Motion-blurred skater in a Colorado Avalanche sweater

Breakdown · COL at VGK

Avalanche edge the Golden Knights in a shootout

Final / OTSat, Dec 27

COLColorado Avalanche6 VGKVegas Golden Knights5

The verdict · earned

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

COL 6 · VGK 5

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 10:09 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

Vegas generated higher xG per shot—0.079 versus Colorado's 0.052—yet lost 6-5 in a shootout, an efficiency reversal that captured the game's core tension. Colorado's expected-goals advantage (5.24-3.65) was real but built on volume; Denver forced the issue through relentless five-on-five play, and the shootout made it stick.

Colorado and Vegas traded high-danger chances near even: Vegas eight, Colorado nine. The mismatch wasn't in chance creation but in goaltending efficiency. Scott Wedgewood gave up 1.35 more goals than expected against 25 shots. Vegas overperformed their xG by 1.35 goals; Colorado by 0.76. Both teams beat their models, yet the scoreboard still favored Denver.

Vegas's goaltender held at 0.872 SV%, a strong night blunted by volume. But execution mattered more. Vegas was lethal rushing—three goals from 19 chances—applying precision where it counted. Colorado answered with five rush goals on 39 attempts, pure volume that somehow won the accuracy battle. Close-range opportunities went begging: Vegas created four rebound looks and converted zero; Colorado eight and zero. No easy money either side.

Nathan MacKinnon ended it in the shootout from the high slot, snapping a 5-5 tie. Sam Malinski worked the other direction: three assists in 19 minutes from the blue line, a quiet orchestrator. Nicolas Hanifin matched pace with two assists in 26 minutes for Vegas—understated in defeat.

The numbers sided with Vegas. Sharper shot, fewer mistakes, tighter efficiency. But Colorado's dominance in raw chances and the shootout's win-or-lose logic conspired to make the scoreboard disagree with every meaningful metric but one.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · SO · Dec 27

COL

VGK

Avalanche edge the Golden Knights in a shootout

Chances 5.2 – 3.6Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Avalanche earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

COL

5.24

VGK

3.65

59% of the chances41%

The board read COL 6, VGK 5. The chances read COL 5.2, VGK 3.6.

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

Luck check

COL

+0.8

goals above expected

COL5.24 expected · 6 scored

Expected

Scored

VGK3.65 expected · 5 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 02:43VGKA. Holtz0–1
P2 00:34VGKI. Barbashev0–2
P2 05:19COLS. Girard1–2
P2 10:27COLM. Necas2–2
P2 11:36VGKB. Hutton2–3
P2 12:05VGKB. Howden2–4
P3 03:52COLM. Necas3–4

+6 more on the full breakdown

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

Where the shots came from

COL

75 shots

Final

117 shots

VGK

42 shots

COL VGK GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

shots · 7 in

shots · 6 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

COLVGK

1 / 9

2.11 xG

High danger

2 / 8

2.00 xG

2 / 22

2.23 xG

Medium

2 / 10

1.09 xG

2 / 69

0.89 xG

Low

1 / 28

0.56 xG

High-danger looks: COL 1 of 9, VGK 2 of 8.

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

In the net

C. Hart

+0.2

VGK · 34/39

D-

S. Wedgewood

−1.4

COL · 20/25

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Avalanche edge the Golden Knights 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 9–7

02:43VGKA. Holtz(N. Hanifin, T. Hertl)0–1

2ndshots 11–12

00:34VGKI. Barbashev(M. Marner)0–2
05:19COLS. Girard(S. Malinski, V. Nichushkin)1–2
10:27COLM. Necas(S. Malinski, S. Girard)2–2
11:36VGKB. Hutton(A. Holtz, N. Hanifin)2–3
12:05VGKB. Howden(R. Smith, J. Lauzon)2–4

3rdshots 16–6

03:52COLM. Necas(N. MacKinnon)3–4
08:21COLN. MacKinnon(S. Malinski, G. Landeskog)4–4
16:00VGKC. Sissons(K. Kolesar, K. Korczak)4–5
18:03COLA. Lehkonenpower play(N. MacKinnon, B. Nelson)5–5

OTshots 3–0no goals

00:00COLM. Necaspower play5–5
00:00VGKM. Marnerpower play5–5
00:00COLN. MacKinnonpower play5–5

score reads COL–VGK

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

5.24

COL chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.8

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

0.941

COL puck luck

Below 1.000 — the bounces went against them

68.5%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

5.24Expected goals3.65

COL 59% of the chance quality

39Shots on goal25

9High-danger chances8

100All attempts (Corsi)46

Adjusted for score: COL 72% · VGK 28%

Faceoffs · VGK won37%off64%neu38%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

COL1 / 9 · 2.11 xG

VGK2 / 8 · 2.00 xG

Medium dangermid-range

COL2 / 22 · 2.23 xG

VGK2 / 10 · 1.09 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

COL2 / 69 · 0.89 xG

VGK1 / 28 · 0.56 xG

COL went 1-for-9 from high danger on 2.11 expected goals — 1.1 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

COL

6 G · 5.24 xG · +0.8

VGK

5 G · 3.65 xG · +1.4

01234567

COL finished +0.8 against expected, VGK +1.4.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

COL

WRIST4/33

SNAP1/13

TIP IN0/7

SLAP0/9

BACKHAND0/5

DEFLECTED0/2

WRAP AROUND0/1

BAT0/1

OTHER0/29

VGK

WRIST1/21

SNAP0/8

TIP IN2/4

SLAP1/2

BACKHAND1/3

DEFLECTED0/0

WRAP AROUND0/0

BAT0/0

OTHER0/8

COL

VGK

Off the rush

5 G on 39

3.00 xG

3 G on 19

1.67 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 8

1.29 xG

0 G on 4

1.08 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: COL went 4-for-33, VGK 1-for-21. COL scored 5 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

S. Wedgewood

COL · 20/25 · .800

-1.4

saved above expected

D-

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/82.0+0.0

Medium2/101.1-0.9

Low1/280.6-0.4

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

C. Hart

VGK · 34/39 · .872

+0.2

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/92.1+1.1

Medium2/222.2+0.2

Low2/690.9-1.1

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

117 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

COL

75 shots

Final

117 shots

VGK

42 shots

COL VGK GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

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

1 G · 2 A · 9 SOG · 25:28 on ice · +2

S. Malinski

#70 · D · COL

0 G · 3 A · 3 SOG · 19:11 on ice · +3

N. Hanifin

#15 · D · VGK

0 G · 2 A · 3 SOG · 26:01 on ice · +2

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Dec 27

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 10:06 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 leans Colorado at 51%, but projects just 2.6 goals for the Avalanche against 2.5 for Vegas. This is a pick'em with numbers to back it.

Colorado controls territorial play. Their 57.0% Corsi rate proves the point: they win the even-strength possession game decisively. Vegas generates 54.0% expected goals, competitive but not commanding. Colorado's 57.0% xG%, though, reveals the true gap—they're creating more dangerous chances, not just more volume.

Vegas is running cold. A 0.983 PDO means shots and saves aren't cooperating; regression will lift them toward expected output. Colorado has the inverse problem: 1.021 PDO signals they're outscoring their underlying play. The model's 51% tilt toward Colorado despite their edge suggests the algorithm expects cooling.

Artturi Lehkonen anchors Colorado at 1.11 expected goals per 60 minutes with a 14.9% shooting rate, reflected in his 18 goals and 6 high-danger chances. Ross Colton follows at 1.10 xG/60, though his 4.9% shooting percentage leaves room for positive regression.

Vegas counters with Brandon Saad (0.91 xG/60, 3 goals) and Tomas Hertl (0.88 xG/60, 4.3% shooting). Both wear the signature of underperformance—offensive play not yet translating to scoring. Denver must defend with precision knowing Vegas's threats are closer to producing than the scoreboard shows.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

COL 51%

51%

COL

Model favorite

51%

49%

COL50VGK

COL by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score COL 2.6–2.5 VGK; 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 →VGK

57.0%54.0%

57.0%52.0%

3.032.52

2.302.11

2.632.12

1.562.10

1.0210.983

COL holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.021 vs 0.983) 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

+12 GD · 3d rest

VGK

6-2-2

+6 GD · 3d rest

1.021

COL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.983

VGK PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Avalanche drive Corsi at 57.0% — expect territorial tilt.

Regression watch

The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.
The Avalanche's PDO is 1.021 — running hot, expect some regression.

Things to watch

The Avalanche drive Corsi at 57.0% — expect territorial tilt.
The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

COL

Expected in goal

S. Wedgewood

3 days rest1.000 last start

Backup Scott Wedgewood · +23.1 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

VGK

Expected in goal

C. Hart

3 days rest.913 last start

Backup Akira Schmid · -1.0 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

VGK

Brandon Saad3G 6A

0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.1% sh

Tomas Hertl5G 17A

0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.3% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page