Joonas Greaves and the Blue Jackets' defensive structure turned a toss-up game into a rout. Columbus and Chicago created nearly identical dangerous chances — 3.64 to 3.36 in expected goals — yet the scoreline was 4-0, a disconnect explained by goaltending performance.

Greaves was untouchable. The Columbus netminder saved all 21 shots and finished 3.36 goals better than expected, the kind of elite performance that decides close games at this margin. Chicago's S. Knight posted a 0.842 save percentage, stopping 16 of 19 shots. That 3-goal swing in performance separated a blowout from a competitive game.

The Blackhawks' real problem was execution. They fell 3.36 goals short of their expected total, meaning they generated quality chances and failed to convert. High-danger scoring chances favored Columbus 7–4, a modest edge, but in a game decided by goaltending, Chicago's missed opportunities compounded their losses.

Columbus leaned on transition to exploit the chaos. The Blue Jackets scored 4 goals on 21 rush chances, a remarkably high rate from transition play. Two of their goals came from low-danger areas, rare sources that exposed Knight's struggles to close out soft chances.

Sean Monahan's wrist shot from the doorstep (15:33, third period) crystallized the turning point. Once Columbus had daylight, Chicago found no route back.

The model projects a CHI 2.3–2.9 CBJ game with the Blue Jackets at 61% win probability. Columbus owns the underlying play and holds a rest advantage that cascades through 60 minutes.

Columbus dominates at even strength. The Blue Jackets claim 52.0% expected goals share versus Chicago's 42.0%, a margin that reflects consistent superiority in chance creation. They control territory at 51.0% Corsi—expect the puck to tilt their way when play is even. Chicago's 46.0% Corsi confirms they're on their heels in the battle for position.

The rest variable sharpens this. Columbus arrives with three days between games; Chicago has one. That single-day gap compounds through a full 60 minutes. Pace dulls, decision-making frays, and recovery in the third period becomes labored.

Chicago's form deepens the problem. Over the last 10 games, Chicago sits at minus-11 goal differential—not just losses, but defeats by wider margins than victories. Columbus is 9–1–0 in the same stretch. That's a team doing everything right: winning and winning convincingly.

The forward matchup favors Columbus. Tyler Bertuzzi (Chicago) leads offensively at 0.85 expected goals per 60, with 20 goals and 7 high-danger chances, though his 18.0% shooting rate is elevated. Connor Bedard (Chicago) pairs 17 goals with 27 assists at 11.8% shooting, more sustainable ground. Columbus counters with Boone Jenner at 0.98 xG/60 with 11 goals and 21 assists, and Mathieu Olivier at 0.89 xG/60 with 12 goals and 9 assists. Jenner's expected-goals rate exceeds Bertuzzi's—that gap signals Columbus generates better-quality chances per minute.

Goaltending introduces a Chicago liability. S. Knight is on a back-to-back, which typically signals either a backup start or a starter running on fumes. Columbus carries no equivalent warning. A backup is unpredictable; a fatigued Knight compounds Chicago's structural disadvantage against a team that controls puck movement the way Columbus does.

Both teams carry named defensive vulnerabilities—Anton Frondell for Chicago, Conor Garland for Columbus. The balance doesn't rescue Chicago. Columbus's 61% implied probability reflects superiority in the dimensions that decide games: chance creation, territorial control, and rest. Chicago's one-day turnaround and 10-point gap in expected goals don't resolve in a single game.