Motion-blurred skater in a Winnipeg Jets sweater

Breakdown · COL at WPG

C. Hellebuyck stands tall as the Jets edge the Avalanche

FinalSat, Mar 14

COLColorado Avalanche1 WPGWinnipeg Jets3

The verdict · stolen

The Jets stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.78–2.56 and won anyway.

COL 1 · WPG 3

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 7:04 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

Winnipeg won 3-1 despite being outshot in expected goals 2.56–3.78. Colorado controlled 60% of the chances at 5v5; the Jets stole this one.

C. Hellebuyck (WPG) saved 2.78 goals above expected with a 0.966 save percentage, stopping all 7 high-danger chances. M. Blackwood (COL) finished at 0.889, +0.56 above expected—respectable, but the Avalanche wasted their opportunities. Colorado went 0 for 7 on high-danger looks and paid for it.

Winnipeg's edge came from shot quality. The Jets generated 0.069 expected goals per shot versus Colorado's 0.048, meaning every chance they created was crisper. K. Connor (WPG) registered 1 goal and 1 assist in 18:49. The Avalanche crashed the net effectively, creating 7 rebound opportunities, but converted none.

On the cycle, Winnipeg thrived on the rush—2 goals on 17 chances. Cole Perfetti's wrist shot from the point at 19:18 proved the turning point. M. Scheifele (WPG) notched 2 assists in 19:53.

Colorado's issue wasn't volume; it was execution. Underperforming their xG by 2.8 goals across a game won by 2 is brutal. M. Necas (COL) scored 1 goal in 26:48 of play, but that was the Avalanche's only answer.

The shot attempts favored Colorado (29–19 on goal), but Winnipeg's goaltending and efficiency proved decisive. Hellebuyck's 28-save performance—especially his perfect record against high-danger looks—was the difference between a statistical anomaly and a scoreboard lie.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Mar 14

COL

WPG

C. Hellebuyck stands tall as the Jets edge the Avalanche

Chances 3.8 – 2.6Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Avalanche deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

COL

3.78

WPG

2.56

60% of the chances40%

The board read COL 1, WPG 3. The chances read COL 3.8, WPG 2.6.

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

Luck check

WPG

+0.4

goals above expected

WPG2.56 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

COL3.78 expected · 1 scored

Expected

Scored

The Avalanche left 2.8 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

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

Every goal, in order

P2 02:05WPGK. Connor0–1
P2 11:52WPGA. Iafallo0–2
P3 18:44COLM. NecasPP1–2
P3 19:18WPGC. PerfettiEN1–3

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

Where the shots came from

COL

52 shots

Final

82 shots

WPG

30 shots

COL WPG GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 1 in

shots · 3 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

COLWPG

0 / 7

1.45 xG

High danger

1 / 3

1.54 xG

1 / 14

1.49 xG

Medium

1 / 4

0.45 xG

0 / 58

0.84 xG

Low

1 / 30

0.56 xG

The Avalanche went 0 for 7 from the slot.

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

In the net

A+

C. Hellebuyck

+2.8

WPG · 28/29

M. Blackwood

+0.6

COL · 16/18

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

C. Hellebuyck stands tall as the Jets edge the Avalanche

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 8–5no goals

2ndshots 8–7

02:05WPGK. Connor(M. Scheifele)0–1
11:52WPGA. Iafallo(M. Scheifele, K. Connor)0–2

3rdshots 13–7

18:44COLM. Necaspower play(N. MacKinnon, C. Makar)1–2
19:18WPGC. Perfettiempty net1–3

score reads COL–WPG

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

2.56

WPG chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.4

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.068

WPG puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

31.9%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.78Expected goals2.56

COL 60% of the chance quality

29Shots on goal19

7High-danger chances3

79All attempts (Corsi)37

Adjusted for score: COL 73% · WPG 27%

Faceoffs · WPG won30%off62%neu43%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

COL0 / 7 · 1.45 xG

WPG1 / 3 · 1.54 xG

Medium dangermid-range

COL1 / 14 · 1.49 xG

WPG1 / 4 · 0.45 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

COL0 / 58 · 0.84 xG

WPG1 / 30 · 0.56 xG

COL went 0-for-7 from high danger on 1.45 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

COL

1 G · 3.78 xG · -2.8

WPG

3 G · 2.56 xG · +0.4

012345

COL finished -2.8 against expected, WPG +0.4.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

COL

WRIST0/30

SNAP1/9

TIP IN0/7

SLAP0/3

BAT0/2

BACKHAND0/1

OTHER0/27

WPG

WRIST3/17

SNAP0/4

TIP IN0/2

SLAP0/6

BAT0/0

BACKHAND0/1

OTHER0/7

COL

WPG

Off the rush

1 G on 26

2.07 xG

2 G on 17

1.43 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 7

0.86 xG

0 G on 1

0.02 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: COL went 0-for-30, WPG 3-for-17. WPG 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

M. Blackwood

COL · 16/18 · .889

+0.6

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/31.5+0.5

Medium1/40.5-0.6

Low1/300.6-0.4

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

C. Hellebuyck

WPG · 28/29 · .966

+2.8

saved above expected

A+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/71.4+1.4

Medium1/141.5+0.5

Low0/580.8+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

82 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

COL

52 shots

Final

82 shots

WPG

30 shots

COL WPG GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — COL left, WPG 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. Scheifele

#55 · C · WPG

0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 19:53 on ice · +1

K. Connor

#81 · L · WPG

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 18:49 on ice · +1

M. Necas

#88 · C · COL

1 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 26:48 on ice · -1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Mar 14

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 7:18 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 2.8-2.4 Avalanche victory with 56% win probability. Colorado's advantage rests on two forces: dominant underlying play and unsustainable puck luck.

Colorado controlled territory decisively at 57.0% xG and 57.0% Corsi. Winnipeg's 48.0% xG and 49.0% Corsi confirm the imbalance—the Jets will spend the evening defending. Over the last 10 games, Colorado's 8-2-0 record reflects this edge, while Winnipeg's -7 goal differential tells what happens when luck runs thin.

The problem: Colorado's 1.021 PDO signals a team converting at unsustainable rates. Winnipeg sits at 0.998, a baseline. When you run that hot, regression looms—especially dangerous when both C. Hellebuyck and S. Wedgewood operate on back-to-back nights. One or both could be replaced by a backup, or they start depleted. That's where Colorado's fortune might crack.

On attack, Artturi Lehkonen drives Colorado's efficiency. His 1.11 xG/60 (18G 22A, 6 HD goals, 14.9% shooting) represents exactly the kind of production Winnipeg's defense must locate and smother. Ross Colton generates nearly identical volumes at 1.10 xG/60 (7G 15A, 1 HD goals, 4.9% shooting), offering secondary scoring that makes him a dangerous secondary target.

Winnipeg's offense operates with less precision. Nino Niederreiter (0.87 xG/60, 6G 6A, 3 HD goals, 8.6% shooting) trails Colorado's elite producers, and Kyle Connor (0.83 xG/60, 25G 30A, 2 HD goals, 13.0% shooting) generates fewer chances than his 25 goals might suggest. Winnipeg's offensive load is lighter than you'd hope for an upset.

Defensively, Nazem Kadri represents Colorado's softest point, while Colin Miller carries similar vulnerability for Winnipeg. Neither profiles as a critical liability in isolation, but the underlying story dominates: Colorado dictates tempo and territory, and the Jets lack the offensive profile to overcome it.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

COL 56%

56%

COL

Model favorite

56%

44%

COL50WPG

COL by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score COL 2.8–2.4 WPG; 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 →WPG

57.0%48.0%

57.0%49.0%

3.032.34

2.302.55

2.631.90

1.562.10

1.0210.998

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

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

COL

8-2-0

+14 GD · 1d rest

WPG

4-3-3

-7 GD · 1d rest

1.021

COL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.998

WPG 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.
C. Hellebuyck 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 are the hotter team by points pace (8-2-0 in their last 10).
The Jets are underwater at -7 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

COL

Expected in goal

S. Wedgewood

back-to-back.966 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.

WPG

Expected in goal

C. Hellebuyck

back-to-back.688 last start

Backup Connor Hellebuyck · +5.5 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

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

WPG

Nino Niederreiter6G 6A

0.87 xG/60 · 3 HD · 8.6% sh

Kyle Connor25G 30A

0.83 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.0% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page