Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Colorado Avalanche sweater
← Sat, Jan 31 · the slate
Breakdown · COL at DET

Avalanche shut out the Red Wings, 5-0

FinalSat, Jan 31
COLColorado Avalanche5DETDetroit Red Wings0
The verdict · earned

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

COL 5 · DET 0
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 3:21 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

Colorado's 5-0 shutout masks a close underlying game: xG split 3.30–3.77, nearly even. The Avalanche won through goaltending variance and execution, not dominance.

M. Blackwood saved 3.3 goals above expected, stealing the night. Detroit held 57% of shot attempts (28–21), generating chances but failing to finish—the Red Wings underperformed their xG by 3.30 goals. In the high-danger zone, Colorado converted 50% (2 of 4) while Detroit managed 0 of 3. The Avalanche also scored twice from low-danger positions, a margin no goalie can concede.

Colorado's rush attack was lethal—three goals on 32 chances. N. MacKinnon (2G, 1A) and A. Lehkonen (2A) orchestrated a clinical performance.

J. Gibson (13/17, 0.765 SV%) and C. Talbot (3/4, 0.750 SV%) both underperformed their expected outcomes. Blackwood's excellence was the difference.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Jan 31
COL
5
DET
0

Avalanche shut out the Red Wings, 5-0

Chances 3.8 – 3.3Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Avalanche earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
COL
3.77
DET
3.30
53% of the chances47%

The board read COL 5, DET 0. The chances read COL 3.8, DET 3.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
COL
+1.2
goals above expected
COL3.77 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
DET3.30 expected · 0 scored
Expected
Scored

The Red Wings left 3.3 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 06:44COLB. Burns1–0
  2. P1 10:03COLN. MacKinnon2–0
  3. P2 01:24COLR. Colton3–0
  4. P2 13:33COLN. MacKinnon4–0
  5. P3 07:35COLP. Kelly5–0
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
COL
46 shots
5
Final
89 shots
DET
43 shots
0
COL attackDET attack
COL DET Goal
46
shots · 5 in
43
shots · 0 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
COLDET
2 / 4
1.11 xG
High danger
0 / 3
0.75 xG
1 / 17
1.99 xG
Medium
0 / 16
1.94 xG
2 / 40
0.67 xG
Low
0 / 38
0.61 xG

The Red Wings went 0 for 3 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
M. Blackwood
+3.3
COL · 28/28
A+
C. Talbot
+2.8
DET · 3/4
+1 more on the full breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Avalanche shut out the Red Wings, 5-0

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 8–11
  1. 06:44COLB. Burns(N. MacKinnon, V. Nichushkin)1–0
  2. 10:03COLN. MacKinnon(A. Lehkonen)2–0
2ndshots 9–9
  1. 01:24COLR. Colton(B. Nelson, J. Manson)3–0
  2. 13:33COLN. MacKinnon(A. Lehkonen)4–0
3rdshots 4–8
  1. 07:35COLP. Kelly(J. Kiviranta, J. Drury)5–0

score reads COL–DET

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.77
COL chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.2
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.082
COL puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
51.7%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.77Expected goals3.30
COL 53% of the chance quality
21Shots on goal28
4High-danger chances3
61All attempts (Corsi)57
Adjusted for score: COL 45% · DET 55%
Faceoffs · DET won64%off42%neu43%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
COL2 / 4 · 1.11 xG
DET0 / 3 · 0.75 xG
Medium dangermid-range
COL1 / 17 · 1.99 xG
DET0 / 16 · 1.94 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
COL2 / 40 · 0.67 xG
DET0 / 38 · 0.61 xG

DET went 0-for-16 from medium danger on 1.94 expected goals — 1.9 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
COL
5 G · 3.77 xG · +1.2
DET
0 G · 3.30 xG · -3.3
0123456

COL finished +1.2 against expected, DET -3.3.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
COL
SNAP2/13
WRIST1/17
SLAP1/11
TIP IN0/3
BACKHAND1/1
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/15
DET
SNAP0/17
WRIST0/12
SLAP0/4
TIP IN0/7
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/14
COL
DET
Off the rush
3 G on 32
2.50 xG
0 G on 27
2.45 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 5
0.89 xG
0 G on 1
0.22 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: COL went 2-for-13, DET 0-for-17. COL scored 3 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
M. Blackwood
COL · 28/28 · 1.000
+3.3
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/30.8+0.8
Medium0/161.9+1.9
Low0/380.6+0.6

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

J. Gibson
DET · 13/17 · .765
-0.2
saved above expected
C
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/41.1-0.9
Medium1/172.0+1.0
Low2/400.7-1.3

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

C. Talbot
DET · 3/4 · .750
+2.8
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/41.1-0.9
Medium1/172.0+1.0
Low2/400.7-1.3

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

89 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
COL
46 shots
5
Final
89 shots
DET
43 shots
0
COL attackDET attack
COL DET Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — COL left, DET 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
2 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 21:36 on ice · +3
A. Lehkonen
#62 · L · COL
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 18:41 on ice · +3
V. Nichushkin
#13 · R · COL
0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 22:57 on ice · +3
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Jan 31
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 3:20 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

The model projects a 2.8-2.5 Avalanche win with Colorado at 55% win probability. The case is straightforward: Colorado owns the underlying play.

The Avalanche control 57.0% of 5v5 expected goals against Detroit's 49.0%—a gap that signals sustained territorial dominance. Their Corsi sits at 57.0% as well, meaning the edge comes from shot volume, not variance. Colorado will dictate tempo.

But Colorado's 1.021 PDO is a regression risk. Teams at that level typically see goaltending and shooting percentages normalize downward. Detroit, at 0.985 PDO, has underperformed relative to their underlying play. Regression would tighten the spread.

Goaltending enters a back-to-back scenario. J. Gibson takes the net on a second night for Colorado; S. Wedgewood does the same for Detroit. Both could see backup relief if coaches prioritize rest, or both start fatigued. Pre-game confirmations will clarify.

Artturi Lehkonen drives Colorado's forward group at 1.11 xG/60 with 18 goals and 22 assists; his 6 high-danger goals indicate consistent volume near the net. Ross Colton posts 7 goals and 15 assists at 1.10 xG/60, but his 4.9% shooting efficiency is suppressing output. For Detroit, Alex DeBrincat's 0.88 xG/60 looks modest until you see 17 goals and 28 assists; he finishes ruthlessly. Marco Kasper contributes 7 goals and 8 assists at 0.81 xG/60 as depth scoring.

Defensively, Nazem Kadri is Colorado's liability, while Axel Sandin-Pellikka anchors Detroit's weak point.

The model's lean holds. Colorado's control metrics justify the edge—though PDO regression is a live risk that could tighten the final score. Not enough to fade the Avalanche, but enough to respect Detroit's variance upside.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

COL 55%
55%
COL
Model favorite
55%
45%
COL50DET

COL by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score COL 2.8–2.5 DET; 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 →DET
57.0%49.0%
57.0%49.0%
3.032.38
2.302.50
2.631.73
1.562.07
1.0210.985

COL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.021 vs 0.985) says COL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
COL
4-4-2
-1 GD · 1d rest
DET
6-2-2
+6 GD · 1d rest
1.021
COL PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.985
DET PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Avalanche own the underlying play — 57.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
  • The Avalanche drive Corsi at 57.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Avalanche's PDO is 1.021 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Avalanche own the underlying play — 57.0% 5v5 xG vs 49.0%.
  • The Avalanche drive Corsi at 57.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • J. Gibson is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • S. Wedgewood is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Avalanche's PDO is 1.021 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
COL
Expected in goal
S. Wedgewood
back-to-back.750 last start
Backup Scott Wedgewood · +23.1 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.

DET
Expected in goal
J. Gibson
back-to-back.870 last start
Backup John Gibson · +11.7 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.

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
DET
Alex DeBrincat17G 28A
0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.0% sh
Marco Kasper7G 8A
0.81 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.1% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page