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

Blue Jackets shut out the Stars, 1-0

The verdict · stolen

The Blue Jackets stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.53–1.48 and won anyway.

DAL 0 · CBJ 1
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 2:06 AMxG: 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 stole this one. The Blue Jackets won 1-0 while surrendering a 70-30 expected-goals deficit—a margin so lopsided it borders on heist territory.

The culprit was goaltending and finishing. C. DeSmith's work in Dallas stopped 21 of 22, but the Stars' execution disintegrated when it mattered. They generated the higher-quality looks (0.058 xG per shot versus Columbus's 0.032) yet managed just 0 goals on 5 high-danger chances. That conversion rate won't persist.

J. Greaves was the antidote. The Blue Jackets goalie turned in a perfect night—28 saves, 1.000 SV%—stopping 3.53 goals above expected on shots where Dallas should have scored. The Stars threw everything at him, including 6 rebound chances, but Greaves would not budge.

Columbus manufactured almost nothing. It held 44% of shot attempts (22–28) but the chances weren't dangerous ones. What it did produce mattered: Zach Werenski's snap shot from the wing at 08:48 of the first period broke through and held up as the game-winner. D. Severson and I. Lundestrom assisted on a five-on-five goal sequence that proved just enough.

The Stars' inability to cash in their quality looks—particularly their dominance in high-danger situations—defined the outcome. They were the better team by nearly every process metric and still left with nothing.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Jan 22
DAL
0
CBJ
1

Blue Jackets shut out the Stars, 1-0

Chances 3.5 – 1.5Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Stars deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
DAL
3.53
CBJ
1.48
71% of the chances30%

The board read DAL 0, CBJ 1. The chances read DAL 3.5, CBJ 1.5.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
CBJ
−0.5
goals above expected
CBJ1.48 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored
DAL3.53 expected · 0 scored
Expected
Scored

The Stars left 3.5 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 08:48CBJZ. Werenski0–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
DAL
43 shots
0
Final
79 shots
CBJ
36 shots
1
DAL attackCBJ attack
DAL CBJ Goal
43
shots · 0 in
36
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
DALCBJ
0 / 5
1.15 xG
High danger
0 / 0
0.00 xG
0 / 17
1.91 xG
Medium
0 / 7
0.79 xG
0 / 39
0.47 xG
Low
1 / 39
0.69 xG

The Stars went 0 for 5 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
J. Greaves
+3.5
CBJ · 28/28
B
C. DeSmith
+0.5
DAL · 21/22
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Blue Jackets shut out the Stars, 1-0

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 6–9
  1. 08:48CBJZ. Werenski(D. Severson, I. Lundeström)0–1
2ndshots 12–7no goals
    3rdshots 10–6no goals

      score reads DAL–CBJ

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

      The numbers

      XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
      1.48
      CBJ chances
      Goals their shots were worth
      −0.5
      Finishing
      Goals below what those chances were worth
      1.022
      CBJ puck luck
      Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
      43.0%
      Shot attempts
      Under half — they were outshot
      Split by club

      Who controlled the game

      3.53Expected goals1.48
      DAL 71% of the chance quality
      28Shots on goal22
      5High-danger chances0
      61All attempts (Corsi)46
      Adjusted for score: DAL 61% · CBJ 39%
      Faceoffs · CBJ won45%off55%neu55%def
      Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
      How the game was won

      The danger ladder

      shotsgoalsexpected
      High dangerslot & crease
      DAL0 / 5 · 1.15 xG
      CBJ0 / 0 · 0.00 xG
      Medium dangermid-range
      DAL0 / 17 · 1.91 xG
      CBJ0 / 7 · 0.79 xG
      Low dangerperimeter & point
      DAL0 / 39 · 0.47 xG
      CBJ1 / 39 · 0.69 xG

      DAL went 0-for-17 from medium danger on 1.91 expected goals — 1.9 left on the table.

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

      Finishing vs expected

      expectedactual
      DAL
      0 G · 3.53 xG · -3.5
      CBJ
      1 G · 1.48 xG · -0.5
      01234

      DAL finished -3.5 against expected, CBJ -0.5.

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

      Shot diet

      goalsshots
      DAL
      WRIST0/24
      SNAP0/8
      SLAP0/4
      BACKHAND0/4
      TIP IN0/2
      DEFLECTED0/1
      OTHER0/18
      CBJ
      WRIST0/17
      SNAP1/10
      SLAP0/4
      BACKHAND0/4
      TIP IN0/1
      DEFLECTED0/0
      OTHER0/10
      DAL
      CBJ
      Off the rush
      0 G on 25
      2.31 xG
      1 G on 19
      1.15 xG
      Off rebounds
      0 G on 6
      0.87 xG
      0 G on 0
      0.00 xG

      Wrist shots carried the volume: DAL went 0-for-24, CBJ 0-for-17.

      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
      C. DeSmith
      DAL · 21/22 · .955
      +0.5
      saved above expected
      B
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      Medium0/70.8+0.8
      Low1/390.7-0.3

      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

      J. Greaves
      CBJ · 28/28 · 1.000
      +3.5
      saved above expected
      A+
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger0/51.1+1.1
      Medium0/171.9+1.9
      Low0/390.5+0.5

      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

      79 shots · press play to watch the game back

      Where the shots came from

      NHL play-by-play coordinates
      DAL
      43 shots
      0
      Final
      79 shots
      CBJ
      36 shots
      1
      DAL attackCBJ attack
      DAL CBJ Goal

      Each club shoots toward its own end — DAL left, CBJ 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
      Z. Werenski
      #8 · D · CBJ
      1 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 27:45 on ice · +1
      D. Severson
      #78 · D · CBJ
      0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 27:21 on ice · +1
      I. Lundestrom
      #21 · C · CBJ
      0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 07:27 on ice · +1
      Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
      What the model said beforehand

      Before the game

      Written Thu, Jan 22
      Open the pre-game read
      Written from the numbers

      The read

      Edited for clarity
      ◆ By the ModelJul 12, 2:04 AMEdited 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

      This game has no clear edge. The model projects 2.4-2.6 goals and gives Columbus a 53% win probability—essentially a pick'em.

      Dallas has the slightly hotter hand. The Stars' PDO of 1.024 suggests they're running above their sustainable performance level; regression typically follows. Columbus counters with a 1.003 PDO, closer to normal luck, and owns the territorial advantage: a 51.0% Corsi% versus Dallas's 47.0%, meaning the Blue Jackets will spend more time in the offensive half.

      Both teams trade quality chances at nearly equal rates. Columbus edges Dallas 52.0% to 51.0% in expected goals percentage, a margin so thin it barely registers. Neither team excels at high-danger chances—both sit at 0% on HD goal rate and rebound goal rate, a red flag suggesting neither can consistently generate the shots that matter most.

      The goaltending situation clouds further. Both J. Greaves and J. Oettinger are on the back-to-back, creating uncertainty about whether either will start or, if they do, how sharp they'll be. Fatigue often affects rhythm in net more than raw competence.

      Where Dallas tries to win: Jason Robertson carries a 0.96 xG/60 and has posted 25 goals and 21 assists with a 12.4% shooting clip and 2 high-danger goals—elite threat level. Michael Bunting (0.83 xG/60, 8 goals, 7.6% shooting) provides secondary scoring punch. Columbus will need to neutralize Robertson; he's the most dangerous weapon on the ice.

      Where Columbus goes for the victory: Boone Jenner (0.98 xG/60, 11 goals, 21 assists, 2 high-danger goals, 9.6% shooting) creates at a similar rate to Robertson with a lower conversion rate—still dangerous. Mathieu Olivier (0.89 xG/60, 12 goals, 13.3% shooting) represents an upside shot: fewer assists than Jenner but a higher shooting percentage that could explode.

      Dallas's defense will be tested at Tyler Myers. Columbus's at Conor Garland. This truly is a pick'em. The slight territorial edge tilts toward Columbus, but Dallas's hot streak and elite forward talent keep it even. Whoever wins will have escaped with it, not dominated.

      What the model said beforehand

      The model's lean

      CBJ 53%
      53%
      CBJ
      Model favorite
      47%
      53%
      DAL50CBJ

      CBJ by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score DAL 2.4–2.6 CBJ; 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
      DAL← edge
      edge →CBJ
      51.0%52.0%
      47.0%51.0%
      2.362.63
      2.292.43
      2.072.12
      1.681.98
      1.0241.003

      CBJ holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.024 vs 1.003) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

      Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
      Form · Last 10
      DAL
      3-5-2
      -3 GD · 1d rest
      CBJ
      5-4-1
      -2 GD · 1d rest
      1.024
      DAL PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      1.003
      CBJ PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      What decides it

      Keys to the game

      Where the edges live
      • The Blue Jackets drive Corsi at 51.0% — expect territorial tilt.
      Regression watch
      • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
      Things to watch
      • The Blue Jackets drive Corsi at 51.0% — expect territorial tilt.
      • J. Greaves is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
      • J. Oettinger is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
      • The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
      Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

      Lineups

      NHL box score
      DAL
      Expected in goal
      J. Oettinger
      back-to-back.889 last start
      Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 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.

      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.

      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
      DAL
      Jason Robertson25G 21A
      0.96 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.4% sh
      Michael Bunting8G 14A
      0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 7.6% sh
      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
      Keep going

      Where to next