3–0
3rdshots 9–9
  1. 05:15MINR. Hartman(J. Brodin, K. Kaprizov)3–1
  2. 15:52COLB. Nelson(S. Girard, V. Nichushkin)4–1
  3. 17:35COLN. MacKinnonempty net(D. Toews, V. Nichushkin)5–1

score reads COL–MIN

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
5.78
COL chances
Goals their shots were worth
−0.8
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.040
COL puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
58.9%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

5.78Expected goals3.39
COL 63% of the chance quality
42Shots on goal29
5High-danger chances5
89All attempts (Corsi)62
Adjusted for score: COL 54% · MIN 46%
Faceoffs · MIN won40%off58%neu41%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
COL1 / 5 · 2.35 xG
MIN0 / 5 · 1.07 xG
Medium dangermid-range
COL3 / 21 · 2.45 xG
MIN1 / 14 · 1.39 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
COL1 / 63 · 0.98 xG
MIN0 / 43 · 0.94 xG

COL went 1-for-5 from high danger on 2.35 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
COL
5 G · 5.78 xG · -0.8
MIN
1 G · 3.39 xG · -2.4
01234567

COL finished -0.8 against expected, MIN -2.4.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
COL
WRIST1/34
SNAP2/10
TIP IN0/6
SLAP2/9
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/0
POKE0/0
BAT0/0
OTHER0/27
MIN
WRIST1/27
SNAP0/8
TIP IN0/5
SLAP0/2
BACKHAND0/4
DEFLECTED0/2
POKE0/1
BAT0/1
OTHER0/12
COL
MIN
Off the rush
4 G on 31
2.83 xG
0 G on 29
1.90 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 6
1.47 xG
1 G on 7
1.04 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: COL went 1-for-34, MIN 1-for-27. 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
M. Blackwood
COL · 28/29 · .966
+2.4
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/51.1+1.1
Medium1/141.4+0.4
Low0/430.9+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

J. Wallstedt
MIN · 37/41 · .902
+1.8
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/52.4+1.4
Medium3/212.5-0.6
Low1/631.0-0.0

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

112 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
COL
62 shots
5
Final
112 shots
MIN
50 shots
1
COL attackMIN attack
COL MIN Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — COL left, MIN 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. Makar
#8 · D · COL
1 G · 2 A · 7 SOG · 23:25 on ice · +2
B. Nelson
#11 · C · COL
1 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 17:57 on ice · +1
N. MacKinnon
#29 · C · COL
2 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 22:33 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sun, Dec 21
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 9:20 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 sees a coin flip: Avalanche 53% to win, 2.7 goals against 2.5. This is as close to pick'em as projections get.

Colorado owns the underlying play. At 57.0% xG and 57.0% Corsi, they control territory and generate chances. Minnesota's 52.0% xG and 48.0% Corsi means they're following, not leading.

But Colorado's PDO is 1.021 — they're running hot. Minnesota's 1.007 is closer to neutral. When Colorado regresses (and it will), their edge compresses.

Goaltending uncertainty tilts the ledger. Both F. Gustavsson and S. Wedgewood face back-to-backs. Backup usage or tired starters are both possible, and both matter more in close games.

Artturi Lehkonen (1.11 xG/60, 18G 22A, 6 hard-chance goals, 14.9% shooting) is Colorado's primary threat. Ross Colton (1.10 xG/60, 7G 15A, 1 hard-chance goal, 4.9% shooting) adds volume but not efficiency. For Minnesota, Matt Boldy (0.89 xG/60, 22G 18A, 5 hard-chance goals, 13.7% shooting) is a genuine shot-maker. Robby Fabbri (0.88 xG/60, 2G 3A, 1 hard-chance goal, 6.9% shooting) is likely out.

The defensive weak points matter. Nazem Kadri (Colorado) and Matt Kiersted (Minnesota) are the respective liabilities. In a game this tight, vulnerabilities become destiny.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

COL 53%
53%
COL
Model favorite
53%
47%
COL50MIN

COL by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score COL 2.7–2.5 MIN; 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 →MIN
57.0%52.0%
57.0%48.0%
3.032.55
2.302.40
2.632.04
1.561.93
1.0211.007

COL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.021 vs 1.007) 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
+14 GD · 1d rest
MIN
8-2-0
+18 GD · 1d rest
1.021
COL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.007
MIN 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 52.0%.
  • 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 52.0%.
  • The Avalanche drive Corsi at 57.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • F. Gustavsson is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • S. Wedgewood is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • 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
S. Wedgewood
back-to-back.909 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.

MIN
Expected in goal
F. Gustavsson
back-to-back.933 last start
Backup Filip Gustavsson · +1.4 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
MIN
Matt Boldy22G 18A
0.89 xG/60 · 5 HD · 13.7% sh
Robby Fabbri2G 3A
0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.9% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page