Motion-blurred skater in a gold and black sweater
Breakdown · OTT at BOS

Bruins edge the Senators in overtime

The verdict · earned

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

OTT 2 · BOS 3
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:46 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 Senators generated more high-danger chances (5 to 4) yet lost 3-2 in overtime. That gap between opportunity and outcome is why Boston's 55% share of 5v5 expected goals (3.23–2.61) held firm.

Korpisalo (BOS) was the difference. He stopped all five Senators high-danger shots on 22 total saves, posting a 0.909 save percentage (+0.61 versus expected). Ullmark (OTT) turned aside 22/25 at 0.880, a respectable line against a team with better finishing.

Boston's edge was ruthless: 2/4 on high-danger chances (50%). Ottawa: 0/5. The Senators excelled elsewhere—two goals on 20 rush chances, three rebound opportunities generated—but the high-danger math did not follow. In a one-goal game, that conversion gap was everything.

Pavel Zacha ended it at 04:54 of overtime, poking home from the doorstep.

Boston also controlled shot attempts 25–22 (53% share). No single metric ran away, but the Bruins' finishing at close range while Ottawa's misfired sealed the result.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · OT · Nov 6
OTT
2
BOS
3

Bruins edge the Senators in overtime

Chances 2.6 – 3.2Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Bruins earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
OTT
2.61
BOS
3.23
45% of the chances55%

The board read OTT 2, BOS 3. The chances read OTT 2.6, BOS 3.2.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
BOS
−0.2
goals above expected
BOS3.23 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
OTT2.61 expected · 2 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 05:42OTTM. Amadio1–0
  2. P2 01:22BOSM. Geekie1–1
  3. P2 16:03BOSS. Kuraly1–2
  4. P3 11:52OTTC. Giroux2–2
  5. OT 04:54BOSP. Zacha2–3
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
OTT
34 shots
2
Final
74 shots
BOS
40 shots
3
OTT attackBOS attack
OTT BOS Goal
34
shots · 2 in
40
shots · 3 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
OTTBOS
0 / 5
1.16 xG
High danger
2 / 4
1.17 xG
1 / 9
1.06 xG
Medium
1 / 14
1.46 xG
1 / 36
0.38 xG
Low
0 / 41
0.59 xG

The Senators went 0 for 5 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B
J. Korpisalo
+0.6
BOS · 20/22
C
L. Ullmark
+0.2
OTT · 22/25
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Bruins edge the Senators in overtime

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 2–9
  1. 05:42OTTM. Amadio(S. Pinto, C. Giroux)1–0
2ndshots 8–9
  1. 01:22BOSM. Geekie(A. Peeke)1–1
  2. 16:03BOSS. Kuraly(T. Jeannot, A. Peeke)1–2
3rdshots 10–3
  1. 11:52OTTC. Giroux(D. Perron, T. Chabot)2–2
OTshots 2–4
  1. 04:54BOSP. Zacha(C. McAvoy)2–3

score reads OTT–BOS

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.23
BOS chances
Goals their shots were worth
−0.2
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.011
BOS puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
54.1%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.61Expected goals3.23
BOS 55% of the chance quality
22Shots on goal25
5High-danger chances4
50All attempts (Corsi)59
Adjusted for score: OTT 46% · BOS 54%
Faceoffs · BOS won39%off65%neu50%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
OTT0 / 5 · 1.16 xG
BOS2 / 4 · 1.17 xG
Medium dangermid-range
OTT1 / 9 · 1.06 xG
BOS1 / 14 · 1.46 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
OTT1 / 36 · 0.38 xG
BOS0 / 41 · 0.59 xG

OTT went 0-for-5 from high danger on 1.16 expected goals — 1.2 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
OTT
2 G · 2.61 xG · -0.6
BOS
3 G · 3.23 xG · -0.2
01234

OTT finished -0.6 against expected, BOS -0.2.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
OTT
WRIST1/22
SNAP1/8
SLAP0/0
BACKHAND0/3
TIP IN0/0
POKE0/0
DEFLECTED0/1
WRAP AROUND0/0
OTHER0/16
BOS
WRIST1/21
SNAP0/5
SLAP0/6
BACKHAND0/1
TIP IN0/4
POKE2/2
DEFLECTED0/0
WRAP AROUND0/1
OTHER0/19
OTT
BOS
Off the rush
2 G on 20
1.71 xG
1 G on 29
2.10 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 3
0.64 xG
2 G on 2
0.70 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: OTT went 1-for-22, BOS 1-for-21. OTT scored 2 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
L. Ullmark
OTT · 22/25 · .880
+0.2
saved above expected
C
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/41.2-0.8
Medium1/141.5+0.5
Low0/410.6+0.6

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 · 20/22 · .909
+0.6
saved above expected
B
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/51.2+1.2
Medium1/91.1+0.1
Low1/360.4-0.6

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

74 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
OTT
34 shots
2
Final
74 shots
BOS
40 shots
3
OTT attackBOS attack
OTT BOS Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — OTT 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
A. Peeke
#26 · D · BOS
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 20:10 on ice · +1
C. Giroux
#28 · R · OTT
1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 14:56 on ice · +2
C. McAvoy
#73 · D · BOS
0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 26:12 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Thu, Nov 6
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 2:42 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 2.7–2.4 goal win for Ottawa and sizes the Senators at 55% win probability. The edge isn't hidden—it lies in what the Senators generate at 5v5 and what regression math suggests the Bruins will soon correct.

Ottawa dominates puck play: 56.0% expected goals share to Boston's 47.0%, with a Corsi% split of 53.0% to 49.0%. That isn't fluky. It's sustained territorial advantage that will translate to volume. Worse for Boston: they're -5 in goal differential over their last 10 games, evidence that the Bruins have underperformed even their own underlying metrics.

The Bruins' PDO is 1.023, well into regression territory. This index compounds save percentage and shooting percentage. When it climbs this high, mean reversion becomes arithmetic, not opinion. Pair regression risk with Boston's possession deficit, and the conclusion is unavoidable: the goal margin will tighten.

Rest stacks another layer onto Ottawa's advantage. Boston arrives on one day of recovery; Ottawa on five. That gap shapes everything downstream—skating sharpness, decision-making in the neutral zone, the execution of the forechecking that turns possession into chances. Complicate it further: J. Swayman, Boston's starter, faces a back-to-back. Watch for either a backup deployment or a tired starter forced to perform anyway.

The Senators' weaponization of their 5v5 advantage runs through Brady Tkachuk and Dylan Cozens. Tkachuk generates 1.19 expected goals per 60 minutes and carries 11 goals on a 7.5% shooting rate—process aligned with output. Cozens creates at 1.00 xG/60 and has 13 goals at 9.5% shooting, a second threat running hot within sustainable bounds.

Boston's Viktor Arvidsson offers the most prolific finish at 13.0% shooting on 1.04 xG/60, but that rate sits too high to sustain. Tanner Jeannot operates at lower volume—0.75 xG/60—but leverages an 8.3% shooting rate that offers cushion against variance.

Nick Jensen will shoulder Ottawa's defensive load. Elias Lindholm faces the same burden on Boston's blue line. Given the possession tilt, rest advantage, and Bruins' PDO trajectory, the model's lean holds.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

OTT 55%
55%
OTT
Model favorite
55%
45%
OTT50BOS

OTT by 10 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score OTT 2.7–2.4 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
OTT← edge
edge →BOS
56.0%47.0%
53.0%49.0%
2.662.39
2.122.67
2.182.22
1.991.82
0.9931.023

OTT holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (0.993 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
OTT
5-3-2
+3 GD · 5d rest
BOS
5-5-0
-5 GD · 1d rest
0.993
OTT 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 Senators own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 47.0%.
  • The Senators drive Corsi at 53.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Bruins' PDO is 1.023 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Senators own the underlying play — 56.0% 5v5 xG vs 47.0%.
  • The Senators drive Corsi at 53.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • J. Swayman is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Bruins are underwater at -5 goal differential over their last 10.
  • The Bruins' PDO is 1.023 — running hot, expect some regression.
  • The Senators have 4 more days of rest.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
OTT
Expected in goal
L. Ullmark
5 days rest.852 last start
Backup Linus Ullmark · -12.8 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

BOS
Expected in goal
J. Swayman
back-to-back.909 last start
Backup Jeremy Swayman · +28.8 GSAx this season
Back-to-back: the backup often gets this one. Treat the starter as unconfirmed.

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
OTT
Brady Tkachuk11G 20A
1.19 xG/60 · 2 HD · 7.5% sh
Dylan Cozens13G 15A
1.00 xG/60 · 1 HD · 9.5% 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