Columbus beat Philadelphia 4–3 in its last win, with Zach Werenski and Mathieu Olivier putting just one shot each on net. Werenski finished with two assists; Olivier added one. If you’re backing another Blue Jackets win in Dallas, that game offers a useful distinction: Werenski can contribute without shooting often, while Olivier’s shot target doesn’t ask him to create a goal.
For a hypothetical Columbus win, these Blue Jackets parlay picks compare Werenski reaching one point, Olivier recording one shot and Thomas Harley finishing without a point. Harley can still put pucks on net and stay under; Olivier can reach his target without a goal or assist. Each option makes a different demand on the game.
Blue Jackets parlay picks: which contribution fits?
The histories below cover completed appearances with each player’s current club from October 1, 2025 through October 30, 2026, including playoff games where applicable. The all-game column uses the same club, dates and participation rules as the win-or-loss record beside it.
| Player & prop | Odds | With this result | All games |
|---|---|---|---|
| Zach Werenski 1+ point |
−175 | 87.2% 34 of 39 Blue Jackets wins |
64.0% 55 of 86 appearances |
| Mathieu Olivier 1+ shot on goal |
−450 | 92.3% 36 of 39 Blue Jackets wins |
79.2% 57 of 72 appearances |
| Thomas Harley Under 0.5 points |
−200 | 87.2% 34 of 39 Stars losses |
61.8% 55 of 89 appearances |
These individual DraftKings prices were captured on October 31 and can change. The records describe past appearances; they don’t give the probability of a future parlay winning.
Zach Werenski — 1+ point (−175)
Werenski’s point target allows either a goal or an assist. It’s a useful choice if you expect his involvement in Columbus’s offense to matter more than his shot count. The recent Philadelphia win is a good example: two assists from one shot, enough for a point but short of two shots at −350.
The broader record slightly favors the point as well. It cleared thirty-four of thirty-nine Columbus wins and fifty-five of eighty-six appearances overall. Two shots cleared thirty-three of those wins and seventy-three appearances overall. The shooting target has the stronger all-game history, but it costs twice as much relative to the amount won on an individual bet.
This season, the point has cleared four of five Blue Jackets wins and seven of eleven appearances. Two shots has cleared three of five wins and six of eleven appearances. In the 1–0 win over the Rangers, Werenski had one shot and an assist in 32:18. You didn’t need him to shoot twice for him to help produce the deciding goal.
An assist alone is lighter at −135. It cleared thirty-one of thirty-nine wins and forty-eight appearances overall, compared with thirty-four and fifty-five for a point. His goal in January’s 1–0 win over Dallas explains the extra room: he scored without an assist. Those three additional winning clears came from goal-only games. This season, all seven of his point-producing appearances have included an assist, so the recent games haven’t separated the two markets.
The recent 2–1 win over Vegas is the counterexample to relying on involvement alone. Werenski had three shots but no points in 28:15, including 3:23 on the power play. He also went without a point in last season’s 5–1 win at Dallas. Columbus can score and win without putting him on the scoresheet.
He’s expected on the first defensive pair with Damon Severson, and his average ice time is about 28:54 this season versus 26:37 last season. That’s substantial opportunity, with the Vegas miss showing its limit. At −175, the point is a way to allow both finishing and passing without paying for the much heavier two-shot price.
Mathieu Olivier — 1+ shot on goal (−450)
Olivier’s one-shot target has cleared all five Columbus wins this season, but two of those wins landed exactly on one: Vegas and Philadelphia. The lower line matters even when Columbus gets the result you’re backing.
Across seventy-two Blue Jackets appearances, one shot cleared thirty-six of thirty-nine wins and fifty-seven games overall. Two shots at −105 cleared twenty-three of those wins and thirty-four games overall. The price difference is large because you’re asking for much less; the lower target kept thirteen more wins in that history.
His recent Carolina game brought three shots without a point in a 3–2 loss. That loss belongs in the all-game comparison, rather than the winning record, and it illustrates what this choice asks from him: a shot on net, with no goal or assist required. He also had five shots without a point in January’s 1–0 Columbus win over Dallas.
One shot still isn’t automatic. His latest shotless win in this sample was March’s 2–1 victory over Philadelphia, when he played 14:25. He’s also had three shotless appearances this season, including 18:04 in the loss at Minnesota. Those zeroes help explain the gap between his strong winning record and fifty-seven clears in seventy-two appearances overall.
Olivier is expected alongside Charlie Coyle and Matthew Knies on the second line. His average ice time has risen from about 14:14 last season to 15:23 this season. That gives the current record some support, but this is still the most expensive option in the table. Taking one shot instead of two buys room; whether that room is worth −450 is the decision.
Thomas Harley — under 0.5 points (−200)
Harley has finished without a point in all six Dallas losses this season. The under also cleared thirty-four of thirty-nine losses in the broader sample, compared with fifty-five of eighty-nine appearances overall. That difference is the reason to examine it alongside a Columbus win, rather than treating it as a general claim that Harley rarely contributes.
His assist under costs more at −265. It cleared the same thirty-four Dallas losses and fifty-eight appearances overall. In this history, paying more to allow Harley to score added three all-game clears and no additional losing-game clears. This season, both unders have cleared the same eight of thirteen appearances.
The point under has survived active shooting nights. Harley put seven shots on net without a point in the 2–1 loss at Pittsburgh this season. In the latest defeats to New Jersey and Montreal, he had one shot and no points in each, while playing 26:40 and 24:53.
He’s expected on the first defensive pair with Miro Heiskanen. Esa Lindell is on injured reserve, and Harley’s average ice time is up to about 24:55 from 23:09 last season. This case doesn’t depend on him sitting for long stretches or losing his role.
His latest point in a Dallas loss in the sample came against the Islanders in March: an assist in a 2–1 defeat, with 25:11 on the ice and 1:17 on the power play. He also had two assists in a 6–4 loss to New Jersey two days earlier. Those games show why a Stars loss doesn’t settle this bet for you.
The recent all-game record supplies another check. He assisted in five Dallas wins this season, including the 6–3 win over the Islanders. The −200 point under gives you the same losing-game history as the heavier assist under, but it asks him to finish without either kind of point.
Choose the part of a Columbus win you want to back
Werenski’s point and Olivier’s shot make different demands on the Blue Jackets. A passing contribution can carry Werenski’s selection, while Olivier only needs to put one on net. Harley’s under adds a separate requirement: Dallas must get through the game without a point from him, even if he plays another long night.
You can use one of these options without adding the others. If you combine them, check the sportsbook’s actual parlay quote. Their individual prices and overlapping histories don’t establish a combined return or success rate.
Follow the live Blue Jackets–Stars matchup or explore more NHL parlay ideas.
More picks to build around
Unlock our Premium picks. Free.
Get our sharpest picks, team grades, and projected score in your inbox.