Backcheck
Pick club
Motion-blurred skater in a gold and black sweater
← Tue, Nov 11 · the slate
Breakdown · TOR at BOS

Bruins hold off the Maple Leafs

FinalTue, Nov 11
TORToronto Maple Leafs3BOSBoston Bruins5
The verdict · earned

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

TOR 3 · BOS 5
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:29 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 beat the Maple Leafs 5-3, and Boston's dominance showed in the underlying metrics: 55% of expected goals (5.46–4.46), 10 high-danger chances to Toronto's 6. But that advantage didn't translate in the expected way. Boston went 0-for-10 on high-danger looks; Toronto 0-for-6. Both teams scored elsewhere—the Bruins via the rush (4 goals from 35 chances) and low-danger spots (2 goals), the Leafs from low-danger (2 goals) and the rush (2 goals on 26 chances).

Goaltending decided it. J. Swayman (BOS) was exceptional: 30 saves at 0.909 SV%, 1.46 goals above expected. D. Hildeby (TOR) was nearly as good with 19 saves and a 1.58-goal advantage against expected. A. Stolarz was the problem: 8 saves at 0.727 SV%, 1.1 goals worse than expected. The tandem collapse for Toronto—particularly the second unit—negated what should have been a closer game based on play.

Boston found secondary scoring and Toronto's rebound opportunities evaporated: 9 created, zero converted. The Bruins had 3 rebound chances themselves and also failed to finish, but they didn't need to. They converted their chances in the margins.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Nov 11
TOR
3
BOS
5

Bruins hold off the Maple Leafs

Chances 4.5 – 5.5Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Bruins earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
TOR
4.46
BOS
5.46
45% of the chances55%

The board read TOR 3, BOS 5. The chances read TOR 4.5, BOS 5.5.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
BOS
−0.5
goals above expected
BOS5.46 expected · 5 scored
Expected
Scored
TOR4.46 expected · 3 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 04:27BOSP. ZachaPP0–1
  2. P1 06:41TORS. LorentzSH1–1
  3. P1 09:32BOSH. LindholmPP1–2
  4. P1 17:23BOSA. Steeves1–3
  5. P2 00:49BOSD. Pastrnak1–4
  6. P2 18:58TORB. McMannPP2–4
  7. P3 03:32TORO. Ekman-Larsson3–4
+1 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
TOR
51 shots
3
Final
107 shots
BOS
56 shots
5
TOR attackBOS attack
TOR BOS Goal
51
shots · 3 in
56
shots · 5 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
TORBOS
0 / 6
1.25 xG
High danger
0 / 10
2.53 xG
1 / 20
2.50 xG
Medium
3 / 20
2.23 xG
2 / 38
0.71 xG
Low
2 / 43
0.70 xG

The Maple Leafs went 0 for 6 from the slot.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
D. Hildeby
+3.5
TOR · 19/21
A
A. Stolarz
+2.5
TOR · 8/11
+1 more on the full breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Bruins hold off the Maple Leafs

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 6–11
  1. 04:27BOSP. Zachapower play(D. Pastrnak, C. McAvoy)0–1
  2. 06:41TORS. Lorentzshorthanded1–1
  3. 09:32BOSH. Lindholmpower play(M. Lohrei, M. Eyssimont)1–2
  4. 17:23BOSA. Steeves(H. Lindholm)1–3
2ndshots 15–11
  1. 00:49BOSD. Pastrnak(M. Geekie, C. McAvoy)1–4
  2. 18:58TORB. McMannpower play(M. Domi, M. Rielly)2–4
3rdshots 12–10
  1. 03:32TORO. Ekman-Larsson(N. Robertson, W. Nylander)3–4
  2. 09:48BOSD. Pastrnakpower play(M. Kastelic, T. Jeannot)3–5

score reads TOR–BOS

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
5.46
BOS chances
Goals their shots were worth
−0.5
Finishing
Goals below what those chances were worth
1.022
BOS puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
53.3%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

4.46Expected goals5.46
BOS 55% of the chance quality
33Shots on goal32
6High-danger chances10
64All attempts (Corsi)73
Adjusted for score: TOR 53% · BOS 47%
Faceoffs · BOS won40%off45%neu35%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
TOR0 / 6 · 1.25 xG
BOS0 / 10 · 2.53 xG
Medium dangermid-range
TOR1 / 20 · 2.50 xG
BOS3 / 20 · 2.23 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
TOR2 / 38 · 0.71 xG
BOS2 / 43 · 0.70 xG

BOS went 0-for-10 from high danger on 2.53 expected goals — 2.5 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
TOR
3 G · 4.46 xG · -1.5
BOS
5 G · 5.46 xG · -0.5
0123456

TOR finished -1.5 against expected, BOS -0.5.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
TOR
SNAP1/25
WRIST1/3
BACKHAND1/9
SLAP0/4
TIP IN0/6
WRAP AROUND0/1
DEFLECTED0/2
BAT0/1
OTHER0/13
BOS
SNAP2/13
WRIST2/25
BACKHAND0/4
SLAP0/9
TIP IN0/2
WRAP AROUND0/2
DEFLECTED1/1
BAT0/0
OTHER0/17
TOR
BOS
Off the rush
2 G on 26
2.25 xG
4 G on 35
2.89 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 9
1.22 xG
0 G on 3
0.62 xG

Snap shots carried the volume: TOR went 1-for-25, BOS 2-for-13. BOS scored 4 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
D. Hildeby
TOR · 19/21 · .905
+3.5
saved above expected
A+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/102.5+2.5
Medium3/202.2-0.8
Low2/430.7-1.3

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

A. Stolarz
TOR · 8/11 · .727
+2.5
saved above expected
A
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/102.5+2.5
Medium3/202.2-0.8
Low2/430.7-1.3

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. Swayman
BOS · 30/33 · .909
+1.5
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/61.3+1.3
Medium1/202.5+1.5
Low2/380.7-1.3

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

107 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
TOR
51 shots
3
Final
107 shots
BOS
56 shots
5
TOR attackBOS attack
TOR BOS Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — TOR 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
D. Pastrnak
#88 · R · BOS
2 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 23:45 on ice
C. McAvoy
#73 · D · BOS
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 26:11 on ice
H. Lindholm
#27 · D · BOS
1 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 21:34 on ice
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Nov 11
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 3:27 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 2.5 to 2.7 goal game with Boston at 54% to win—as close to a pick'em as playoff hockey gets. The underlying numbers explain why.

At five-on-five, Boston owns a territorial edge: 49.0% Corsi to Toronto's 45.0%. The Bruins will camp in Toronto's end for stretches. But that Corsi advantage doesn't fully translate offensively—Boston's 47.0% xG% runs nearly even with Toronto's 46.0%. Here's the complication: Boston's 1.023 PDO means they're outperforming their shot quality. Regression is pricing in, which is why the model gives them only 54%, not 60%.

Goaltending matters for variance. D. Hildeby plays on a back-to-back—watch whether Boston pivots to a backup or leans on a tired starter, as that will reshape shot volume and rebound chaos.

Auston Matthews is Toronto's offensive engine at 1.10 expected goals per 60 minutes, with 17 goals and 13 assists. His 10.6% shooting rate is the key variable: that's unsustainably high for most players. If it regresses, Toronto's scoring output contracts. John Tavares (15G 24A, 0.91 xG/60) offers a countervailing advantage—a 12.4% shooting rate and 3 high-danger goals suggest secondary scoring depth that Boston can't simulate away.

Viktor Arvidsson anchors Boston's reply with 1.04 xG/60 across 18 goals and 24 assists, plus a 13.0% shooting rate that has room to stay elevated. Tanner Jeannot (6G 14A, 0.75 xG/60) grades as a secondary threat with 2 high-danger goals, though his 8.3% shooting rate implies downside if puck luck shifts.

Defensively, the edges are subtle. Toronto's Bo Groulx and Boston's Elias Lindholm are the listed weak links, but neither breakdown is dramatic enough to swing a coin flip. Matchup execution will decide this—Boston's territorial control against Toronto's shooting luck, with goaltending variance as the tiebreaker.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

BOS 54%
54%
BOS
Model favorite
46%
54%
TOR50BOS

BOS by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score TOR 2.5–2.7 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
TOR← edge
edge →BOS
46.0%47.0%
45.0%49.0%
2.242.39
2.672.67
2.092.22
2.521.82
1.0021.023

BOS holds 6 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.002 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
TOR
5-5-0
-3 GD · 1d rest
BOS
7-3-0
+2 GD · 2d rest
1.002
TOR 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 Bruins drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.
Regression watch
  • The Bruins' PDO is 1.023 — running hot, expect some regression.
Things to watch
  • The Bruins drive Corsi at 49.0% — expect territorial tilt.
  • D. Hildeby is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Bruins' PDO is 1.023 — running hot, expect some regression.
Last game's lineup · confirmed at warm-up

Lineups

NHL box score
TOR
Expected in goal
D. Hildeby
back-to-back.894 last start
Backup Joseph Woll · -6.6 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.

BOS
Expected in goal
J. Swayman
2 days rest.909 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
TOR
Auston Matthews17G 13A
1.10 xG/60 · 1 HD · 10.6% sh
John Tavares15G 24A
0.91 xG/60 · 3 HD · 12.4% 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