Motion-blurred skater in a gold and black sweater

Breakdown · BUF at BOS

Bruins steal one from the Sabres against the run of play

Final / OTThu, Oct 30

The verdict · stolen

The Bruins stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 6.02–2.95 and won anyway.

BUF 3 · BOS 4

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 1:50 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 won 4–3 in overtime despite losing the expected-goals battle 2.95–6.02. Buffalo controlled two-thirds of the shot quality. This was a win written by goaltending, not play.

J. Korpisalo (BOS) saved 3.0 goals above expected on 37 of 40 shots (0.925 SV%). That's elite performance under pressure. A. Lyon (BUF) conceded 1.05 more than expected on just 18 saves (0.818 SV%), a mismatch between workload and execution. Buffalo generated 10 high-danger chances to Boston's 2 — a 5-to-1 advantage — yet finished a goal behind. The per-shot quality gap was stark: Buffalo's xG per shot (0.087) nearly doubled Boston's (0.050). Puck luck reversed the outcome.

Boston found their edge on the rush, converting 3 of 27 chances while Buffalo scored 2 of 30. Thin margins, but Korpisalo's save rate was the difference.

Marat Khusnutdinov's snap shot from the high slot at 02:07 of overtime decided it.

Three Stars

R. Dahlin (BUF) — 1G, 1A in 25:49
D. Pastrnak (BOS) — 1G, 1A in 20:17
A. Tuch (BUF) — 1G, 1A in 19:19

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · OT · Oct 30

BUF

BOS

Bruins steal one from the Sabres against the run of play

Chances 6.0 – 3.0Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Sabres deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value

BUF

6.02

BOS

2.95

67% of the chances33%

The board read BUF 3, BOS 4. The chances read BUF 6.0, BOS 3.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations

Luck check

BOS

+1.1

goals above expected

BOS2.95 expected · 4 scored

Expected

Scored

BUF6.02 expected · 3 scored

Expected

Scored

The Sabres left 3.0 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season

Every goal, in order

P1 13:07BOSM. GeekiePP0–1
P1 15:07BOSD. Pastrnak0–2
P2 16:01BUFR. DahlinPP1–2
P2 19:39BOSM. Kastelic1–3
P3 07:00BUFJ. Doan2–3
P3 14:25BUFA. Tuch3–3
OT 02:07BOSM. Khusnutdinov3–4

NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model

Where the shots came from

BUF

61 shots

Final

101 shots

BOS

40 shots

BUF BOS GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 3 in

shots · 4 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

BUFBOS

2 / 10

2.53 xG

High danger

1 / 2

0.72 xG

0 / 20

2.62 xG

Medium

3 / 21

1.88 xG

1 / 39

0.88 xG

Low

0 / 36

0.35 xG

High-danger looks: BUF 2 of 10, BOS 1 of 2.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance

In the net

A+

J. Korpisalo

+3.0

BOS · 37/40

D-

A. Lyon

−1.1

BUF · 18/22

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Bruins steal one from the Sabres against the run of play

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 13–5

13:07BOSM. Geekiepower play(D. Pastrnak, P. Zacha)0–1
15:07BOSD. Pastrnak0–2

2ndshots 16–9

16:01BUFR. Dahlinpower play(Z. Benson, T. Thompson)1–2
19:39BOSM. Kastelic(T. Jeannot, S. Kuraly)1–3

3rdshots 11–5

07:00BUFJ. Doan(A. Tuch, O. Power)2–3
14:25BUFA. Tuch(R. Dahlin)3–3

OTshots 0–3

02:07BOSM. Khusnutdinov(F. Minten)3–4

score reads BUF–BOS

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

2.95

BOS chances

Goals their shots were worth

+1.1

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.024

BOS puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

46.1%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

6.02Expected goals2.95

BUF 67% of the chance quality

40Shots on goal22

10High-danger chances2

69All attempts (Corsi)59

Adjusted for score: BUF 58% · BOS 42%

Faceoffs · BOS won64%off44%neu60%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

BUF2 / 10 · 2.53 xG

BOS1 / 2 · 0.72 xG

Medium dangermid-range

BUF0 / 20 · 2.62 xG

BOS3 / 21 · 1.88 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

BUF1 / 39 · 0.88 xG

BOS0 / 36 · 0.35 xG

BUF went 0-for-20 from medium danger on 2.62 expected goals — 2.6 left on the table.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

BUF

3 G · 6.02 xG · -3.0

BOS

4 G · 2.95 xG · +1.1

01234567

BUF finished -3.0 against expected, BOS +1.1.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

BUF

SNAP0/31

WRIST1/17

TIP IN0/4

SLAP1/3

BACKHAND0/2

POKE0/1

WRAP AROUND0/1

DEFLECTED0/1

BAT1/1

OTHER0/8

BOS

SNAP2/8

WRIST1/21

TIP IN0/5

SLAP0/3

BACKHAND0/2

POKE1/1

WRAP AROUND0/0

DEFLECTED0/0

BAT0/0

OTHER0/19

BUF

BOS

Off the rush

2 G on 30

2.58 xG

3 G on 27

1.91 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 10

2.27 xG

1 G on 2

0.56 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: BUF went 0-for-31, BOS 2-for-8. BOS 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

A. Lyon

BUF · 18/22 · .818

-1.1

saved above expected

D-

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/20.7-0.3

Medium3/211.9-1.1

Low0/360.3+0.3

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

J. Korpisalo

BOS · 37/40 · .925

+3.0

saved above expected

A+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger2/102.5+0.5

Medium0/202.6+2.6

Low1/390.9-0.1

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

101 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates

BUF

61 shots

Final

101 shots

BOS

40 shots

BUF BOS GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

Each club shoots toward its own end — BUF left, BOS 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

R. Dahlin

#26 · D · BUF

1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 25:49 on ice

D. Pastrnak

#88 · R · BOS

1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 20:17 on ice · +1

A. Tuch

#89 · R · BUF

1 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 19:19 on ice · +1

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Thu, Oct 30

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 1:49 PMEdited 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 model projects a 2.6–2.6 game with the Sabres at 50% win probability. This is a true coin flip.

Buffalo arrives with better form: 4-4-2 over their last 10 games. Boston has imploded in the same window, posting an -8 goal differential. But the underlying play is similarly tight. The Sabres own the 5v5 battle at 50.0% expected goals percentage versus Boston's 47.0%, but both teams sit at 49.0% Corsi%, meaning shot volume is equal. That xG edge is the only genuine separation.

Both teams are running hot. Boston's PDO of 1.023 and Buffalo's 1.020 indicate both are outperforming their underlying metrics; regression is coming for both, marginally sooner for Boston.

Players to Watch

Buffalo

Jason Zucker: 1.07 xG/60, 14G–14A, 6 high-danger goals, 15.1% shooting

Josh Doan: 1.01 xG/60, 15G–18A, 2 high-danger goals, 11.5% shooting

Boston

Viktor Arvidsson: 1.04 xG/60, 18G–24A, 2 high-danger goals, 13.0% shooting

Tanner Jeannot: 0.75 xG/60, 6G–14A, 2 high-danger goals, 8.3% shooting

Zucker and Doan operate at nearly identical shot-quality rates; Arvidsson closes gaps through volume and sits at 18 goals despite just two high-danger conversions. Jeannot occupies a smaller role. Buffalo's xG% edge suggests marginal offensive efficiency, but not margin of victory. Both teams' PDO means regression is coming; the statistical case for Buffalo is modest. The 50% projection reflects what it actually is: no clear winner. Treat this as permission to ignore consensus and watch the play.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

BUF 50%

50%

BUF

Model favorite

50%

BUF50BOS

BUF by 0 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score BUF 2.6–2.6 BOS; 18% 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

BUF← edge

edge →BOS

50.0%47.0%

49.0%49.0%

2.552.39

2.552.67

2.352.22

1.901.82

1.0201.023

BUF holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.020 vs 1.023) says BOS has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

BUF

4-4-2

-1 GD · 2d rest

BOS

3-7-0

-8 GD · 2d rest

1.020

BUF PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

1.023

BOS PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Where the edges live

The Sabres own the underlying play — 50.0% 5v5 xG vs 47.0%.

Regression watch

The Bruins' PDO is 1.023 — running hot, expect some regression.
The Sabres' PDO is 1.020 — running hot, expect some regression.

Things to watch

The Sabres own the underlying play — 50.0% 5v5 xG vs 47.0%.
The Sabres are the hotter team by points pace (4-4-2 in their last 10).
The Bruins are underwater at -8 goal differential over their last 10.
The Bruins' PDO is 1.023 — running hot, expect some regression.

Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score

BUF

Expected in goal

A. Lyon

2 days rest.897 last start

Backup Ukko-Pekka Luukkonen · +10.5 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

BOS

Expected in goal

J. Korpisalo

2 days rest.943 last start

Backup Jeremy Swayman · +28.8 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

Lineups are the players who dressed in each club's last game, with their minutes; clubs confirm tonight's at warm-up. Every player this preview names was in that lineup.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

NHL stats API · our xG

BUF

Jason Zucker14G 14A

1.07 xG/60 · 6 HD · 15.1% sh

Josh Doan15G 18A

1.01 xG/60 · 2 HD · 11.5% sh

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

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page