Backcheck
Recap · WPG at CBJ

Jets hold off the Blue Jackets

The Jets won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

By the ModelJul 12, 10:20 AMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
WPG
Winnipeg Jets
2
Home
CBJ
Columbus Blue Jackets
1
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

2.71Expected goals2.61
51% share for the better side
26Shot attempts (SOG)16
4High-danger chances5
60Corsi (all attempts)50
Score-adjusted: 56% / 44%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Hellebuyck was the only difference. Columbus generated more high-danger chances (five versus four) and nearly matched Winnipeg's expected goals (2.61–2.71), yet lost 2–1 because Hellebuyck saved all five high-danger looks.

The Blue Jackets held 38 percent of shot attempts (16–26) but created nearly as many quality opportunities as the Jets. Five high-danger scoring chances yielded zero goals—an outcome that won't repeat. Hellebuyck faced 16 total shots and saved 15 (0.938 SV%), finishing 1.61 goals above expected.

Kyle Connor's wrist shot from the high slot (P3, 10:58) provided the margin. Winnipeg generated 2.71 xG and scored two (underperforming by 0.71). Columbus generated 2.61 xG and scored one (underperforming by 1.61). The gap came down to goaltending: Hellebuyck denied the Blue Jackets at their most dangerous. J. Greaves (CBJ) saved 24 of 26 shots (0.923 SV%), only beating expected by 0.71.

Winnipeg won on elite performance when it mattered most, not on possession or overall chance creation.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
WPG1 / 4 · 0.92 xG
CBJ0 / 5 · 1.15 xG
Medium dangermid-range
WPG1 / 10 · 1.15 xG
CBJ1 / 7 · 0.80 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
WPG0 / 46 · 0.63 xG
CBJ0 / 38 · 0.66 xG

CBJ went 0-for-5 from high danger on 1.15 expected goals — 1.1 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
WPG
2 G · 2.71 xG · -0.7
CBJ
1 G · 2.61 xG · -1.6
01234
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
C. HellebuyckWPG
+1.6
J. GreavesCBJ
+0.7

WPG finished -0.7 against expected, CBJ -1.6 — C. Hellebuyck (WPG) saved 1.6 goals above expected.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
WPG
SNAP0/10
WRIST2/14
TIP IN0/6
BACKHAND0/3
SLAP0/3
BETWEEN LEGS0/1
WRAP AROUND0/1
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/21
CBJ
SNAP1/20
WRIST0/5
TIP IN0/6
BACKHAND0/3
SLAP0/2
BETWEEN LEGS0/0
WRAP AROUND0/0
DEFLECTED0/0
OTHER0/14
WPG
CBJ
Off the rush
1 G on 19 · 1.70 xG
1 G on 21 · 1.55 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3 · 0.54 xG
0 G on 3 · 0.65 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: WPG went 0-for-10, CBJ 1-for-20.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
M. Scheifele
#55 · C · WPG
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 22:39 TOI · +2
K. Connor
#81 · L · WPG
2 G · 0 A · 2 SOG · 21:27 TOI · +2
N. Pionk
#4 · D · WPG
0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 23:56 TOI
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • WPG generated higher-quality looks than the shot total suggests.
  • C. Hellebuyck (WPG) stopped 1.6 goals above expected.
  • CBJ couldn't convert — 0/5 on high-danger chances. That won't happen often.
  • CBJ created 3 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • WPG created 3 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • CBJ underperformed xG by 1.6 — wasted quality chances.
  • C. Hellebuyck (WPG) saved 1.6 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • C. Hellebuyck was a wall on HD chances — 100% SV on 5 high-danger shots.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · WPG at CBJ · 7:00 PM ET

The Blue Jackets are the model's lean over the Jets on the rest edge

By the ModelJul 12, 10:18 AMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

56%
CBJ
Model favorite
44%
56%
WPG50CBJ

CBJ by 12 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score WPG 2.42.7 CBJ; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

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

Tale of the tape

WPG← edge
edge →CBJ
48.0%5v5 xG%52.0%
49.0%Corsi%51.0%
2.34xGF / 602.63
2.55xGA / 602.43
1.90Goals for / gm2.12
2.10Goals against / gm1.98
0.998PDO — luck, not skill1.003

CBJ holds 6 of 6 process categories — and PDO (0.998 vs 1.003) says CBJ has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

The model projects Columbus at 56% win probability, with an expected final score of 2.7-2.4 in favor of the Blue Jackets.

That edge rests on two pillars. First, Columbus dominates the underlying play. The Blue Jackets generate 52.0% of 5v5 expected goals and 51.0% of 5v5 Corsi, advantages that show up consistently in models that matter. Winnipeg's 48.0% xG and 49.0% Corsi mark them as the lesser force when the scoreboard sits frozen.

Second—and more immediate—is the rest gap. Columbus arrives on two days' recovery. Winnipeg plays tonight on zero. That compounds the underlying edge.

Winnipeg's strengths are narrow and player-dependent. Nino Niederreiter carries a 0.87 xG/60 at 6 goals and 6 assists, with three hard-chance goals and an 8.6% shooting rate. Kyle Connor is deeper into dominance: 0.83 xG/60 but 25 goals and 30 assists, sustaining a 13.0% shooting rate that outlasts most noise. Connor's shooting percentage is the thing to monitor—if it normalizes downward, Winnipeg's offense compresses.

Columbus inverts the profile. Boone Jenner posts 0.98 xG/60 across 11 goals and 21 assists with two hard-chance goals and 9.6% shooting. Mathieu Olivier sits at 0.89 xG/60 with 12 goals and 9 assists, one hard-chance goal, and 13.3% shooting—comparable efficiency to Connor but on a tighter point total. The Blue Jackets' attack comes wider and deeper.

Defensively, both teams carry identified weak points—Winnipeg's Colin Miller and Columbus's Conor Garland. Neither team has recorded a hard-chance goal or rebound goal this season, a metric too sparse for confident reading.

The model assumes Columbus's advantage in shot quality and puck possession persists, and that rest matters at the margins. Whether rest shifts the outcome by a full goal or a fraction of one depends on how much Winnipeg's zero days matter—a real variable, but secondary to the structural edge in play. Columbus is the team that should win. The model says so. Rest accelerates that timetable.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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
CBJ
Boone Jenner11G 21A
0.98 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.6% sh
Mathieu Olivier12G 9A
0.89 xG/60 · 1 HD · 13.3% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters