Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Winnipeg Jets sweater
← Sat, Mar 28 · the slate
Breakdown · WPG at COL

Jets run the Avalanche off the ice on the underlying numbers

FinalSat, Mar 28
WPGWinnipeg Jets4COLColorado Avalanche2
The verdict · earned

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

WPG 4 · COL 2
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 9:35 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 shot more, Winnipeg converted more—and the expected goals margin (3.42–1.89) is why. The Avalanche held 52% of shot attempts but generated only 36% of expected goals. That's the scoreboard's complaint: 4–2 to the Jets was the inevitable conclusion of this 64–36 quality split.

The gap isn't about volume. Colorado landed 23 shot attempts to Winnipeg's 21. Conversion quality separated them: the Jets averaged 0.071 expected goals per shot; the Avalanche, 0.034. Winnipeg's looks came from dangerous areas. Colorado's did not.

High-danger chances went 3–1 to Winnipeg. Both teams scored twice from low-danger spots—opportunities the opposing goalie should have stopped—but Winnipeg's margin came from the rush: three goals on 20 chances, compared to Colorado's two on 21.

C. Hellebuyck (21/23, 0.913 SV%) and M. Blackwood (17/20, 0.850 SV%) faced imbalanced circumstances. One got high-quality looks; the other did not. The save percentage gap—0.913 to 0.850—mirrors the underlying game. That's not a goalie failure. That's the math of dominance.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Mar 28
WPG
4
COL
2

Jets run the Avalanche off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 3.4 – 1.9Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Jets earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
WPG
3.42
COL
1.89
64% of the chances36%

The board read WPG 4, COL 2. The chances read WPG 3.4, COL 1.9.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
WPG
+0.6
goals above expected
WPG3.42 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
COL1.89 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored

Both sides finished close to what their chances were worth. This one was earned on the ice.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 03:51WPGG. Vilardi1–0
  2. P1 08:59COLB. NelsonPP1–1
  3. P2 02:14WPGC. Koepke2–1
  4. P2 18:05COLP. Kelly2–2
  5. P3 14:49WPGC. Perfetti3–2
  6. P3 17:51WPGK. ConnorEN4–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
WPG
32 shots
4
Final
66 shots
COL
34 shots
2
WPG attackCOL attack
WPG COL Goal
32
shots · 4 in
34
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
WPGCOL
2 / 3
1.56 xG
High danger
0 / 1
0.22 xG
0 / 13
1.50 xG
Medium
0 / 9
1.18 xG
2 / 32
0.37 xG
Low
2 / 46
0.49 xG

The Jets buried 2 of 3 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B
M. Blackwood
+0.4
COL · 17/20
C
C. Hellebuyck
−0.1
WPG · 21/23
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Jets run the Avalanche off the ice on the underlying numbers

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 10–9
  1. 03:51WPGG. Vilardi(J. Morrissey, A. Lowry)1–0
  2. 08:59COLB. Nelsonpower play(N. Kadri, C. Makar)1–1
2ndshots 6–10
  1. 02:14WPGC. Koepke(J. Toews, E. Salomonsson)2–1
  2. 18:05COLP. Kelly(J. Manson, V. Nichushkin)2–2
3rdshots 5–4
  1. 14:49WPGC. Perfetti(J. Bryson, G. Vilardi)3–2
  2. 17:51WPGK. Connorempty net(M. Scheifele, D. Samberg)4–2

score reads WPG–COL

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.42
WPG chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.6
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.048
WPG puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
46.2%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.42Expected goals1.89
WPG 64% of the chance quality
21Shots on goal23
3High-danger chances1
48All attempts (Corsi)56
Adjusted for score: WPG 44% · COL 56%
Faceoffs · COL won55%off52%neu46%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
WPG2 / 3 · 1.56 xG
COL0 / 1 · 0.22 xG
Medium dangermid-range
WPG0 / 13 · 1.50 xG
COL0 / 9 · 1.18 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
WPG2 / 32 · 0.37 xG
COL2 / 46 · 0.49 xG

WPG went 2-for-32 from low danger on 0.37 expected goals — 1.6 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
WPG
4 G · 3.42 xG · +0.6
COL
2 G · 1.89 xG · +0.1
012345

WPG finished +0.6 against expected, COL +0.1.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
WPG
WRIST2/18
SNAP0/5
TIP IN2/4
SLAP0/2
BACKHAND0/2
BAT0/1
POKE0/0
OTHER0/16
COL
WRIST0/17
SNAP0/5
TIP IN2/6
SLAP0/5
BACKHAND0/0
BAT0/0
POKE0/1
OTHER0/22
WPG
COL
Off the rush
3 G on 20
1.76 xG
2 G on 21
1.57 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3
0.35 xG
0 G on 0
0.00 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: WPG went 2-for-18, COL 0-for-17. WPG scored 3 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
C. Hellebuyck
WPG · 21/23 · .913
-0.1
saved above expected
C
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/10.2+0.2
Medium0/91.2+1.2
Low2/460.5-1.5

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

M. Blackwood
COL · 17/20 · .850
+0.4
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/31.6-0.4
Medium0/131.5+1.5
Low2/320.4-1.6

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

66 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
WPG
32 shots
4
Final
66 shots
COL
34 shots
2
WPG attackCOL attack
WPG COL Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — WPG left, COL 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
G. Vilardi
#13 · C · WPG
1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 20:05 on ice · +2
C. Makar
#8 · D · COL
0 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 26:37 on ice · -3
D. Samberg
#54 · D · WPG
0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 24:19 on ice · +2
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Mar 28
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 9:20 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 WPG 2.3 - 2.9 COL game with the Avalanche at 60% win probability. Colorado owns the matchup on the underlying metrics that predict outcomes.

In 5v5 play, the Avalanche generate 57.0% of expected goals to Winnipeg's 48.0%. That gap matters: territory converts to chances. Colorado's 57.0% Corsi share reinforces the pattern—they control possession and should dictate play.

There's a caveat. Colorado's 1.021 PDO means they're converting at rates that regress toward league average. Winnipeg sits at 0.998, closer to that midline. If Colorado's shooting luck dries up even slightly, that 60% edge contracts.

The Jets are wounded recently. They're underwater by 7 goals over their last 10 games, a deficit that reflects both results and underlying play. That context makes Colorado's advantage steeper, though Winnipeg's underlying numbers (48.0% xG, 49.0% Corsi) suggest the team can compete when healthy.

Goaltending adds noise: M. Blackwood works on a back-to-back, as does C. Hellebuyck. Either could see a backup deployed, or face fatigue in a must-execute spot. If starters play, both teams get a worn option—an edge to neither side.

Three Stars

  • Artturi Lehkonen (Avalanche) — 1.11 xG/60, 18G 22A, 6 high-danger goals, 14.9% shooting
  • Nino Niederreiter (Jets) — 0.87 xG/60, 6G 6A, 3 high-danger goals, 8.6% shooting
  • Kyle Connor (Jets) — 0.83 xG/60, 25G 30A, 2 high-danger goals, 13.0% shooting

Lehkonen carries the load for Colorado; the team leans on his 1.11 xG/60 rate and prolific finishing. Niederreiter is Winnipeg's best secondary outlet at even strength, though the volume trails the Avalanche's attack. Connor's goal total (25) masks his underlying rate—he's efficient in finishing but not generating chances at the same clip as the top Avalanche producers. Ross Colton (1.10 xG/60, 7G 15A) presents another scoring avenue for Colorado if the game tightens.

The model's lean is sound. Expect Colorado to outshoot, out-drive play, and control the space. The PDO risk is real but secondary—regression alone doesn't flip a 60% favorite.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

COL 60%
60%
COL
Model favorite
40%
60%
WPG50COL

COL by 20 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score WPG 2.3–2.9 COL; 17% 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
WPG← edge
edge →COL
48.0%57.0%
49.0%57.0%
2.343.03
2.552.30
1.902.63
2.101.56
0.9981.021

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

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
WPG
4-4-2
-7 GD · 1d rest
COL
6-3-1
+5 GD · 1d rest
0.998
WPG PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.021
COL 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.
  • M. Blackwood is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • C. Hellebuyck is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • 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
WPG
Expected in goal
C. Hellebuyck
back-to-back.914 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.

COL
Expected in goal
M. Blackwood
back-to-back.917 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.

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
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
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
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page