The Bruins stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.88–2.91 and won anyway.
Boston's 5-2 victory disguises a 57-43 control problem. The Blues dominated expected goals 3.88–2.91, yet left empty-handed because the Bruins' finishing and goaltending overwhelmed statistical probability.
The gap started in net. J. Korpisalo stopped 1.88 goals above expected; J. Binnington surrendered 2.09 below. That swing alone accounts for the scoreboard's lie. The Bruins took just 27 shots to St. Louis's 39, and converted 5 high-danger chances to the Blues's 7. By every measure of volume and quality, Boston was outworked. By the goal column, they were not.
Pius Suter's wrist shot from the doorstep (third period, 09:07) epitomized the evening—a low-probability finish executed at the moment it mattered. The Bruins won the rush battle 3 goals on 19 chances; the Blues squandered 9 rebound opportunities for nothing. Crashing the net only counts if you can finish.
- M. Geekie — 1 goal, 2 assists in 16:42
- E. Lindholm — 3 assists in 15:37
- A. Steeves — 1 goal, 1 assist in 16:06
For St. Louis, the loss stings because the underlying play was there. The Blues controlled 57% of expected goals at 5v5 and had more high-danger chances. Underperforming expected goals by 1.88 is not sloppy execution—it's a magnitude of bad luck or goaltending that turns a play-in win into a blowout loss.
Boston rode variance to victory. Whether that variance was elite finishing or fortunate bouncing, the scoreboard read only one way: Bruins 5, Blues 2.
