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

Blue Jackets pull away from the Senators

The verdict · earned

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

CBJ 4 · OTT 1
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 10:16 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 dominated the xG battle (3.31–2.71) and won 4-1, but the real mismatch was Ottawa's shot volume without the finishing: the Senators held 56% of attempts (28–22) yet trailed by three. They were active, not dangerous.

Ottawa's problem wasn't quantity—it was quality and execution. The Senators generated 5 high-danger chances to Columbus's 3, but finished just one goal. Worse: they underperformed their xG by 1.71 goals, leaving goalscoring opportunities on the table. J. Greaves (CBJ) saved 1.71 goals above expected; L. Meriläinen (OTT) yielded 0.69 below. The goaltending split was decisive.

Columbus converted efficiently. They had 0.070 xG per shot versus Ottawa's 0.045—a 55% edge in quality per chance. They scored two goals from low-danger spots, both plays any opposing goalie must stop. Their rush game was clinical: 2 goals on 21 chances, the kind of efficiency that sinks teams.

Kirill Marchenko's snap shot from the high slot (P3, 15:54) swung momentum early. D. Severson (1G, 1A in 18:41) drove the attack, while C. Coyle and C. Sillinger each picked up two assists—CBJ's depth made the difference.

Ottawa played a volume game and lost the quality game. That's a gap no shot count closes.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Dec 29
CBJ
4
OTT
1

Blue Jackets pull away from the Senators

Chances 3.3 – 2.7Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Blue Jackets earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
CBJ
3.31
OTT
2.71
55% of the chances45%

The board read CBJ 4, OTT 1. The chances read CBJ 3.3, OTT 2.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
CBJ
+0.7
goals above expected
CBJ3.31 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
OTT2.71 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Senators left 1.7 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 15:58CBJB. Jenner1–0
  2. P2 01:21CBJD. Severson2–0
  3. P2 08:16OTTJ. Sanderson2–1
  4. P3 01:57CBJD. Mateychuk3–1
  5. P3 15:54CBJK. Marchenko4–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
CBJ
36 shots
4
Final
77 shots
OTT
41 shots
1
CBJ attackOTT attack
CBJ OTT Goal
36
shots · 4 in
41
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
CBJOTT
1 / 5
1.67 xG
High danger
0 / 3
0.74 xG
1 / 11
1.22 xG
Medium
1 / 10
1.24 xG
2 / 31
0.42 xG
Low
0 / 47
0.73 xG

The Senators went 0 for 3 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A
J. Greaves
+1.7
CBJ · 27/28
D
L. Meriläinen
−0.7
OTT · 18/22
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Blue Jackets pull away from the Senators

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 12–7
  1. 15:58CBJB. Jenner(C. Sillinger, C. Coyle)1–0
2ndshots 3–10
  1. 01:21CBJD. Severson(D. Voronkov, C. Sillinger)2–0
  2. 08:16OTTJ. Sanderson(T. Stützle, B. Tkachuk)2–1
3rdshots 7–11
  1. 01:57CBJD. Mateychuk(D. Severson, C. Coyle)3–1
  2. 15:54CBJK. Marchenko(M. Marchment, A. Fantilli)4–1

score reads CBJ–OTT

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.31
CBJ chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.7
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.068
CBJ puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
43.9%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.31Expected goals2.71
CBJ 55% of the chance quality
22Shots on goal28
5High-danger chances3
47All attempts (Corsi)60
Adjusted for score: CBJ 39% · OTT 61%
Faceoffs · OTT won50%off43%neu50%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
CBJ1 / 5 · 1.67 xG
OTT0 / 3 · 0.74 xG
Medium dangermid-range
CBJ1 / 11 · 1.22 xG
OTT1 / 10 · 1.24 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
CBJ2 / 31 · 0.42 xG
OTT0 / 47 · 0.73 xG

CBJ went 2-for-31 from low danger on 0.42 expected goals — 1.6 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
CBJ
4 G · 3.31 xG · +0.7
OTT
1 G · 2.71 xG · -1.7
012345

CBJ finished +0.7 against expected, OTT -1.7.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
CBJ
WRIST0/20
SLAP1/5
SNAP2/6
TIP IN1/3
BACKHAND0/2
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/11
OTT
WRIST1/23
SLAP0/8
SNAP0/4
TIP IN0/2
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/19
CBJ
OTT
Off the rush
2 G on 21
1.82 xG
1 G on 26
2.01 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 1
0.16 xG
0 G on 0
0.00 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: CBJ went 0-for-20, OTT 1-for-23. CBJ 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
J. Greaves
CBJ · 27/28 · .964
+1.7
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/30.7+0.7
Medium1/101.2+0.2
Low0/470.7+0.7

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

L. Meriläinen
OTT · 18/22 · .818
-0.7
saved above expected
D
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/51.7+0.7
Medium1/111.2+0.2
Low2/310.4-1.6

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

77 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
CBJ
36 shots
4
Final
77 shots
OTT
41 shots
1
CBJ attackOTT attack
CBJ OTT Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — CBJ left, OTT 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
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 18:41 on ice · +2
C. Coyle
#3 · C · CBJ
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 15:08 on ice · +2
C. Sillinger
#4 · C · CBJ
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 14:49 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Dec 29
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 10:15 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

Ottawa owns this matchup on the numbers. The model projects a 2.4–2.7 goal game with the Senators at 55% win probability—a clean edge grounded in play quality, not luck.

Form backs the model. Ottawa is 5-4-1 over their last 10 games while Columbus has collapsed to a -9 goal differential over the same stretch. More importantly, the season-long underlying metrics align with this gap. Ottawa generates 56.0% of expected goals at even strength compared to Columbus's 52.0%, and controls broader play: 53.0% Corsi% versus 51.0%. The Senators don't just create more chances; they create better ones.

The one way Columbus stays in this game is through luck. Columbus runs a 1.003 PDO (the combined rate of shooting percentage and save percentage), slightly elevated, while Ottawa sits at 0.993—meaning the Blue Jackets have converted beyond their underlying play and the Senators are due for regression in their favor. That gap isn't massive, but in a tight game it reshuffles odds.

Both teams arrive at goaltending uncertainty: L. Meriläinen and J. Greaves are both on back-to-backs, so watch for either a backup start or a fatigued starter. Tired goalies punish possession teams faster than defensive ones.

When Ottawa executes, the game runs through Brady Tkachuk and Dylan Cozens. Tkachuk generates 1.19 expected goals per 60 minutes—elite volume—backed by 11 goals and 20 assists. He's finished 2 high-danger chances and shoots 7.5%; some correction looks likely. Cozens mirrors the threat: 1.00 xG/60, 13 goals, 15 assists, 1 high-danger goal at 9.5%. Both are creating at rates that demand defensive attention.

Columbus's response centers on Boone Jenner. He carries 0.98 xG/60 with 11 goals and 21 assists—the assist volume is legitimate, though 2 high-danger goals on that volume (9.6% shooting) hints he's been fortunate. Mathieu Olivier adds 0.89 xG/60, 12 goals, and 9 assists; his 13.3% shooting rate looks unsustainable and suggests regression incoming.

The defensive weak link: Conor Garland for Columbus, Nick Jensen for Ottawa. Neither team generates high-danger or rebound goals at rates that punish average defense, so this becomes a conversion game. That's where Ottawa's underlying advantage lives.

The model says yes, and the numbers back it.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

OTT 55%
55%
OTT
Model favorite
45%
55%
CBJ50OTT

OTT by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score CBJ 2.4–2.7 OTT; 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 →OTT
52.0%56.0%
51.0%53.0%
2.632.66
2.432.12
2.122.18
1.981.99
1.0030.993

OTT holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.003 vs 0.993) 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
-9 GD · 1d rest
OTT
5-4-1
+8 GD · 1d rest
1.003
CBJ PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.993
OTT PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Senators own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 52.0%.
Things to watch
  • The Senators own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 52.0%.
  • L. Meriläinen is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • J. Greaves is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Senators are the hotter team by points pace (5-4-1 in their last 10).
  • The Blue Jackets are underwater at -9 goal differential over their last 10.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
CBJ
Expected in goal
J. Greaves
back-to-back.923 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.

OTT
Expected in goal
L. Meriläinen
back-to-back.889 last start
Backup Linus Ullmark · -12.8 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
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
OTT
Brady Tkachuk11G 20A
1.19 xG/60 · 2 HD · 7.5% sh
Dylan Cozens13G 15A
1.00 xG/60 · 1 HD · 9.5% sh
Keep going

Where to next