Motion-blurred skater in a Columbus Blue Jackets sweater
Breakdown · CBJ at LAK

Blue Jackets hold off the Kings

The verdict · earned

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

CBJ 3 · LAK 1
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 9:43 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

Columbus won 3-1, but expected goals said Los Angeles should have come closer—the Kings generated 3.34 xG to the Jackets' 2.83, yet the scoreboard ran against them by two. J. Greaves made that difference, posting 23 saves with a 0.958 save percentage. He stopped 1.83 goals above expected, converting marginal situations into saves that mattered.

A. Forsberg (LAK) made 27 saves at a 0.900 clip but couldn't overcome the same margin of error. The Kings underperformed their xG by 1.8—a brutal deficit when you're already down in the score.

Columbus's efficiency was the second factor. The Jackets scored twice from low-danger areas, the sort of chances Forsberg needs to have. They crashed the net hard, creating six rebound opportunities and translating that aggression into three power-play goals on 18 shots. The power play produced 1.34 xG; they scored three. That's conversion at its finest.

Kirill Marchenko's snap shot from the circles at 14:16 of the third period gave Columbus breathing room, a shot that epitomized their clinical approach. By then, the game was already set.

D. Severson (2A, 19:06) ran the offense from the blue line. M. Marchment supplied two goals in 16:01, the sort of forward production that ends close games. D. Mateychuk played 28:35, a quiet 1A that reflected the back-line confidence required when one goaltender plays this well.

Greaves stole this one.

Three Stars

  • #78 D. Severson (CBJ) — 2A in 19:06
  • #17 M. Marchment (CBJ) — 2G in 16:01
  • #5 D. Mateychuk (CBJ) — 1A in 28:35
The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Dec 22
CBJ
3
LAK
1

Blue Jackets hold off the Kings

Chances 3.3 – 2.8Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Blue Jackets earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
CBJ
3.34
LAK
2.83
54% of the chances46%

The board read CBJ 3, LAK 1. The chances read CBJ 3.3, LAK 2.8.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
CBJ
−0.3
goals above expected
CBJ3.34 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
LAK2.83 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Kings left 1.8 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 04:07CBJM. MarchmentPP1–0
  2. P1 19:36CBJM. MarchmentPP2–0
  3. P2 18:41LAKA. Kuzmenko2–1
  4. P3 14:16CBJK. MarchenkoPP3–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
CBJ
44 shots
3
Final
83 shots
LAK
39 shots
1
CBJ attackLAK attack
CBJ LAK Goal
44
shots · 3 in
39
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
CBJLAK
0 / 3
0.68 xG
High danger
0 / 4
0.86 xG
1 / 18
2.12 xG
Medium
0 / 11
1.27 xG
2 / 36
0.55 xG
Low
1 / 42
0.69 xG

The Kings went 0 for 4 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
J. Greaves
+1.8
CBJ · 23/24
B
A. Forsberg
+0.3
LAK · 27/30
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Blue Jackets hold off the Kings

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 10–11
  1. 04:07CBJM. Marchmentpower play(D. Severson, D. Voronkov)1–0
  2. 19:36CBJM. Marchmentpower play(D. Severson, B. Jenner)2–0
2ndshots 11–6
  1. 18:41LAKA. Kuzmenko(M. Anderson, D. Doughty)2–1
3rdshots 9–7
  1. 14:16CBJK. Marchenkopower play(D. Mateychuk, A. Fantilli)3–1

score reads CBJ–LAK

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.34
CBJ chances
Goals their shots were worth
−0.3
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.035
CBJ puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
50.0%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.34Expected goals2.83
CBJ 54% of the chance quality
30Shots on goal24
3High-danger chances4
57All attempts (Corsi)57
Adjusted for score: CBJ 44% · LAK 56%
Faceoffs · LAK won43%off44%neu50%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
CBJ0 / 3 · 0.68 xG
LAK0 / 4 · 0.86 xG
Medium dangermid-range
CBJ1 / 18 · 2.12 xG
LAK0 / 11 · 1.27 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
CBJ2 / 36 · 0.55 xG
LAK1 / 42 · 0.69 xG

CBJ went 2-for-36 from low danger on 0.55 expected goals — 1.4 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
CBJ
3 G · 3.34 xG · -0.3
LAK
1 G · 2.83 xG · -1.8
01234

CBJ finished -0.3 against expected, LAK -1.8.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
CBJ
WRIST1/20
SNAP1/7
SLAP0/3
BACKHAND0/6
TIP IN0/4
DEFLECTED1/2
WRAP AROUND0/1
BAT0/1
OTHER0/13
LAK
WRIST1/20
SNAP0/5
SLAP0/9
BACKHAND0/2
TIP IN0/3
DEFLECTED0/0
WRAP AROUND0/0
BAT0/0
OTHER0/18
CBJ
LAK
Off the rush
1 G on 20
1.77 xG
0 G on 24
2.15 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 6
0.81 xG
0 G on 2
0.29 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: CBJ went 1-for-20, LAK 1-for-20.

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. Greaves
CBJ · 23/24 · .958
+1.8
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/40.9+0.9
Medium0/111.3+1.3
Low1/420.7-0.3

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

A. Forsberg
LAK · 27/30 · .900
+0.3
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/30.7+0.7
Medium1/182.1+1.1
Low2/360.6-1.4

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

83 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
CBJ
44 shots
3
Final
83 shots
LAK
39 shots
1
CBJ attackLAK attack
CBJ LAK Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — CBJ left, LAK 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
D. Severson
#78 · D · CBJ
0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 19:06 on ice
M. Marchment
#17 · L · CBJ
2 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 16:01 on ice
D. Mateychuk
#5 · D · CBJ
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 28:35 on ice
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Dec 22
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 9:32 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 Kings look like the safer pick, but only barely. The model projects a 2.4–2.5 goal game with Los Angeles holding 52% win probability—essentially a toss-up with the slimmest edge.

On the season, neither team has separated itself at 5v5. Both sit at 52.0% expected goals, while the Kings lead marginally in Corsi at 52.0% to Columbus's 51.0%. PDO readings of 1.003 for the Blue Jackets and 1.002 for the Kings suggest neither has been riding unsustainable luck; both are playing to their underlying numbers.

The Blue Jackets arrive wounded, having shed a goal differential of -10 over their last ten games. E. Merzlikins faces the back-to-back grind, which could mean a backup start or a fatigued starter. The Kings, by contrast, enjoy a rest advantage: three days since their last game versus Columbus's one.

For Columbus, Boone Jenner carries the offensive load with 11 goals and 21 assists, posting 0.98 expected goals per 60 minutes and two high-danger goals on a 9.6% shooting rate. Mathieu Olivier forms the second prong at 0.89 xG/60, with 12 goals, 9 assists, 1 high-danger goal, and an elevated 13.3% shot conversion. The Jackets generate offense from these weapons while maintaining a 0% high-danger goal rate and 0% rebound goal rate team-wide—efficiency ceilings that suggest their scoring could reverse.

Los Angeles counters with Alex Laferriere, who owns 0.87 xG/60, 16 goals, 18 assists, 2 high-danger goals, and a 9.9% conversion rate. Jared Wright contributes 0.83 xG/60 with 0 goals and 4 assists. The Kings face the same conversion constraints: 0% on high-danger and rebound opportunities.

The edge lies elsewhere. Conor Garland represents Columbus's defensive weak link, a liability Los Angeles can exploit. Adrian Kempe is where the Kings' defense springs leaks. But three extra days of recovery matters more than one marginal positional advantage.

This game hinges on whether Columbus overcomes its recent doldrums and Merzlikins's fatigue, or whether the Kings simply roll through the better-rested team. The data can't decide, which is why it won't commit to either.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

LAK 52%
52%
LAK
Model favorite
48%
52%
CBJ50LAK

LAK by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score CBJ 2.4–2.5 LAK; 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 →LAK
52.0%52.0%
51.0%52.0%
2.632.42
2.432.20
2.121.85
1.981.71
1.0031.002

LAK holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.003 vs 1.002) says CBJ has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
CBJ
3-6-1
-10 GD · 1d rest
LAK
4-4-2
+1 GD · 3d rest
1.003
CBJ PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.002
LAK PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Things to watch
  • E. Merzlikins is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Blue Jackets are underwater at -10 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Kings have 2 more days of rest.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
CBJ
Expected in goal
E. Merzlikins
back-to-back.857 last start
Backup Jet Greaves · +16.5 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.

LAK
Expected in goal
A. Forsberg
3 days rest.969 last start
Backup Darcy Kuemper · -5.8 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
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
LAK
Alex Laferriere16G 18A
0.87 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.9% sh
Jared Wright0G 4A
0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 0.0% sh
Keep going

Where to next