Motion-blurred skater in a Colorado Avalanche sweater

Breakdown · COL at STL

Avalanche hold off the Blues

FinalTue, Apr 7

COLColorado Avalanche3 STLSt. Louis Blues1

The verdict · earned

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

COL 3 · STL 1

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 10:46 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

High-danger chances tied 6-6, yet Colorado won 3-1. That gap—the Avalanche's conversion against St. Louis's inability to finish—tells the real story. Colorado dominated play (60% of expected goals at 5-on-5, 4.18–2.80) and converted their opportunities; the Blues wasted theirs.

The Avalanche added two rush-chance goals on 23 attempts, extending their advantage. S. Wedgewood stopped 18 of 19 shots (0.947 SV%, plus-1.80 against expected) and saved all six high-danger attempts, producing a dominant display.

St. Louis underperformed their expected goals by 1.80, a clear measure of wasted chances. Robert Thomas scored in the second period from the doorstep, but Colorado's dominance was never threatened. J. Hofer made 34 of 37 saves (0.919 SV%, plus-1.18), but facing 37 shots was simply too much. The Blues held 34% of shot attempts, a deficit they couldn't overcome.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Apr 7

COL

STL

Avalanche hold off the Blues

Chances 4.2 – 2.8Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Avalanche earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

COL

4.18

STL

2.80

60% of the chances40%

The board read COL 3, STL 1. The chances read COL 4.2, STL 2.8.

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

Luck check

COL

−1.2

goals above expected

COL4.18 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

STL2.80 expected · 1 scored

Expected

Scored

The Blues left 1.8 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 16:11COLV. Nichushkin1–0
P1 19:32COLM. Necas2–0
P2 01:40COLV. NichushkinSH3–0
P2 15:38STLR. Thomas3–1

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

Where the shots came from

COL

54 shots

Final

85 shots

STL

31 shots

COL STL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 3 in

shots · 1 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

COLSTL

1 / 6

1.78 xG

High danger

0 / 6

1.38 xG

2 / 13

1.57 xG

Medium

1 / 9

1.02 xG

0 / 54

0.83 xG

Low

0 / 36

0.40 xG

The Blues went 0 for 6 from the slot.

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

In the net

S. Wedgewood

+1.8

COL · 18/19

B+

J. Hofer

+1.2

STL · 34/37

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Avalanche hold off the Blues

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 17–2

16:11COLV. Nichushkin(D. Toews, S. Malinski)1–0
19:32COLM. Necas(N. MacKinnon, A. Lehkonen)2–0

2ndshots 14–7

01:40COLV. Nichushkinshorthanded(B. Nelson)3–0
15:38STLR. Thomas(T. Lindstein, J. Snuggerud)3–1

3rdshots 6–10no goals

score reads COL–STL

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

4.18

COL chances

Goals their shots were worth

−1.2

Finishing

Goals below what those chances were worth

1.022

COL puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

58.9%

Shot attempts

Over half — they had the puck more

Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.18Expected goals2.80

COL 60% of the chance quality

37Shots on goal19

6High-danger chances6

73All attempts (Corsi)51

Adjusted for score: COL 53% · STL 47%

Faceoffs · STL won44%off40%neu54%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

COL1 / 6 · 1.78 xG

STL0 / 6 · 1.38 xG

Medium dangermid-range

COL2 / 13 · 1.57 xG

STL1 / 9 · 1.02 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

COL0 / 54 · 0.83 xG

STL0 / 36 · 0.40 xG

STL went 0-for-6 from high danger on 1.38 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

COL

3 G · 4.18 xG · -1.2

STL

1 G · 2.80 xG · -1.8

012345

COL finished -1.2 against expected, STL -1.8.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

COL

WRIST1/21

SLAP0/14

TIP IN1/8

SNAP0/5

BACKHAND0/3

BETWEEN LEGS1/1

DEFLECTED0/1

BAT0/1

WRAP AROUND0/0

OTHER0/19

STL

WRIST1/20

SLAP0/2

TIP IN0/1

SNAP0/3

BACKHAND0/4

BETWEEN LEGS0/0

DEFLECTED0/0

BAT0/0

WRAP AROUND0/1

OTHER0/20

COL

STL

Off the rush

2 G on 23

2.47 xG

1 G on 20

1.94 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 1

0.18 xG

0 G on 1

0.29 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: COL went 1-for-21, STL 1-for-20. COL 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

S. Wedgewood

COL · 18/19 · .947

+1.8

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger0/61.4+1.4

Medium1/91.0+0.0

Low0/360.4+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

J. Hofer

STL · 34/37 · .919

+1.2

saved above expected

B+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/61.8+0.8

Medium2/131.6-0.4

Low0/540.8+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

85 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

COL

54 shots

Final

85 shots

STL

31 shots

COL STL GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — COL left, STL 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

V. Nichushkin

#13 · R · COL

2 G · 0 A · 6 SOG · 15:45 on ice · +2

R. Thomas

#18 · C · STL

1 G · 0 A · 1 SOG · 24:04 on ice

D. Toews

#7 · D · COL

0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 23:44 on ice · +2

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Apr 7

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 12, 10:43 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 Colorado at 55% win probability—essentially a toss-up. MoneyPuck's expected-score spread is 2.7 to 2.4 Avalanche.

Colorado owns the underlying play. At 5v5, the Avalanche generate 57.0% of expected goals against 49.0% for St. Louis. Their Corsi advantage—57.0% to 48.0%—means territorial control. This is dominance, not luck.

But Colorado is running hot. The Avalanche sit at 1.021 PDO; St. Louis is at 1.000. One team's results exceed its underlying numbers, the other's don't. That gap will shrink. On a night when Colorado's luck normalizes, the outcome could flip.

J. Hofer and M. Blackwood both face back-to-backs, introducing fatigue neither team fully controls.

Artturi Lehkonen drives Colorado's offense: 1.11 expected goals per 60 minutes, 18 goals, 22 assists, 14.9% shooting rate. Ross Colton mirrors the xG/60 (1.10) but converts at just 4.9%—7 goals on 15 assists. St. Louis counters with Jimmy Snuggerud (0.86 xG/60, 15 goals, 22 assists, 11.9% shooting) and Dylan Holloway (0.82 xG/60, 13 goals, 24 assists, 10.8% shooting). Snuggerud and Holloway offer secondary scoring, but neither reaches Lehkonen's tier.

Colorado's play-driving edge is real. They control shot generation and territory. St. Louis plays at expected value, which is stable but not explosive. Ordinarily, Colorado's dominance would be decisive. But unsustainable PDO is a clock—the Avalanche are running borrowed time. When that normalizes, a St. Louis team operating from expected value might find room to play. The model sees it clearly: a true coin flip, and flips go both ways.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

COL 55%

55%

COL

Model favorite

55%

45%

COL50STL

COL by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score COL 2.7–2.4 STL; 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 →STL

57.0%49.0%

57.0%48.0%

3.032.34

2.302.40

2.632.00

1.562.12

1.0211.000

COL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.021 vs 1.000) says COL has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

COL

6-3-1

+12 GD · 1d rest

STL

6-2-2

+11 GD · 1d rest

1.021

COL PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.000

STL 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 49.0%.
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 49.0%.
The Avalanche drive Corsi at 57.0% — expect territorial tilt.
J. Hofer is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
M. Blackwood is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
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

M. Blackwood

back-to-back.897 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.

STL

Expected in goal

J. Hofer

back-to-back.929 last start

Backup Joel Hofer · +11.7 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

STL

Jimmy Snuggerud15G 22A

0.86 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.9% sh

Dylan Holloway13G 24A

0.82 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.8% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page