Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a Vegas Golden Knights sweater
← Thu, Oct 16 · the slate
Breakdown · BOS at VGK

Golden Knights run the Bruins off the ice on the underlying numbers

FinalThu, Oct 16
BOSBoston Bruins5VGKVegas Golden Knights6
The verdict · earned

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

BOS 5 · VGK 6
◆ By the ModelJun 16, 2:56 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

The Bruins absorbed a convincing defeat despite scoring five goals. Boston overperformed their expected goals by 2.16—the only thing that kept them in a 5–6 loss to Vegas. VGK controlled the underlying play so thoroughly that Vegas' one-goal margin understates their dominance.

VGK won the underlying metrics decisively. They commanded 68% of 5v5 expected goals (5.89–2.84), held 61% of shot attempts (37–24), and created far more dangerous chances (12 high-danger chances to Boston's 5). More pointedly: VGK generated 0.079 expected goals per shot; Boston managed 0.044. Vegas was lethal where it mattered.

Boston's overperformance reveals the gap between execution and opportunity. The Bruins scored twice from low-danger areas—shots that required exceptional finishes or, more likely, fortune. Vegas, conversely, converted their advantages. VGK was lethal in transition, scoring three goals from 33 rush chances, and crashed the net effectively, creating six rebound opportunities and converting three. That's process translating into results.

The turning point came early: Michael Eyssimont's wrist shot from the top of the circles (P3, 05:12) set the tone for Vegas' net-front assault.

VGK's power play was equally dominant, recording two goals on 17 shots (2.62 expected goals). A. Schmid, Vegas' goalie, finished with 19 saves on 24 shots (0.792 SV%), conceding 2.16 goals more than expected—a reflection of Boston's fortune more than Schmid's performance. J. Swayman (Boston) made 31 saves on 37 shots (0.838 SV%), exemplifying the Bruins' reliance on goaltending to stay competitive.

Vegas ran Boston off the ice. The final score flattered Boston's play.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Oct 16
BOS
5
VGK
6

Golden Knights run the Bruins off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 2.8 – 5.9Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Golden Knights earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
BOS
2.84
VGK
5.89
32% of the chances68%

The board read BOS 5, VGK 6. The chances read BOS 2.8, VGK 5.9.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
VGK
+0.1
goals above expected
VGK5.89 expected · 6 scored
Expected
Scored
BOS2.84 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored

Both sides finished close to what their chances were worth. This one was earned on the ice.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 02:05BOST. Jeannot1–0
  2. P1 03:35VGKP. Dorofeyev1–1
  3. P1 16:44BOSN. Zadorov2–1
  4. P1 18:33VGKC. Reinhardt2–2
  5. P2 04:14VGKJ. Eichel2–3
  6. P2 06:35VGKT. HertlPP2–4
  7. P2 08:15BOSD. PastrnakPP3–4
+4 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
BOS
41 shots
5
Final
93 shots
VGK
52 shots
6
BOS attackVGK attack
BOS VGK Goal
41
shots · 5 in
52
shots · 6 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
BOSVGK
1 / 5
1.08 xG
High danger
2 / 12
3.04 xG
2 / 12
1.17 xG
Medium
3 / 18
2.20 xG
2 / 48
0.59 xG
Low
1 / 45
0.64 xG

The Golden Knights buried 2 of 12 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
C
J. Swayman
−0.1
BOS · 31/37
F
A. Schmid
−2.2
VGK · 19/24
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Golden Knights run the Bruins off the ice on the underlying numbers

A model, not a newsroom. Every number on these frames comes from the NHL's play-by-play and our own models. Nothing was watched, guessed or heard from anyone.

Read the full breakdown
backcheckreport.com
01 / 08 · Final
Every goal, in order

How it happened

NHL play-by-play
1stshots 9–11
  1. 02:05BOST. Jeannot(C. McAvoy, M. Eyssimont)1–0
  2. 03:35VGKP. Dorofeyev(M. Marner, Z. Whitecloud)1–1
  3. 16:44BOSN. Zadorov(H. Jokiharju, S. Kuraly)2–1
  4. 18:33VGKC. Reinhardt(B. Hutton, C. Sissons)2–2
2ndshots 7–13
  1. 04:14VGKJ. Eichel(M. Stone, I. Barbashev)2–3
  2. 06:35VGKT. Hertlpower play(P. Dorofeyev, M. Stone)2–4
  3. 08:15BOSD. Pastrnakpower play(M. Geekie, E. Lindholm)3–4
  4. 18:24VGKW. Karlssonshorthanded(M. Stone)3–5
3rdshots 8–13
  1. 02:19VGKW. Karlssonpower play(M. Marner, J. Eichel)3–6
  2. 04:05BOSM. Kastelic(S. Kuraly)4–6
  3. 05:12BOSM. Eyssimont(M. Lohrei)5–6

score reads BOS–VGK

Source · NHL play-by-play (api-web.nhle.com)
Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
5.89
VGK chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.1
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.003
VGK puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
53.6%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.84Expected goals5.89
VGK 68% of the chance quality
24Shots on goal37
5High-danger chances12
65All attempts (Corsi)75
Adjusted for score: BOS 49% · VGK 51%
Faceoffs · VGK won48%off48%neu56%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
BOS1 / 5 · 1.08 xG
VGK2 / 12 · 3.04 xG
Medium dangermid-range
BOS2 / 12 · 1.17 xG
VGK3 / 18 · 2.20 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
BOS2 / 48 · 0.59 xG
VGK1 / 45 · 0.64 xG

BOS went 2-for-48 from low danger on 0.59 expected goals — 1.4 above expected.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
BOS
5 G · 2.84 xG · +2.2
VGK
6 G · 5.89 xG · +0.1
01234567

BOS finished +2.2 against expected, VGK +0.1.

Source · Backcheck xG model
Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
BOS
WRIST4/24
SNAP1/7
SLAP0/4
TIP IN0/5
BACKHAND0/0
DEFLECTED0/0
BAT0/1
OTHER0/24
VGK
WRIST3/28
SNAP1/12
SLAP0/5
TIP IN0/2
BACKHAND1/3
DEFLECTED1/2
BAT0/0
OTHER0/23
BOS
VGK
Off the rush
1 G on 25
1.96 xG
3 G on 33
4.25 xG
Off rebounds
1 G on 2
0.26 xG
3 G on 6
0.92 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: BOS went 4-for-24, VGK 3-for-28. VGK scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
New to these numbers?

Two things happened in this game: who created the better chances, and who put the puck in the net. They are not the same thing, and this page separates them on purpose.

The one to watch is expected goals— the best single read on who deserved to win. When it disagrees with the scoreboard, that disagreement is usually the story. Nothing here is a projection; every figure is computed from this game's play-by-play. Full glossary →

xG
Expected goals. Every shot scored by how often that exact look goes in. 2.5 xG means the chances were worth about two and a half goals.
HD
High-danger chances — shots from the slot and the crease, where shots actually become goals.
Corsi
Every shot attempt, including the ones that missed or got blocked. A rough read on who had the puck.
Adj.
Score-adjusted. Teams that trail shoot more and teams that lead sit back, so this corrects the attempt count for the scoreboard.
GSAx
Goals saved above expected. A positive number means the goalie stopped more than an average goalie would have on those shots.
PDO
Shooting % plus save % — a luck gauge. It sits near 1.000 over a season, so a game far from it usually means the bounces decided it.
Shot by shot

In the net

Graded on goals saved above expected
J. Swayman
BOS · 31/37 · .838
-0.1
saved above expected
C
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/123.0+1.0
Medium3/182.2-0.8
Low1/450.6-0.4

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

A. Schmid
VGK · 19/24 · .792
-2.2
saved above expected
F
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger1/51.1+0.1
Medium2/121.2-0.8
Low2/480.6-1.4

A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5

93 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
BOS
41 shots
5
Final
93 shots
VGK
52 shots
6
BOS attackVGK attack
BOS VGK Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — BOS left, VGK right — the way you would watch it. A dot's size is how dangerous the look was, from distance and angle; it is a proxy for shot quality, not the xG model the article is written from. Hover a dot for the shooter and the clock.

Ranked from the box score

Three stars

Points first
Three stars · computed, not voted
M. Stone
#61 · R · —
0 G · 3 A · 6 SOG · 22:30 on ice · +1
J. Eichel
#9 · C · —
1 G · 1 A · 9 SOG · 24:11 on ice
M. Marner
#93 · R · —
0 G · 2 A · 0 SOG · 21:07 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Thu, Oct 16
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelSep 22, 3:38 AMEdited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

Vegas is the model's play here. The projection pins a 2.8–3.5 game with the Golden Knights at 60% win probability—a meaningful edge even before PDO regression enters.

The underlying dominance justifies it. Vegas owns 54.5% 5v5 expected goals against Boston's 46.7%, and controls territory at 52.3% Corsi. That's not luck; it's territorial tilt and shot volume. The Bruins will spend the evening defending their end.

But Boston has Viktor Arvidsson, who matters. Arvidsson sits at 18G 24A with 1.04 xG/60 and 2 high-danger goals—a 13.0% shooting rate that's propping his goal total. He's their offensive engine, and Vegas will have to spend real resources shutting him down. If Arvidsson can stay hot, Boston's shooting luck extends the game. Tanner Jeannot, at 0.75 xG/60 with 6G 14A and an 8.3% shooting rate, is the secondary scorer to watch; he's got 2 high-danger goals but relies on conversion volume.

Vegas counters with Brandon Saad and Tomas Hertl. Saad (3G 6A, 0.91 xG/60, 1 high-danger goal, 4.1% shooting) is the assignment for Boston's shutdown line, and his low shooting rate suggests he's due for positive variance—or his scoring window is narrower than expected. Hertl (5G 17A, 0.88 xG/60, 1 high-danger goal, 4.3% shooting) is the secondary threat, similarly cold by shooting percentage. Both favor Vegas's territorial advantage.

The PDO story cuts both ways. Vegas is running 0.983—cold, and due for positive regression when their underlying play finally translates to results. Boston is at 1.022, running hot, and regression will sting. Over a 60-minute span, that's real leverage for Vegas: Boston's shooting luck is borrowed, Vegas's superior underlying play gets to normalize.

The model sees Vegas winning territory, driving chances, and getting paid for it when PDO evens out. Boston can steal this on Arvidsson's heat and Bruins shooting luck holding, but they're playing in Vegas's game.

Season rates in this preview are from 2025-26 — this season's sample isn't live yet.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

VGK 60%
60%
VGK
Model favorite
40%
60%
BOS50VGK

VGK by 20 points of win probability — a clear lean. Projected score BOS 2.8–3.5 VGK; 16% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season rates · 5v5

Tale of the tape

NHL stats API · our xG
BOS← edge
edge →VGK
46.7%54.5%
49.0%52.3%
2.973.26
3.392.71
3.273.22
3.012.95
1.0220.983

VGK holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.022 vs 0.983) says BOS has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · No games yet
BOS
0-0-0
+0 GD · 0d rest
VGK
0-0-0
+0 GD · 0d rest
1.022
BOS PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
0.983
VGK PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
What decides it

Keys to the game

TACTICALVGK

Shutdown Assignment: Golden Knights

Key matchup: Neutralize Viktor Arvidsson (18G, 1.04 xG/60, 2 HD goals)

Key matchup: Neutralize Viktor Arvidsson (18G, 1.04 xG/60, 2 HD goals)

TACTICALBOS

Shutdown Assignment: Bruins

Key matchup: Neutralize Brandon Saad (3G, 0.91 xG/60, 1 HD goals)

Key matchup: Neutralize Brandon Saad (3G, 0.91 xG/60, 1 HD goals)

WARNINGBOS

Exploitable minutes: Elias Lindholm

Elias Lindholm is on ice for 2.80 xGA/60 and 40 high-danger shots against this season.

Hunt matchups against Elias Lindholm's shifts with the top line.

WARNINGVGK

Exploitable minutes: Rasmus Andersson

Rasmus Andersson is on ice for 2.49 xGA/60 and 68 high-danger shots against this season.

Hunt matchups against Rasmus Andersson's shifts with the top line.

Where the edges live
  • The Golden Knights own the underlying play — 54.5% 5v5 xG vs 46.7%.
  • The Golden Knights drive Corsi at 52.3% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.
  • The Bruins' PDO is 1.022 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Golden Knights own the underlying play — 54.5% 5v5 xG vs 46.7%.
  • The Golden Knights drive Corsi at 52.3% — expect territorial tilt.
  • The Golden Knights' PDO is 0.983 — running cold, due for positive regression.
Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG
BOS
Viktor Arvidsson18G 24A
1.04 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.0% sh
Tanner Jeannot6G 14A
0.75 xG/60 · 2 HD · 8.3% sh
VGK
Brandon Saad3G 6A
0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.1% sh
Tomas Hertl5G 17A
0.88 xG/60 · 1 HD · 4.3% sh
Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page