Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Columbus Blue Jackets sweater
← Tue, Mar 17 · the slate
Breakdown · CAR at CBJ

Blue Jackets pull away from the Hurricanes

FinalTue, Mar 17
CARCarolina Hurricanes1CBJColumbus Blue Jackets5
The verdict · earned

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

CAR 1 · CBJ 5
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 7:48 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

Columbus' 5-1 scoreline masks a narrower underlying battle. Expected goals finished 3.27-2.49 in the Blue Jackets' favor—a 57-43 split that would normally forecast a 3-1 or 4-2 result. But elite finishes on one side and defensive entropy on the other created the gap.

J. Greaves' 0.966 save percentage carried the larger load, stopping 1.49 goals above expectation while facing 29 shot attempts. B. Bussi conceded 1.73 more than expected, unable to stem high-quality chances.

Columbus' shot profile was sharper: 0.054 xG per attempt versus Carolina's 0.040. On 30 attempts, that compounds. The Blue Jackets were clinical in high-danger territory (2/4, 50%) and lethal off the rush (4 goals on 27 chances). They added two power-play goals on ten shots—an outright domination.

Mathieu Olivier's wrist shot from the doorstep (P3, 07:38) crystallized the game's arc early in the third, pushing the advantage beyond recovery.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Mar 17
CAR
1
CBJ
5

Blue Jackets pull away from the Hurricanes

Chances 2.5 – 3.3Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Blue Jackets earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
CAR
2.49
CBJ
3.27
43% of the chances57%

The board read CAR 1, CBJ 5. The chances read CAR 2.5, CBJ 3.3.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
CBJ
+1.7
goals above expected
CBJ3.27 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
CAR2.49 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Blue Jackets scored 1.7 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 05:25CBJM. MarchmentPP0–1
  2. P1 19:05CBJC. CoylePP0–2
  3. P2 14:05CARA. Svechnikov1–2
  4. P2 17:29CBJD. Heinen1–3
  5. P2 18:03CBJD. Mateychuk1–4
  6. P3 07:38CBJM. Olivier1–5
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
CAR
39 shots
1
Final
81 shots
CBJ
42 shots
5
CAR attackCBJ attack
CAR CBJ Goal
39
shots · 1 in
42
shots · 5 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
CARCBJ
1 / 2
0.50 xG
High danger
2 / 4
1.07 xG
0 / 13
1.46 xG
Medium
1 / 17
1.70 xG
0 / 48
0.53 xG
Low
2 / 40
0.51 xG

The Blue Jackets buried 2 of 4 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
J. Greaves
+1.5
CBJ · 28/29
F
B. Bussi
−1.7
CAR · 25/30
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Blue Jackets pull away from the Hurricanes

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 6–11
  1. 05:25CBJM. Marchmentpower play(C. Coyle, A. Fantilli)0–1
  2. 19:05CBJC. Coylepower play(A. Fantilli, Z. Werenski)0–2
2ndshots 13–11
  1. 14:05CARA. Svechnikov(N. Ehlers, A. Nikishin)1–2
  2. 17:29CBJD. Heinen(C. Coyle, C. Sillinger)1–3
  3. 18:03CBJD. Mateychuk(S. Monahan)1–4
3rdshots 10–8
  1. 07:38CBJM. Olivier(C. Coyle, C. Sillinger)1–5

score reads CAR–CBJ

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.27
CBJ chances
Goals their shots were worth
+1.7
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.066
CBJ puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
49.2%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.49Expected goals3.27
CBJ 57% of the chance quality
29Shots on goal30
2High-danger chances4
63All attempts (Corsi)61
Adjusted for score: CAR 57% · CBJ 43%
Faceoffs · CBJ won53%off70%neu71%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
CAR1 / 2 · 0.50 xG
CBJ2 / 4 · 1.07 xG
Medium dangermid-range
CAR0 / 13 · 1.46 xG
CBJ1 / 17 · 1.70 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
CAR0 / 48 · 0.53 xG
CBJ2 / 40 · 0.51 xG

CBJ went 2-for-40 from low danger on 0.51 expected goals — 1.5 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
CAR
1 G · 2.49 xG · -1.5
CBJ
5 G · 3.27 xG · +1.7
0123456

CAR finished -1.5 against expected, CBJ +1.7.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
CAR
WRIST0/16
SNAP0/6
SLAP0/5
TIP IN0/5
BACKHAND1/7
OTHER0/24
CBJ
WRIST4/17
SNAP1/10
SLAP0/8
TIP IN0/6
BACKHAND0/1
OTHER0/19
CAR
CBJ
Off the rush
1 G on 23
1.70 xG
4 G on 27
2.75 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 2
0.19 xG
0 G on 1
0.13 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: CAR went 0-for-16, CBJ 4-for-17. CBJ 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
B. Bussi
CAR · 25/30 · .833
-1.7
saved above expected
F
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/41.1-0.9
Medium1/171.7+0.7
Low2/400.5-1.5

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

J. Greaves
CBJ · 28/29 · .966
+1.5
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/20.5-0.5
Medium0/131.5+1.5
Low0/480.5+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

81 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
CAR
39 shots
1
Final
81 shots
CBJ
42 shots
5
CAR attackCBJ attack
CAR CBJ Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — CAR left, CBJ 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
C. Coyle
#3 · C · CBJ
1 G · 3 A · 4 SOG · 18:31 on ice · +2
A. Fantilli
#19 · C · CBJ
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 18:34 on ice · -1
C. Sillinger
#4 · C · CBJ
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 16:07 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Mar 17
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 7:33 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 projection gives Carolina 52% win probability in a 2.7-2.6 game — as close to even money as you'll find.

Carolina dominates underlying play. The Hurricanes generate 56.0% expected goals to Columbus' 52.0%, and control territory at 60.0% Corsi versus 51.0%. This is a meaningful possession edge that should yield first-period control and extended stretches in the Blue Jackets' end.

But Columbus carries a structural edge that can't be ignored. Its 1.003 PDO suggests above-average puck luck embedded in results; Carolina's 0.984 sits cold, pointing toward positive regression. This is the central tension: Carolina plays better hockey, but Columbus finishes better.

Jackson Blake drives Carolina's attack: 1.06 xG/60, 14G 19A, 2 HD goals at 10.9% shooting. He'll draw constant checking, leaving space for Seth Jarvis. Jarvis operates as the secondary threat — 0.98 xG/60, 17G 12A, 1 HD goals at 11.9% shooting.

Boone Jenner mirrors Jarvis' xG/60 (0.98) but plays setup artist for Columbus: 11G 21A with 2 HD goals and 9.6% shooting. Mathieu Olivier is the variance play — 0.89 xG/60, 12G 9A at 13.3% shooting, enough conversion to swing a low-event game on a clean transition.

Both teams are structure-first systems: 0% high-danger goal rate and 0% rebound rate across the board. Charles Alexis Legault represents Carolina's defensive liability; Conor Garland anchors a similar weak point for Columbus. Expect tightly managed minutes and the game decided by one team's ability to capitalize when chaos does emerge.

The model says pick'em. The advanced metrics say Carolina. The results say Columbus deserves to believe. Until the gap closes, this is a genuine coin flip.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

CAR 52%
52%
CAR
Model favorite
52%
48%
CAR50CBJ

CAR by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score CAR 2.7–2.6 CBJ; 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
CAR← edge
edge →CBJ
56.0%52.0%
60.0%51.0%
2.982.63
2.312.43
2.262.12
1.951.98
0.9841.003

CAR holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.984 vs 1.003) says CBJ has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
CAR
7-3-0
+10 GD · 3d rest
CBJ
5-1-4
+2 GD · 3d rest
0.984
CAR PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.003
CBJ PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live
  • The Hurricanes own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 52.0%.
  • The Hurricanes drive Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Things to watch
  • The Hurricanes own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 52.0%.
  • The Hurricanes drive Corsi at 60.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • The Hurricanes' PDO is 0.984 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
CAR
Expected in goal
F. Andersen
3 days rest.895 last start
Backup Brandon Bussi · +2.8 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

CBJ
Expected in goal
J. Greaves
3 days rest.947 last start
Backup Jet Greaves · +16.5 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
CAR
Jackson Blake14G 19A
1.06 xG/60 · 2 HD · 10.9% sh
Seth Jarvis17G 12A
0.98 xG/60 · 1 HD · 11.9% sh
CBJ
Boone Jenner11G 21A
0.98 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.6% sh
Mathieu Olivier12G 9A
0.89 xG/60 · 1 HD · 13.3% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page