Motion-blurred skater in a Colorado Avalanche sweater

Breakdown · COL at DAL

Avalanche shut out the Stars, 2-0

FinalSat, Apr 4

The verdict · earned

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

COL 2 · DAL 0

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 10:13 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

Dallas created 2.29 expected goals and scored zero. S. Wedgewood's 1.000 save percentage (17/17 shots, +2.29 vs expected) mattered less than Dallas's offensive collapse—the shutout was built on wasted chances, not goaltending brilliance.

Colorado controlled 62% of 5v5 expected goals (3.69–2.29) with higher shot quality (0.070 xG per shot versus Dallas's 0.053). The Stars held just 44% of shot attempts (17–22 on goal) and generated only seven high-danger chances to Colorado's three. Both teams wasted second chances: Dallas created four rebounds without converting, Colorado created three and did the same.

Colorado underperformed their xG by 1.69 goals; Dallas by 2.29. C. DeSmith's +2.69 save rate indicates Dallas's goalie also played well, yet still surrendered two goals on superior offensive looks. The variance explains the 2-0 scoreline more than either goalie's execution.

The game's clearest turning point: Nathan MacKinnon's snap shot from the top of the circles at 19:02 of the third period, landing when Dallas's offensive pressure had dimmed.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Apr 4

COL

DAL

Avalanche shut out the Stars, 2-0

Chances 3.7 – 2.3Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Avalanche earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

COL

3.69

DAL

2.29

62% of the chances38%

The board read COL 2, DAL 0. The chances read COL 3.7, DAL 2.3.

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

Luck check

COL

−1.7

goals above expected

COL3.69 expected · 2 scored

Expected

Scored

DAL2.29 expected · 0 scored

Expected

Scored

The Stars left 2.3 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

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

Every goal, in order

P3 10:39COLM. Necas1–0
P3 19:02COLN. MacKinnonEN2–0

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

Where the shots came from

COL

39 shots

Final

70 shots

DAL

31 shots

COL DAL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 2 in

shots · 0 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

COLDAL

2 / 7

2.36 xG

High danger

0 / 3

0.79 xG

0 / 7

0.70 xG

Medium

0 / 9

1.04 xG

0 / 39

0.62 xG

Low

0 / 31

0.47 xG

The Stars went 0 for 3 from the slot.

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

In the net

A+

C. DeSmith

+2.7

DAL · 20/21

S. Wedgewood

+2.3

COL · 17/17

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Avalanche shut out the Stars, 2-0

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 7–8no goals

2ndshots 8–4no goals

3rdshots 7–5

10:39COLM. Necas(A. Lehkonen, D. Toews)1–0
19:02COLN. MacKinnonempty net(M. Necas, J. Manson)2–0

score reads COL–DAL

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

3.69

COL chances

Goals their shots were worth

−1.7

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.038

COL puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

55.2%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.69Expected goals2.29

COL 62% of the chance quality

22Shots on goal17

7High-danger chances3

53All attempts (Corsi)43

Adjusted for score: COL 54% · DAL 46%

Faceoffs · DAL won40%off48%neu46%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

COL2 / 7 · 2.36 xG

DAL0 / 3 · 0.79 xG

Medium dangermid-range

COL0 / 7 · 0.70 xG

DAL0 / 9 · 1.04 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

COL0 / 39 · 0.62 xG

DAL0 / 31 · 0.47 xG

DAL went 0-for-9 from medium danger on 1.04 expected goals — 1.0 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

COL

2 G · 3.69 xG · -1.7

DAL

0 G · 2.29 xG · -2.3

01234

COL finished -1.7 against expected, DAL -2.3.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

COL

SNAP1/17

WRIST0/10

TIP IN1/6

BACKHAND0/2

SLAP0/4

OTHER0/14

DAL

SNAP0/16

WRIST0/4

TIP IN0/3

BACKHAND0/6

SLAP0/2

OTHER0/12

COL

DAL

Off the rush

1 G on 21

1.22 xG

0 G on 18

1.35 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 3

0.69 xG

0 G on 4

0.79 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: COL went 1-for-17, DAL 0-for-16.

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

S. Wedgewood

COL · 17/17 · 1.000

+2.3

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/30.8+0.8

Medium0/91.0+1.0

Low0/310.5+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

C. DeSmith

DAL · 20/21 · .952

+2.7

saved above expected

A+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/72.4+0.4

Medium0/70.7+0.7

Low0/390.6+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

70 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

COL

39 shots

Final

70 shots

DAL

31 shots

COL DAL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

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 · 1 A · 3 SOG · 21:19 on ice · +2

D. Toews

#7 · D · COL

0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 23:53 on ice · +2

J. Manson

#42 · D · COL

0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 21:07 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Sat, Apr 4

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 10:11 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

This is as close to a pick'em as you'll find. The model projects Colorado winning 2.7 goals to Dallas's 2.5, giving the Avalanche 54% win probability—enough of an edge to matter, but barely.

The advantage goes to Colorado's underlying play. The Avalanche own 57.0% expected goals and 57.0% Corsi at 5v5, while Dallas sits at 51.0% xG and 47.0% Corsi. Territory will tilt decisively in Colorado's direction. But Dallas's recent form muddies that edge: the Stars are underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10.

Both teams are running hot on PDO. Colorado's sits at 1.021 and Dallas's at 1.024—both unsustainable. Regression is coming.

The goaltending matchup carries risk. J. Oettinger faces this on a back-to-back; expect either a tired starter or Dallas reaching for a backup.

Colorado's offensive punch concentrates on two forwards. Artturi Lehkonen carries 1.11 expected goals per 60 with 18 goals and 22 assists, including 6 high-danger tallies on a 14.9% shooting rate. Ross Colton generates 1.10 xG/60 but has found just 7 goals on 15 assists—his 4.9% shooting rate is dangerously low, a regression candidate if the puck doesn't bounce his way.

Dallas's attack leans heavily on Jason Robertson, who owns 0.96 xG/60 with 25 goals and 21 assists but only 2 high-danger goals, signaling his volume comes from distance. Michael Bunting sits at 0.83 xG/60 with 8 goals and 14 assists in a supporting role.

Defensively, Colorado exposes Nazem Kadri to forechecking pressure. Dallas can attack Tyler Myers at 5v5 depth.

The model says Colorado, but execution wins these coin flips.

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

5-4-1

+4 GD · 2d rest

DAL

3-5-2

-5 GD · 1d 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.
J. Oettinger is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
The Stars are underwater at -5 goal differential over 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

M. Blackwood

2 days rest.684 last start

Backup Scott Wedgewood · +23.1 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

DAL

Expected in goal

J. Oettinger

back-to-back1.000 last start

Backup Jake Oettinger · +5.7 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

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