Backcheck
Recap · NJD at CGY

Devils run the Flames off the ice on the underlying numbers

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

By the ModelJul 12, 1:50 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
NJD
New Jersey Devils
2
Home
CGY
Calgary Flames
1
FINAL / OT
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.04Expected goals1.88
62% share for the better side
32Shot attempts (SOG)22
3High-danger chances1
54Corsi (all attempts)46
Score-adjusted: 54% / 46%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

The Devils' 2-1 overtime victory understated their dominance. They controlled 62% of expected goals at 5-on-5 (3.04–1.88), a margin that suggested a blowout rather than a one-goal win.

New Jersey simply generated better looks. They averaged 0.056 expected goals per shot; Calgary managed 0.041. That quality gap materialized in the rush, where the Devils converted 2 goals on 24 chances.

The Flames folded on the underlying metrics. They recorded just 38% of xG while ceding 41% of shot attempts. Only their goaltending prevented an even larger margin: D. Cooley posted a 0.938 save percentage, outplaying his xG model by 1.04 goals.

New Jersey underperformed slightly themselves—finishing with 2 goals on an xG of 3.04, leaving 1.04 in the tank—but J. Markstrom was nearly flawless, stopping 21 of 22 shots (0.955 SV%, +0.88). The net advantage was decisive: when Calgary attacked, they got low-danger looks; when New Jersey did, they found soft areas.

S. Nemec's overtime snap from the slot at 01:18 was the visual confirmation of what the xG model had been saying all night.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
NJD1 / 3 · 0.78 xG
CGY1 / 1 · 0.22 xG
Medium dangermid-range
NJD1 / 18 · 1.83 xG
CGY0 / 9 · 1.01 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
NJD0 / 33 · 0.43 xG
CGY0 / 36 · 0.64 xG

CGY went 0-for-9 from medium danger on 1.01 expected goals — 1.0 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
NJD
2 G · 3.04 xG · -1.0
CGY
1 G · 1.88 xG · -0.9
01234
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
J. MarkstromNJD
+0.9
D. CooleyCGY
+1.0

NJD finished -1.0 against expected, CGY -0.9 — D. Cooley (CGY) saved 1.0 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
NJD
WRIST0/24
BACKHAND0/5
SLAP0/1
TIP IN1/4
SNAP1/6
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/14
CGY
WRIST0/21
BACKHAND0/2
SLAP1/6
TIP IN0/2
SNAP0/0
DEFLECTED0/2
OTHER0/13
NJD
CGY
Off the rush
2 G on 24 · 1.92 xG
1 G on 24 · 1.66 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 5 · 0.70 xG
0 G on 0 · 0.00 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: NJD went 0-for-24, CGY 0-for-21. NJD scored 2 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
K. Bahl
#7 · D · CGY
0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 23:28 TOI
S. Nemec
#17 · D · NJD
1 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 23:14 TOI
D. Hamilton
#7 · D · NJD
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 21:34 TOI · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • D. Cooley (CGY) stopped 1.0 goals above expected.
  • NJD had the higher quality looks — 0.056 xG/shot vs 0.041.
  • NJD was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 24 rush chances.
  • NJD created 5 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · NJD at CGY · 9:00 PM ET

Devils at Flames: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 12, 1:37 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

50%
NJD
Model favorite
50%
50%
NJD50CGY

NJD by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score NJD 2.62.5 CGY; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

NJD← edge
edge →CGY
50.0%5v5 xG%47.0%
51.0%Corsi%49.0%
2.45xGF / 602.36
2.50xGA / 602.66
1.66Goals for / gm1.76
2.23Goals against / gm2.15
0.971PDO — luck, not skill0.985

NJD holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.971 vs 0.985) says CGY has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

New Jersey and Calgary project to 2.6 and 2.5 goals respectively, with the Devils at 50% win probability. This is about as close to an even matchup as you'll find.

The Devils own the underlying play. They're generating 50.0% of expected goals at 5v5 to Calgary's 47.0%, and they lead in possession metrics too, holding 51.0% Corsi to the Flames' 49.0%. Yet Jersey sits -14 on goal differential over their last 10 games—a sign that their underlying dominance hasn't translated to results. That's the coin flip: the better team on paper has underperformed.

Both squads are running cold. New Jersey's PDO sits at 0.971, Calgary's at 0.985. When you're shooting and save-percentage-suppressed like this, regression toward the mean becomes the dominant variable. Both should get healthier.

The Devil side leans on Timo Meier and Jack Hughes. Meier is clicking at 1.08 expected goals per 60 minutes with 13 goals and 15 assists; his 3 high-danger chances and 6.7% shooting rate suggest he's generating elite looks and finishing them. Hughes has 18 goals and 17 assists at 11.5% shooting but only 1 high-danger goal despite 0.88 xG/60—he's creating at a high rate but converting at an above-average rate from a mix of opportunities. Both are threats.

Calgary counters with Blake Coleman and Matt Coronato. Coleman posts 0.89 xG/60 with 16 goals, 12 assists, and 2 high-danger goals at a 11.4% shooting rate—comparable production to Meier, though slightly lower volume. Coronato has been quieter offensively with 10 goals, 16 assists, 0.80 xG/60, and 6.6% shooting, but represents the kind of depth Calgary has leaned on.

One wrinkle: J. Markstrom is on a back-to-back. Calgary could opt for a backup start, or Markstrom takes the net tired. Either way, New Jersey should hunt shooting volume early.

The underlying math says New Jersey should win this more often than not—their shot-generation edge is real. But PDO regression cuts both ways. If Calgary gets even slightly healthier while New Jersey stays cold, the tables flip. Fifty-fifty feels right.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NJD
Timo Meier13G 15A
1.08 xG/60 · 3 HD · 6.7% sh
Jack Hughes18G 17A
0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.5% sh
CGY
Blake Coleman16G 12A
0.89 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.4% sh
Matt Coronato10G 16A
0.80 xG/60 · 0 HD · 6.6% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters