Jets Collapse in Game 3: Unlucky Bounces or Systemic Problems?

A deep dive into Winnipeg's struggles in their second-round series against the Dallas Stars

The Winnipeg Jets were tied with the Dallas Stars heading into the third period, but some unfortunate bounces—and decisions made by those outside their control—pulled the game away.

Still, the issues started well before the controversial game-winning goal.

Let’s break down Game 3 of the Winnipeg vs. Dallas series.

---

Winnipeg Jets 2 - Dallas Stars 5

I have an untested theory: that people’s perception of how a team is performing correlates more closely with win probabilities than it does with possession stats like Corsi, expected goals, or shot attempts.

You might say “duh,” since win probabilities track more directly with goals, and fans are heavily influenced by goals due to basic cognitive biases—but stick with me.

Shot metrics influence win probabilities, but are also influenced by the score and time left in the game. Each goal and penalty has leverage, which affects both win probability models and fan emotions.

So if you’ve ever found your sense of a game’s flow doesn’t match the xG or Corsi charts, this is probably why.

That’s not to say one perspective is better—just different ways of interpreting the game.

Let’s look at the xGoal worm. I like to toggle between cumulative xG charts (like those at Evolving-Hockey) and “worm” momentum charts (like those at HockeyViz) depending on what I’m trying to see.

Cumulative xG is better for spotting pace and style, while worm charts are better for momentum and game flow.

This game's worm shows that while the game unraveled in the third, there was a slow bleed of chances against throughout. Even when tied, the Jets were flirting with danger.

Looking at player-level Corsi charts, some Jets were outshooting their opponents, while others were buried. The Namestnikov line, for the most part, won their matchups in shot attempts. The top line and fourth line, however, were spending too much time in the defensive zone.

But once you account for shot quality and remove blocked attempts, the picture gets bleaker.

The Stars effectively kept the Jets to the outside and blocked enough shots to suppress meaningful offense. Per HockeyViz’s xGoal breakdowns, it was more about shot quality than quantity.

That's a major issue the Jets must address if they want to stay alive in this series.

Playoff hockey is always a chess match, and Peter DeBoer made the right moves at home, deploying Roope Hintz primarily against Mark Scheifele. That power-vs-power matchup favored Dallas.

During the regular season, Winnipeg was equally strong at home and on the road, ranking top-three in 5v5 goal differential. In fact, they ranked better on the road in expected goal differential.

Still, in a playoff series, when you lose the ability to match lines—and you're a team built around specialization (Namestnikov's line for offense, Lowry's for defense)—things can spiral.

---

Winnipeg Jets Playoff Performance Credit

The basic idea is that a “quality performance” (from the goalie or skaters) was a game where the other party only had to perform at a league-average level to win.

The rest breaks down as:

• Team Win: both had quality performances

• Goalie Steal: team wins with only a quality performance from the goalie

• Skater Steal: team wins with only a quality performance from the skaters

• Team Loss: team loses without any quality performance

• Goalie Loss: team loses despite a quality skater performance

• Skater Loss: team loses despite a quality goalie performance

The Jets seem to lose as a team, every time.

Skaters scored 2 goals (matching their 2.0 xG at HockeyViz and just under 2.57 at Evolving-Hockey), but gave up significantly more expected goals than they created. Not a “quality performance.”

Connor Hellebuyck also allowed about a goal more than expected. No “quality performance” from him either.

---

Winnipeg Jets 5v5 Stats

Series

Quick stat explainer:

• Corsi = all shot attempts (goals, saves, misses, blocks), correlates with puck possession and is predictive.

• xGoals (expected goals) = all unblocked attempts, weighted by shot quality, more directly correlates with scoring.

• Weighted Shots = like Corsi but weights goals more heavily, while regressing toward expected value, most predictive.

I mistakenly wrote about the whole playoffs before diving into Game 3, so my head is a bit skewed. But here’s where we’re at:

The Jets have actually fared better than in their series vs. the Blues in terms of goals. But when it comes to xG differential, they're struggling—especially after Game 3.

As of now, no forward has a positive xG differential in Round 2. That’s troubling.

Maybe Luke Schenn was the glue holding this team together (joking!).

Their top pair has been outshot and outchanced, though they’ve outscored. Meanwhile, others have won the possession battle but lost the goal share. Odd stuff.

Small sample sizes make it hard to draw conclusions, but weighted shots offer the best snapshot over just three games.

Bottom line: Winnipeg’s underperformance isn’t a “swap one player” fix—it’s a team-wide issue. If they want to come back in this series, they need across-the-board improvements.

Playoffs

The Jets’ middle six has arguably been their strength at 5v5 during the postseason—though only Mason Appleton, among that group, has outscored his opposition. Mark Scheifele is the lone player outside that group to do the same.

Poor shot quality explains some of the Jets’ gap between strong shot volume and weak goal differential, but it doesn’t cover the full picture.

We knew heading into the playoffs that Winnipeg’s depth was a relative strength. For the Jets to go deep, they’d need that depth plus Connor Hellebuyck to mask the flaws in their top line. Unfortunately, the bottom six—especially the fourth line—has underwhelmed.

In the regular season, Winnipeg’s fourth line ranked among the best in the league at 5v5. In the playoffs? It’s been a disaster.

As mentioned earlier, both the Jets’ top line and top defensive pair have struggled at 5v5 in the postseason, which was a known risk entering the playoffs. The hope was that depth scoring would balance things out and keep the team competitive, even if their so-called “best line in hockey” didn’t carry the load.

That hasn’t been the case.

The second pair has been the backbone of Winnipeg’s success, led by Dylan Samberg. Colin Miller has looked good in limited minutes, but his usage has been minimal.

And now to look at decision making and actions of individual players with microstats such as scoring chances, zone exits, zone entries, forechecking, and entry denial tracked manually by moi…

Update on Microstats Results