Motion-blurred skater in a Colorado Avalanche sweater

Breakdown · COL at DAL

Avalanche edge the Stars in a shootout

Final / OTFri, Mar 6

The verdict · stolen

The Avalanche stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.24–4.28 and won anyway.

COL 5 · DAL 4

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 5:46 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 stole this one. Dallas controlled 57% of expected goals—generating 4.28 xG to Colorado's 3.24—and still lost.

The gap originates with Dallas's quality. They registered only 21 shots on goal to Colorado's 29, yet packed far more danger per attempt: 0.087 expected goals per shot versus Colorado's 0.056. Dallas's 8-3 edge in high-danger chances reinforces the picture—Colorado was scraping out chances where Dallas was generating them.

S. Wedgewood (COL) kept Colorado alive. His perfect 10/10 save performance (+2.04 goals saved versus expected) was the margin. Colorado's other netminder, M. Blackwood (COL), gave up 1.76 more goals than expected from his workload (7/11, 0.636 SV%, -1.76), while J. Oettinger (DAL) ran slightly unlucky (25/29, 0.862 SV%, -0.76).

Colorado's power play provided daylight: three goals on 17 shots (1.40 xG), enough to neutralize Dallas's 5-on-5 superiority. Colorado also won the rush battle—four goals on 26 chances versus Dallas's three—another fraction that cascaded into the final margin.

M. Necas ended it in the shootout with a snap from the slot. Colorado didn't deserve this win based on play, but finished it anyway.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · SO · Mar 6

COL

DAL

Avalanche edge the Stars in a shootout

Chances 3.2 – 4.3Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Stars deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

COL

3.24

DAL

4.28

43% of the chances57%

The board read COL 5, DAL 4. The chances read COL 3.2, DAL 4.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations

Luck check

COL

+1.8

goals above expected

COL3.24 expected · 5 scored

Expected

Scored

DAL4.28 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

The Avalanche scored 1.8 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season

Every goal, in order

P1 03:33COLC. MakarPP1–0
P1 07:11DALM. HeiskanenPP1–1
P1 10:39DALW. Johnston1–2
P1 16:07DALJ. Hryckowian1–3
P1 19:58COLN. MacKinnonPP2–3
P2 01:52DALJ. Benn2–4
P2 08:06COLM. Necas3–4

+3 more on the full breakdown

NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model

Where the shots came from

COL

42 shots

Final

81 shots

DAL

39 shots

COL DAL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

shots · 6 in

shots · 4 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

COLDAL

0 / 3

0.82 xG

High danger

1 / 8

2.14 xG

3 / 19

1.86 xG

Medium

3 / 17

1.80 xG

1 / 36

0.57 xG

Low

0 / 24

0.34 xG

High-danger looks: COL 0 of 3, DAL 1 of 8.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance

In the net

A+

S. Wedgewood

+4.3

COL · 10/10

M. Blackwood

+0.3

COL · 7/11

+1 more on the full breakdown

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Avalanche edge the Stars in a shootout

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 11–10

03:33COLC. Makarpower play(N. MacKinnon, M. Necas)1–0
07:11DALM. Heiskanenpower play(J. Robertson, W. Johnston)1–1
10:39DALW. Johnston(M. Heiskanen, J. Robertson)1–2
16:07DALJ. Hryckowian(M. Bourque)1–3
19:58COLN. MacKinnonpower play(M. Necas, C. Makar)2–3

2ndshots 9–6

01:52DALJ. Benn(J. Hryckowian, M. Bourque)2–4
08:06COLM. Necas(N. MacKinnon, G. Landeskog)3–4

3rdshots 7–3

19:45COLV. Nichushkinpower play(M. Necas, B. Nelson)4–4

OTshots 2–2no goals

00:00COLV. Nichushkinpower play4–4
00:00COLM. Necaspower play4–4

score reads COL–DAL

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.24

COL chances

Goals their shots were worth

+1.8

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

0.987

COL puck luck

About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces

54.2%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.24Expected goals4.28

DAL 57% of the chance quality

29Shots on goal21

3High-danger chances8

58All attempts (Corsi)49

Adjusted for score: COL 58% · DAL 42%

Faceoffs · DAL won44%off35%neu73%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

COL0 / 3 · 0.82 xG

DAL1 / 8 · 2.14 xG

Medium dangermid-range

COL3 / 19 · 1.86 xG

DAL3 / 17 · 1.80 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

COL1 / 36 · 0.57 xG

DAL0 / 24 · 0.34 xG

DAL went 3-for-17 from medium danger on 1.80 expected goals — 1.2 above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

COL

5 G · 3.24 xG · +1.8

DAL

4 G · 4.28 xG · -0.3

0123456

COL finished +1.8 against expected, DAL -0.3.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

COL

SNAP3/16

SLAP1/14

TIP IN0/5

WRIST0/3

BACKHAND0/1

DEFLECTED0/0

BAT0/1

WRAP AROUND0/0

OTHER0/18

DAL

SNAP4/22

SLAP0/1

TIP IN0/6

WRIST0/3

BACKHAND0/2

DEFLECTED0/2

BAT0/0

WRAP AROUND0/1

OTHER0/12

COL

DAL

Off the rush

4 G on 26

2.29 xG

3 G on 26

3.33 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 0

0.00 xG

1 G on 3

0.53 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: COL went 3-for-16, DAL 4-for-22. COL scored 4 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 · 7/11 · .636

+0.3

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/82.1+1.1

Medium3/171.8-1.2

Low0/240.3+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

S. Wedgewood

COL · 10/10 · 1.000

+4.3

saved above expected

A+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/82.1+1.1

Medium3/171.8-1.2

Low0/240.3+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. Oettinger

DAL · 25/29 · .862

-0.8

saved above expected

D-

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/30.8+0.8

Medium3/191.9-1.1

Low1/360.6-0.4

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

81 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

COL

42 shots

Final

81 shots

DAL

39 shots

COL DAL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Shootout goals are not shots and are not drawn; the scoreboard above counts goals from the shot log.

Each club shoots toward its own end — COL left, DAL 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

M. Necas

#88 · C · COL

1 G · 3 A · 5 SOG · 26:55 on ice · +1

N. MacKinnon

#29 · C · COL

1 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 27:21 on ice · +1

M. Heiskanen

#4 · D · DAL

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 31:46 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Fri, Mar 6

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 5:44 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 says 2.7 goals for Colorado, 2.5 for Dallas, with the Avalanche at 54% to win. It's as close to a pick'em as it gets.

Dallas has momentum—10-0-0 in their last ten. But Colorado owns the underlying play by a clear margin. The Avalanche control 57.0% of 5v5 shot attempts (Corsi) and generate 57.0% of expected goals. Dallas manages 47.0% Corsi and 51.0% xG%, meaning Colorado is creating more dangerous looks and dictating the game's geography.

Both teams are running hot on PDO—Colorado at 1.021, Dallas at 1.024—which means both are converting at unsustainable rates. Expect regression from both.

The matchups are straightforward. Artturi Lehkonen drives Colorado's offense at 1.11 xG/60 and has 18 goals to show for it. He's efficient: 14.9% shooting, with 6 of his goals coming from high-danger areas. Ross Colton generates 1.10 xG/60 but shoots just 4.9%, with 1 high-danger goal across 22 points—expect his conversion to climb. Dallas counters with Jason Robertson (25 goals, 0.96 xG/60, 12.4% shooting) and Michael Bunting (0.83 xG/60, 7.6% shooting), though neither has punished their chances at an exceptional rate.

Both teams leave money on the table: Colorado scores on 0% of high-danger chances and generates no rebound goals; Dallas mirrors that inefficiency. That's unsustainable. Whoever tightens the back end—Colorado's Nazem Kadri or Dallas's Tyler Myers, each a known defensive liability—could decide this.

Colorado has better play-driving. Dallas has momentum. That's a toss-up.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

COL 54%

54%

COL

Model favorite

54%

46%

COL50DAL

COL by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score COL 2.7–2.5 DAL; 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 →DAL

57.0%51.0%

57.0%47.0%

3.032.36

2.302.29

2.632.07

1.561.68

1.0211.024

COL holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.021 vs 1.024) says DAL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

COL

6-4-0

+5 GD · 2d rest

DAL

10-0-0

+20 GD · 2d rest

1.021

COL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.024

DAL 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 51.0%.
The Avalanche drive Corsi at 57.0% — expect territorial tilt.

Regression watch

The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.
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 51.0%.
The Avalanche drive Corsi at 57.0% — expect territorial tilt.
The Stars are the hotter team by points pace (10-0-0 in their last 10).
The Stars' PDO is 1.024 — running hot, expect some regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

COL

Expected in goal

S. Wedgewood

2 days rest.964 last start

Backup Scott Wedgewood · +23.1 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

DAL

Expected in goal

C. DeSmith

2 days rest.952 last start

Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 GSAx this season

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

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

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page