Backcheck
Recap · CHI at COL

Avalanche run the Blackhawks off the ice on the underlying numbers

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

By the ModelJul 12, 4:51 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
CHI
Chicago Blackhawks
1
Home
COL
Colorado Avalanche
3
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

2.23Expected goals4.27
66% share for the better side
15Shot attempts (SOG)35
4High-danger chances7
40Corsi (all attempts)71
Score-adjusted: 35% / 65%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Colorado dominated completely—66% of expected goals (4.27–2.23), 70% of shot attempts (35–15), 7–4 on high-danger chances—but the 3-1 final understates how thoroughly the Blackhawks were overmatched. S. Knight (CHI) saved 2.3 goals above expected on 32 of 34 shots (0.941 SV%), the only reason Chicago remained competitive.

The Avalanche were relentless. They generated 4 rebound opportunities and converted one; the Blackhawks created 4 chances but converted none. Both teams underperformed their xG—the Avalanche by 1.27 goals, Chicago by 1.23—but that's a story of execution, not parity. M. Blackwood (COL) posted a 0.933 SV% (1.23 goals above expected on 14 of 15 saves), solid work against limited danger.

The turning point arrived early in the third when C. Makar's wrist shot from the top of the circles (18:33, P3) gave Colorado a margin the Blackhawks never threatened.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
CHI0 / 4 · 0.95 xG
COL2 / 7 · 1.96 xG
Medium dangermid-range
CHI1 / 10 · 0.90 xG
COL1 / 13 · 1.35 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
CHI0 / 26 · 0.38 xG
COL0 / 51 · 0.96 xG

COL went 0-for-51 from low danger on 0.96 expected goals — 1.0 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
CHI
1 G · 2.23 xG · -1.2
COL
3 G · 4.27 xG · -1.3
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
S. KnightCHI
+2.3
M. BlackwoodCOL
+1.2

CHI finished -1.2 against expected, COL -1.3 — S. Knight (CHI) saved 2.3 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
CHI
WRIST0/8
SNAP1/9
SLAP0/6
BACKHAND0/2
TIP IN0/1
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/13
COL
WRIST2/37
SNAP1/9
SLAP0/5
BACKHAND0/3
TIP IN0/1
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/16
CHI
COL
Off the rush
1 G on 16 · 1.35 xG
1 G on 30 · 2.24 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 4 · 0.21 xG
1 G on 4 · 0.63 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: CHI went 0-for-8, COL 2-for-37.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
C. Makar
#8 · D · COL
2 G · 0 A · 3 SOG · 23:49 TOI · +2
N. MacKinnon
#29 · C · COL
0 G · 2 A · 6 SOG · 23:32 TOI · +2
M. Necas
#88 · C · COL
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 23:05 TOI · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • S. Knight (CHI) stopped 2.3 goals above expected.
  • COL created 4 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • CHI created 4 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • S. Knight (CHI) saved 2.3 goals above expected — stole the show.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · CHI at COL · 6:00 PM ET

The Avalanche should handle the Blackhawks — with PDO regression in play

By the ModelJul 12, 4:50 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

65%
COL
Model favorite
35%
65%
CHI50COL

COL by 30 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score CHI 2.23.1 COL; 17% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

CHI← edge
edge →COL
42.0%5v5 xG%57.0%
46.0%Corsi%57.0%
2.17xGF / 603.03
2.94xGA / 602.30
1.84Goals for / gm2.63
2.41Goals against / gm1.56
0.996PDO — luck, not skill1.021

COL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.996 vs 1.021) says COL has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The Avalanche own this matchup on underlying metrics. The model projects a 2.2–3.1 victory with Colorado at 65% win probability. The Avalanche dominate 5v5 play at 57.0% expected goals share to Chicago's 42.0%, and control territory at 57.0% Corsi. Chicago's -12 goal differential over the last ten games signals collapse; Colorado's -5, while still negative, leaves room for outright dominance.

Colorado's edge has a flaw: a PDO of 1.021 means the Avalanche are running hot on finishing luck. Regression is baked into the forecast. Chicago's 0.996 PDO is closer to neutral, which makes their structural weakness—42.0% xG%, 46.0% Corsi%—all the starker.

Watch for goaltending depth. M. Blackwood and S. Knight both play on back-to-back nights, raising the odds of a tired starter or a backup appearance.

Tyler Bertuzzi is Chicago's most dangerous forward. He has 20 goals and 15 assists with 0.85 expected goals per 60 minutes, 7 high-danger chances, and an 18.0% shooting percentage. Connor Bedard underwhelms that metric: 17 goals, 27 assists, 0.82 xG/60, 5 high-danger chances, and 11.8% shooting. Bedard's disparity between points and expected output suggests playmaking outpacing finishing.

Colorado's scoring threats are Artturi Lehkonen and Ross Colton. Lehkonen has generated 1.11 xG/60 with 18 goals, 22 assists, 6 high-danger chances, and 14.9% shooting. Colton posts 1.10 xG/60 but has only 7 goals and 15 assists with 1 high-danger chance at 4.9% shooting—a severe underperformance that forecasts positive regression.

Anton Frondell is Chicago's defensive liability. Nazem Kadri represents the same structural flaw for Colorado. If the Avalanche's PDO cools as expected, these weak links will determine whether Colorado coasts to a multi-goal win or leaves the door cracked for Chicago.

The Avalanche should prevail. Regression risk is real, but underlying dominance usually holds.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

CHI
Tyler Bertuzzi20G 15A
0.85 xG/60 · 7 HD · 18.0% sh
Connor Bedard17G 27A
0.82 xG/60 · 5 HD · 11.8% 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
Source · MoneyPuck skaters