Motion-blurred skater in a Montreal Canadiens sweater

Breakdown · CBJ at MTL

Canadiens steal one from the Blue Jackets against the run of play

FinalThu, Mar 26

CBJColumbus Blue Jackets1 MTLMontreal Canadiens2

The verdict · stolen

The Canadiens stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.76–2.19 and won anyway.

CBJ 1 · MTL 2

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 8:54 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

Montreal won 2-1 despite Columbus controlling the game on paper. The Blue Jackets out-generated Montreal on expected goals 3.76–2.19, out-attempted them 26–20, and created nine high-danger chances versus three. Columbus scored once. This was a goaltending heist.

J. Dobes (MTL) stole the game. His 2.76 goals saved above expected—a measure of how much better he performed than league average—tells the story: elite goaltending against a team that couldn't finish. A 0.962 save percentage and nine-for-nine on high-danger chances sealed it. J. Greaves (CBJ) posted 0.900, solid work buried by Columbus's wasteful execution.

Z. Bolduc (MTL) scored at 4:36 on a snap shot from a sharp angle—the turning point. Montreal finished ruthlessly, converting two chances off seventeen rush attempts. Columbus crashed the net for four rebound opportunities but left them empty.

This outcome is a variance outlier for Columbus. They won't regularly squander this many high-danger looks, and their 2.76-goal shortfall versus expected output will regress. But not tonight—Montreal's precision and Dobes's brilliance converted dominance into defeat.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Mar 26

CBJ

MTL

Canadiens steal one from the Blue Jackets against the run of play

Chances 3.8 – 2.2Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Blue Jackets deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

CBJ

3.76

MTL

2.19

63% of the chances37%

The board read CBJ 1, MTL 2. The chances read CBJ 3.8, MTL 2.2.

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

Luck check

MTL

−0.2

goals above expected

MTL2.19 expected · 2 scored

Expected

Scored

CBJ3.76 expected · 1 scored

Expected

Scored

The Blue Jackets 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

P1 09:54MTLJ. Struble0–1
P1 12:17CBJD. Severson1–1
P3 04:36MTLZ. Bolduc1–2

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

Where the shots came from

CBJ

44 shots

Final

75 shots

MTL

31 shots

CBJ MTL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 1 in

shots · 2 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

CBJMTL

0 / 9

2.01 xG

High danger

0 / 3

0.77 xG

1 / 11

1.18 xG

Medium

2 / 11

1.14 xG

0 / 42

0.57 xG

Low

0 / 27

0.28 xG

The Blue Jackets went 0 for 9 from the slot.

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

In the net

A+

J. Dobes

+2.8

MTL · 25/26

J. Greaves

+0.2

CBJ · 18/20

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Canadiens steal one from the Blue Jackets against the run of play

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 13–6

09:54MTLJ. Struble(Z. Bolduc, L. Hutson)0–1
12:17CBJD. Severson(B. Jenner, I. Lundeström)1–1

2ndshots 6–8no goals

3rdshots 7–6

04:36MTLZ. Bolduc(J. Evans, M. Matheson)1–2

score reads CBJ–MTL

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

2.19

MTL chances

Goals their shots were worth

−0.2

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.033

MTL puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

39.8%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.76Expected goals2.19

CBJ 63% of the chance quality

26Shots on goal20

9High-danger chances3

62All attempts (Corsi)41

Adjusted for score: CBJ 61% · MTL 39%

Faceoffs · MTL won61%off15%neu69%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

CBJ0 / 9 · 2.01 xG

MTL0 / 3 · 0.77 xG

Medium dangermid-range

CBJ1 / 11 · 1.18 xG

MTL2 / 11 · 1.14 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

CBJ0 / 42 · 0.57 xG

MTL0 / 27 · 0.28 xG

CBJ went 0-for-9 from high danger on 2.01 expected goals — 2.0 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

CBJ

1 G · 3.76 xG · -2.8

MTL

2 G · 2.19 xG · -0.2

012345

CBJ finished -2.8 against expected, MTL -0.2.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

CBJ

SNAP0/29

TIP IN0/5

SLAP1/5

BACKHAND0/5

WRIST0/0

OTHER0/18

MTL

SNAP2/23

TIP IN0/3

SLAP0/3

BACKHAND0/1

WRIST0/1

OTHER0/10

CBJ

MTL

Off the rush

1 G on 28

2.64 xG

2 G on 17

1.71 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 4

0.81 xG

0 G on 1

0.19 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: CBJ went 0-for-29, MTL 2-for-23. MTL 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

J. Greaves

CBJ · 18/20 · .900

+0.2

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/30.8+0.8

Medium2/111.1-0.9

Low0/270.3+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. Dobes

MTL · 25/26 · .962

+2.8

saved above expected

A+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/92.0+2.0

Medium1/111.2+0.2

Low0/420.6+0.6

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

75 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

CBJ

44 shots

Final

75 shots

MTL

31 shots

CBJ MTL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — CBJ left, MTL 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

Z. Bolduc

#76 · R · MTL

1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 13:51 on ice · +2

M. Matheson

#8 · D · MTL

0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 21:24 on ice · +1

D. Severson

#78 · D · CBJ

1 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 21:23 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Thu, Mar 26

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 8:52 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 calls it a coin flip: the Blue Jackets project as a 51% favorite in a 2.6–2.5 game. The underlying shot metrics support the near-dead heat.

Columbus dominates the underlying play with 52.0% expected goals to Montreal's 48.0% and 51.0% Corsi to 49.0%. The gap is modest, but consistent—enough to matter over time, not enough to guarantee anything on a given night. When two teams are this close, individual performances determine outcomes.

Montreal's PDO of 1.018 signals a team that's converting at an above-sustainable clip. Columbus, at 1.003, runs neutral. The Canadiens are due for regression.

Boone Jenner is Columbus's engine: 0.98 expected goals per 60 minutes, 11 goals, 21 assists, shooting at 9.6%—well above average. Two of his goals come from high-danger areas. Mathieu Olivier (0.89 xG/60, 12 goals) provides secondary offensive pressure.

Montreal counters with Cole Caufield, a 33-goal scorer shooting 20.0%—elite efficiency. He has just 1 high-danger goal, suggesting his volume comes from sound shot selection and positioning rather than time spent in the hard areas. Oliver Kapanen (0.83 xG/60, 19 goals, 4 high-danger) offers more tactically dangerous scoring, with his output rooted in proximity.

Defensively, Conor Garland is Columbus's weak point; Mike Matheson fills that role for Montreal. Neither team has clearly superior goaltending or special teams to break the tie.

Two possession-dominant teams, one moderately hot Canadiens offense, and nothing decisive in how they generate or prevent danger. Heads.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

CBJ 51%

51%

CBJ

Model favorite

51%

49%

CBJ50MTL

CBJ by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score CBJ 2.6–2.5 MTL; 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

CBJ← edge

edge →MTL

52.0%48.0%

51.0%49.0%

2.632.41

2.432.62

2.122.24

1.981.96

1.0031.018

CBJ holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.003 vs 1.018) says MTL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

CBJ

6-1-3

+11 GD · 2d rest

MTL

6-3-1

+6 GD · 2d rest

1.003

CBJ PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.018

MTL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Blue Jackets own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.

Regression watch

The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.

Things to watch

The Blue Jackets own the underlying play — 52.0% 5v5 xG vs 48.0%.
The Canadiens' PDO is 1.018 — running hot, expect some regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

CBJ

Expected in goal

J. Greaves

2 days rest.923 last start

Backup Jet Greaves · +16.5 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

MTL

Expected in goal

J. Dobes

2 days rest.953 last start

Backup Jakub Dobes · +17.3 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

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

MTL

Cole Caufield33G 16A

0.97 xG/60 · 1 HD · 20.0% sh

Oliver Kapanen19G 12A

0.83 xG/60 · 4 HD · 17.8% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page