Backcheck
Recap · COL at CHI

Avalanche run the Blackhawks off the ice on the underlying numbers

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

By the ModelJul 12, 8:04 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
COL
Colorado Avalanche
4
Home
CHI
Chicago Blackhawks
1
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

5.25Expected goals2.72
66% share for the better side
49Shot attempts (SOG)20
9High-danger chances5
87Corsi (all attempts)42
Score-adjusted: 63% / 37%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Colorado's 4–1 win had a sharp disagreement with its underlying metrics: the Avalanche went 0–9 on high-danger chances while Soderblom stopped all nine. They won instead on rush volume, scoring 4 goals on 34 rush opportunities—a ratio that overwhelmed Chicago's transition defense.

The Blackhawks held 29% of shot attempts and generated 2.72 expected goals, then squandered even that meager share. Blackwood saved 1.72 goals above expected, suffocating Chicago whenever they approached the net with purpose. Colorado paid for their own inefficiency in the slot: they underperformed their 5.25 xG by 1.25 goals, a consequence of Soderblom's near-perfection on high-danger chances. Yet Colorado's relentless rush attacks, combined with 8 rebound opportunities against a scrambling defense, proved unstoppable.

Chicago never escaped the defensive zone long enough to generate sustained offense. Colorado's volume in transition was the deciding factor.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
COL0 / 9 · 2.13 xG
CHI1 / 5 · 1.22 xG
Medium dangermid-range
COL3 / 20 · 2.20 xG
CHI0 / 9 · 0.96 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
COL1 / 58 · 0.91 xG
CHI0 / 28 · 0.54 xG

COL went 0-for-9 from high danger on 2.13 expected goals — 2.1 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
COL
4 G · 5.25 xG · -1.3
CHI
1 G · 2.72 xG · -1.7
0123456
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
M. BlackwoodCOL
+1.7
A. SoderblomCHI
+1.2

COL finished -1.3 against expected, CHI -1.7 — M. Blackwood (COL) saved 1.7 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
COL
WRIST1/35
SNAP2/12
TIP IN1/9
SLAP0/5
BACKHAND0/1
DEFLECTED0/2
WRAP AROUND0/1
POKE0/0
OTHER0/22
CHI
WRIST1/20
SNAP0/7
TIP IN0/3
SLAP0/1
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/0
WRAP AROUND0/0
POKE0/1
OTHER0/7
COL
CHI
Off the rush
4 G on 34 · 2.62 xG
1 G on 24 · 1.85 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 8 · 1.64 xG
0 G on 2 · 0.23 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: COL went 1-for-35, CHI 1-for-20. COL scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
N. MacKinnon
#29 · C · COL
0 G · 3 A · 4 SOG · 22:12 TOI · +1
M. Necas
#88 · C · COL
1 G · 2 A · 5 SOG · 20:40 TOI · +1
V. Nichushkin
#13 · R · COL
1 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 16:52 TOI · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • M. Blackwood (COL) stopped 1.7 goals above expected.
  • COL couldn't convert — 0/9 on high-danger chances. That won't happen often.
  • COL was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 34 rush chances.
  • COL created 8 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • CHI underperformed xG by 1.7 — wasted quality chances.
  • M. Blackwood (COL) saved 1.7 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • A. Soderblom was a wall on HD chances — 100% SV on 9 high-danger shots.
  • COL power play was dominant — 2 PPG on 8 PP shots (0.62 xG).
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · COL at CHI · 8:30 PM ET

The Avalanche are the model's lean over the Blackhawks — with PDO regression in play

By the ModelJul 12, 8:03 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

61%
COL
Model favorite
61%
39%
COL50CHI

COL by 22 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score COL 3.02.4 CHI; 17% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

COL← edge
edge →CHI
57.0%5v5 xG%42.0%
57.0%Corsi%46.0%
3.03xGF / 602.17
2.30xGA / 602.94
2.63Goals for / gm1.84
1.56Goals against / gm2.41
1.021PDO — luck, not skill0.996

COL holds 6 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.021 vs 0.996) says COL has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model favors Colorado at 3.0–2.4, marking the Avalanche as 61% likely to win. The underlying numbers support that, but one caveat looms: Colorado's PDO has inflated its results.

At 57.0% expected goals and 57.0% Corsi, Colorado dominates the territorial battle. Chicago manages just 42.0% xG% and 46.0% Corsi, a gap mirrored in its minus-5 goal differential over the last 10 games.

Expected goals measure shot location. Corsi counts all attempts regardless of danger. Both favor Colorado. But shooting and save percentage—the luck components in PDO—have run to Colorado's favor at 1.021. Chicago sits at 0.996. These rates almost always regress.

S. Knight and S. Wedgewood both face back-to-backs, raising the question of a backup or tired starter.

Artturi Lehkonen (18G, 22A) leads Colorado with 1.11 expected goals per 60 and 6 high-danger chances. Ross Colton (7G, 15A, 1.10 xG/60) carries a 4.9% shooting rate. Chicago counters with Tyler Bertuzzi (20G, 15A, 0.85 xG/60, 7 HD goals, 18.0% shooting) and Connor Bedard (17G, 27A, 0.82 xG/60, 5 HD goals, 11.8% shooting).

Nazem Kadri is Colorado's defensive weak link; Anton Frondell plays the same role for Chicago. Neither team generates meaningful rebound or high-danger goals—both sit at 0%—which tilts play toward sustained possession and shot volume.

Players to Watch

COL

  • Artturi Lehkonen (18G, 22A, 1.11 xG/60, 6 HD goals, 14.9% shooting)
  • Ross Colton (7G, 15A, 1.10 xG/60, 1 HD goal, 4.9% shooting)

CHI

  • Tyler Bertuzzi (20G, 15A, 0.85 xG/60, 7 HD goals, 18.0% shooting)
  • Connor Bedard (17G, 27A, 0.82 xG/60, 5 HD goals, 11.8% shooting)
Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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
CHI
Tyler Bertuzzi20G 15A
0.85 xG/60 · 7 HD · 18.0% sh
Connor Bedard17G 27A
0.82 xG/60 · 5 HD · 11.8% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters