Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Colorado Avalanche sweater
← Wed, Feb 4 · the slate
Breakdown · SJS at COL

Avalanche run the Sharks off the ice on the underlying numbers

FinalWed, Feb 4
SJSSan Jose Sharks2COLColorado Avalanche4
The verdict · earned

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

SJS 2 · COL 4
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 3:59 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 4-2 victory masks their dominance: they controlled 69% of 5v5 expected goals (5.69–2.58), a split that suggested a larger margin. The Avalanche underperformed their own xG by 1.69 goals, leaving points on the table despite tactical supremacy.

Y. Askarov's overperformance was decisive. He stopped 2.69 goals above expected, the sole reason San Jose remained competitive. Without that save rate, the scoreline would have reflected the underlying advantage.

Colorado's control extended beyond xG. They won shot attempts 42–25 (63% of plays), high-danger chances 9–4, and rebound opportunities 8–3, with Colorado converting 1 and San Jose 0. Off the rush, the Avalanche converted 2 goals on 30 chances, efficiency that the final score doesn't fully capture.

N. MacKinnon ran the attack with 2 assists in 23:01, while V. Nichushkin added 3 assists in 20:44. A. Lehkonen provided the finish: 2 goals in 17:35. San Jose's scarcity—just 3 rebound chances created—reflected Colorado's defensive discipline.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Feb 4
SJS
2
COL
4

Avalanche run the Sharks off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 2.6 – 5.7Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Avalanche earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
SJS
2.58
COL
5.69
31% of the chances69%

The board read SJS 2, COL 4. The chances read SJS 2.6, COL 5.7.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
COL
−1.7
goals above expected
COL5.69 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
SJS2.58 expected · 2 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
  1. P2 01:05COLA. Lehkonen0–1
  2. P2 15:47COLA. Lehkonen0–2
  3. P3 00:43SJST. Liljegren1–2
  4. P3 03:34SJSP. Kurashev2–2
  5. P3 12:44COLJ. Manson2–3
  6. P3 18:43COLB. NelsonEN2–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
SJS
36 shots
2
Final
93 shots
COL
57 shots
4
SJS attackCOL attack
SJS COL Goal
36
shots · 2 in
57
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
SJSCOL
0 / 4
0.86 xG
High danger
1 / 9
2.60 xG
1 / 12
1.23 xG
Medium
3 / 20
2.31 xG
1 / 27
0.48 xG
Low
0 / 49
0.79 xG

The Sharks went 0 for 4 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
Y. Askarov
+2.7
SJS · 38/41
B
M. Blackwood
+0.6
COL · 23/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Avalanche run the Sharks off the ice on the underlying numbers

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 5–14no goals
    2ndshots 8–17
    1. 01:05COLA. Lehkonen(V. Nichushkin, C. Makar)0–1
    2. 15:47COLA. Lehkonen(N. MacKinnon, V. Nichushkin)0–2
    3rdshots 12–11
    1. 00:43SJST. Liljegren(A. Wennberg, J. Klingberg)1–2
    2. 03:34SJSP. Kurashev2–2
    3. 12:44COLJ. Manson(V. Nichushkin, N. MacKinnon)2–3
    4. 18:43COLB. Nelsonempty net2–4

    score reads SJS–COL

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

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    5.69
    COL chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    −1.7
    Finishing
    Goals below what those chances were worth
    1.005
    COL puck luck
    About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
    64.5%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    2.58Expected goals5.69
    COL 69% of the chance quality
    25Shots on goal42
    4High-danger chances9
    43All attempts (Corsi)78
    Adjusted for score: SJS 38% · COL 62%
    Faceoffs · COL won82%off56%neu48%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    SJS0 / 4 · 0.86 xG
    COL1 / 9 · 2.60 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    SJS1 / 12 · 1.23 xG
    COL3 / 20 · 2.31 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    SJS1 / 27 · 0.48 xG
    COL0 / 49 · 0.79 xG

    COL went 1-for-9 from high danger on 2.60 expected goals — 1.6 left on the table.

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

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    SJS
    2 G · 2.58 xG · -0.6
    COL
    4 G · 5.69 xG · -1.7
    0123456

    SJS finished -0.6 against expected, COL -1.7.

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

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    SJS
    WRIST1/15
    SNAP0/5
    SLAP1/8
    TIP IN0/8
    BACKHAND0/0
    DEFLECTED0/0
    OTHER0/7
    COL
    WRIST0/30
    SNAP1/12
    SLAP1/6
    TIP IN0/4
    BACKHAND1/3
    DEFLECTED1/2
    OTHER0/21
    SJS
    COL
    Off the rush
    1 G on 23
    1.68 xG
    2 G on 30
    2.21 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 3
    0.45 xG
    1 G on 8
    1.37 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: SJS went 1-for-15, COL 0-for-30. COL 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
    Y. Askarov
    SJS · 38/41 · .927
    +2.7
    saved above expected
    A+
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/92.6+1.6
    Medium3/202.3-0.7
    Low0/490.8+0.8

    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

    M. Blackwood
    COL · 23/25 · .920
    +0.6
    saved above expected
    B
    the night
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/40.9+0.9
    Medium1/121.2+0.2
    Low1/270.5-0.5

    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

    93 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    SJS
    36 shots
    2
    Final
    93 shots
    COL
    57 shots
    4
    SJS attackCOL attack
    SJS COL Goal

    Each club shoots toward its own end — SJS left, COL 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
    V. Nichushkin
    #13 · R · COL
    0 G · 3 A · 2 SOG · 20:44 on ice · +4
    N. MacKinnon
    #29 · C · COL
    0 G · 2 A · 4 SOG · 23:01 on ice · +4
    A. Lehkonen
    #62 · L · COL
    2 G · 0 A · 5 SOG · 17:35 on ice · +2
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    What the model said beforehand

    Before the game

    Written Wed, Feb 4
    Open the pre-game read
    Written from the numbers

    The read

    Edited for clarity
    ◆ By the ModelJul 12, 3:58 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

    Colorado enters with the model's backing: a 2.3-2.9 projected final and 61% win probability for the Avalanche.

    The advantage is clean. Colorado commands 57.0% of expected goals at 5v5—a significant edge in high-quality scoring chances. That same 57.0% Corsi share signals territorial control; San Jose's 48.0% xG and 47.0% Corsi reveal a club being outshot and out-chanced.

    Neither team is playing well lately, though. The Avalanche have hit -8 in goal differential over 10 games; the Sharks sit at -6. That slide compresses the gap between the model's projection and real-world results.

    The Avalanche's 1.021 PDO is the warning sign. Their save rates and shooting percentages both sit above sustainable levels—regression is coming. San Jose's 0.998 PDO holds closer to normal, offering no similar edge.

    Goaltending carries risk. Both M. Blackwood and Y. Askarov are on back-to-backs, raising the chance of a backup or a fatigued starter.

    Artturi Lehkonen and Ross Colton anchor Colorado's attack. Lehkonen produces 1.11 xG/60 with 18 goals and 22 assists, plus 6 high-danger goals—a volume suggesting tight marking is necessary. Colton adds 1.10 xG/60 across 7 goals and 15 assists.

    San Jose's counter relies on Pavol Regenda and Igor Chernyshov. Regenda generates 1.10 xG/60 with 5 goals, but his 16.1% shooting rate is unsustainable and destined to fall. Chernyshov sits at 0.91 xG/60 yet owns 6 goals on a 15.0% clip—another inflated finish that will regress. Chernyshov's defensive weaknesses become more exposed as his unsustainable shooting rate normalizes.

    Nazem Kadri emerges as Colorado's defensive liability if San Jose can generate chances.

    What the model said beforehand

    The model's lean

    COL 61%
    61%
    COL
    Model favorite
    39%
    61%
    SJS50COL

    COL by 22 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score SJS 2.3–2.9 COL; 17% 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
    SJS← edge
    edge →COL
    48.0%57.0%
    47.0%57.0%
    2.333.03
    2.562.30
    1.992.63
    2.321.56
    0.9981.021

    COL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.998 vs 1.021) says COL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

    Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
    Form · Last 10
    SJS
    4-5-1
    -6 GD · 1d rest
    COL
    3-5-2
    -8 GD · 1d rest
    0.998
    SJS PDO
    Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
    1.021
    COL 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 48.0%.
    • 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 48.0%.
    • The Avalanche drive Corsi at 57.0% — expect territorial tilt.
    • M. Blackwood is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • Y. Askarov is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
    • The Avalanche are underwater at -8 goal differential over their last 10.
    • The Sharks are underwater at -6 goal differential over their last 10.
    • The Avalanche's PDO is 1.021 — running hot, expect some regression.
    Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

    Lineups

    NHL box score
    SJS
    Expected in goal
    Y. Askarov
    back-to-back.600 last start
    Backup Yaroslav Askarov · -18.9 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.

    COL
    Expected in goal
    M. Blackwood
    back-to-back.958 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.

    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
    SJS
    Pavol Regenda5G 1A
    1.10 xG/60 · 2 HD · 16.1% sh
    Igor Chernyshov6G 8A
    0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh
    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
    Keep going

    Where to next

    Back to the front page