Motion-blurred skater in a Detroit Red Wings sweater

Breakdown · BOS at DET

Red Wings hold off the Bruins

FinalTue, Dec 2

The verdict · earned

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

BOS 4 · DET 5

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 6:37 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

Detroit's 5-4 win understates their control. The Red Wings held 58% of expected goals (4.70–3.42), converting a tight scoreline into decisive underlying advantage.

Detroit's edges compound. They controlled 10 high-danger chances to Boston's 6, and generated superior efficiency—0.077 expected goals per shot versus Boston's 0.050. The Red Wings punished the rush: 5 goals on 29 chances, a rate that separates contenders from pretenders.

Goaltending magnified Detroit's advantage. J. Swayman surrendered 1.6 goals beyond his expected performance on 18 saves, a catastrophic underperformance. J. Korpisalo entered in relief and posted a shutout—saving 1.3 goals above expectation, steadying Boston too late. Meanwhile, J. Gibson backed Detroit with 34 saves on 38 shots.

Neither team capitalized on rebounds despite attacking the net. Detroit created 8 rebound opportunities; Boston 3. This restraint in chaos kept the margin narrow, even as Detroit's quality and volume proved too much to overcome.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page

Final · Dec 2

BOS

DET

Red Wings hold off the Bruins

Chances 3.4 – 4.7Did they deserve it? →

Did they deserve it?

The Red Wings earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value

BOS

3.42

DET

4.70

42% of the chances58%

The board read BOS 4, DET 5. The chances read BOS 3.4, DET 4.7.

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

Luck check

DET

+0.3

goals above expected

DET4.70 expected · 5 scored

Expected

Scored

BOS3.42 expected · 4 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

P1 06:52DETJ. van Riemsdyk0–1
P1 13:49DETM. Seider0–2
P2 01:35DETA. DeBrincat0–3
P2 11:09BOSJ. Aspirot1–3
P2 15:38BOSA. Steeves2–3
P2 16:15DETB. Chiarot2–4
P3 03:55DETL. RaymondPP2–5

+2 more on the full breakdown

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

Where the shots came from

BOS

49 shots

Final

93 shots

DET

44 shots

BOS DET GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

shots · 4 in

shots · 5 in

Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it

Chances by danger

BOSDET

1 / 6

1.20 xG

High danger

1 / 10

2.67 xG

2 / 11

1.23 xG

Medium

3 / 13

1.53 xG

1 / 52

0.98 xG

Low

1 / 38

0.51 xG

High-danger looks: BOS 1 of 6, DET 1 of 10.

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

In the net

A+

J. Korpisalo

+4.7

BOS · 9/9

J. Swayman

−0.3

BOS · 18/23

+1 more on the full breakdown

The numbers, checked

BACKCHECK

Red Wings hold off the Bruins

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 10–7

06:52DETJ. van Riemsdyk(A. Johansson, M. Seider)0–1
13:49DETM. Seider(P. Kane, A. DeBrincat)0–2

2ndshots 10–14

01:35DETA. DeBrincat0–3
11:09BOSJ. Aspirot(N. Zadorov, T. Jeannot)1–3
15:38BOSA. Steeves(H. Lindholm, M. Geekie)2–3
16:15DETB. Chiarot(D. Larkin, L. Raymond)2–4

3rdshots 18–11

03:55DETL. Raymondpower play(M. Seider, P. Kane)2–5
14:57BOSM. Khusnutdinov(H. Lindholm, M. Geekie)3–5
19:48BOSA. Steevespower play(P. Zacha, H. Lindholm)4–5

score reads BOS–DET

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

Process vs result

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play

4.70

DET chances

Goals their shots were worth

+0.3

Finishing

Goals above what those chances were worth

1.024

DET puck luck

Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way

46.9%

Shot attempts

Under half — they were outshot

Split by club

Who controlled the game

3.42Expected goals4.70

DET 58% of the chance quality

38Shots on goal32

6High-danger chances10

69All attempts (Corsi)61

Adjusted for score: BOS 60% · DET 40%

Faceoffs · DET won50%off63%neu44%def

Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected

High dangerslot & crease

BOS1 / 6 · 1.20 xG

DET1 / 10 · 2.67 xG

Medium dangermid-range

BOS2 / 11 · 1.23 xG

DET3 / 13 · 1.53 xG

Low dangerperimeter & point

BOS1 / 52 · 0.98 xG

DET1 / 38 · 0.51 xG

DET went 1-for-10 from high danger on 2.67 expected goals — 1.7 left on the table.

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

The luck layer

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual

BOS

4 G · 3.42 xG · +0.6

DET

5 G · 4.70 xG · +0.3

0123456

BOS finished +0.6 against expected, DET +0.3.

Source · Backcheck xG model

Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +

What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots

BOS

WRIST0/16

SNAP1/15

SLAP2/12

TIP IN1/6

BACKHAND0/0

OTHER0/20

DET

WRIST2/19

SNAP2/11

SLAP1/5

TIP IN0/4

BACKHAND0/5

OTHER0/17

BOS

DET

Off the rush

1 G on 27

1.67 xG

5 G on 29

3.18 xG

Off rebounds

0 G on 3

0.39 xG

0 G on 8

1.37 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: BOS went 0-for-16, DET 2-for-19. DET scored 5 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 · 18/23 · .783

-0.3

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/102.7+1.7

Medium3/131.5-1.5

Low1/380.5-0.5

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 · 9/9 · 1.000

+4.7

saved above expected

A+

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/102.7+1.7

Medium3/131.5-1.5

Low1/380.5-0.5

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. Gibson

DET · 34/38 · .895

-0.6

saved above expected

the night

By dangerG/attxGsaved

High danger1/61.2+0.2

Medium2/111.2-0.8

Low1/521.0-0.0

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

49 shots

Final

93 shots

DET

44 shots

BOS DET GoalBigger dot · more dangerous look

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

H. Lindholm

#27 · D · BOS

0 G · 3 A · 2 SOG · 24:59 on ice · +1

M. Seider

#53 · D · DET

1 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 22:55 on ice · +1

L. Raymond

#23 · L · DET

1 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 18:57 on ice

Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck

What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Dec 2

Open the pre-game read

Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity

◆ By the ModelJul 11, 6:35 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 2.4–2.6 game with the Red Wings at 54% win probability. This is as close to a pick'em as you'll find.

Detroit enters on a downswing: -7 goal differential over its last ten games. But the underlying metrics run ahead of recent results. The Red Wings lead in expected goals percentage (49.0% to 47.0%), while Corsi% is deadlocked at 49.0%.

Boston's PDO of 1.023 signals overperformance. That number will regress. Detroit sits at 0.985, suggesting variance is working against it—not an insurmountable gap, but meaningful over sample size.

The Bruins' forward depth hinges on Viktor Arvidsson, who generates 1.04 expected goals per 60 minutes and owns 18 goals against 24 assists on the season. His shooting rate of 13.0% is elevated; his 2 high-danger goals keep him operational. Tanner Jeannot creates at a lower rate (0.75 xG/60) with 6 goals and 14 assists, though his 2 high-danger goals suggest he's getting to the right spots. His 8.3% shooting percentage leaves upside.

Detroit leans on Alex DeBrincat, whose 0.88 xG/60 and 17 goals—28 assists split puts him in constant threat range. His 9.0% shooting rate is sustainable. Marco Kasper, at 0.81 xG/60 with 7 goals, 8 assists, and 1 high-danger goal, is the secondary punch; his 6.1% shooting shows lower variance.

Boston's defensive weakness is Elias Lindholm. Detroit's is Axel Sandin-Pellikka. Neither team is getting high-danger production at the rate you'd expect for a close game—both are running 0% on both high-danger and rebound goals. That says either elite goaltending or underperformance up front. The model gives Detroit a slight edge at 54%, reflecting better underlying metrics despite worse recent luck.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

DET 54%

54%

DET

Model favorite

46%

54%

BOS50DET

DET by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score BOS 2.4–2.6 DET; 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

BOS← edge

edge →DET

47.0%49.0%

49.0%49.0%

2.392.38

2.672.50

2.221.73

1.822.07

1.0230.985

The season numbers split 3–3 — no clear process edge — and the luck row (1.023 vs 0.985) says BOS has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5

Form · Last 10

BOS

5-5-0

-4 GD · 2d rest

DET

4-4-2

-7 GD · 2d rest

1.023

BOS PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

0.985

DET PDO

Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000

What decides it

Keys to the game

Regression watch

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

Things to watch

The Red Wings are underwater at -7 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

BOS

Expected in goal

J. Swayman

2 days rest.923 last start

Backup Jeremy Swayman · +28.8 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

DET

Expected in goal

C. Talbot

2 days rest.900 last start

Backup John Gibson · +11.7 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

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

DET

Alex DeBrincat17G 28A

0.88 xG/60 · 2 HD · 9.0% sh

Marco Kasper7G 8A

0.81 xG/60 · 1 HD · 6.1% sh

Keep going

Where to next

Back to the front page