The Hurricanes earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.
Carolina's 5–4 victory was far more dominant than the scoreline suggested. The Hurricanes controlled 65% of expected goals at 5v5 (5.44–2.90), running a sustained offensive campaign that the Maple Leafs' goaltending and rush efficiency kept competitive.
The gap between xG and the actual score reveals the full story. Toronto generated fewer total shot attempts (20 vs. 47) but concentrated their danger—they produced 0.083 xG per shot compared to Carolina's 0.061. High-danger chances favored the Hurricanes 9–5, and yet the margin held at one goal. B. Bussi allowed 1.10 more goals than expected, a performance that masked how thoroughly Carolina dominated five-on-five play.
Toronto survived through ruthlessness on the rush. They converted three goals on just 14 rush chances while Carolina needed 34 to score three, an efficiency edge that kept the game within reach despite being outshot and outchanced. Rebound opportunities slightly favored Carolina (8–3), but Toronto's finishing off second chances was clinical where it mattered most.
The Maple Leafs also benefited from a 1.10-goal variance boost—they exceeded their xG total, while Carolina fell short. That swing alone nearly tied the game, and it underscores an uncomfortable truth: the Hurricanes' underlying dominance didn't translate to the scoreboard in proportion to the chance quality they created.