Motion-blurred skater in a Seattle Kraken sweater
Breakdown · BOS at SEA

Kraken pull away from the Bruins

The verdict · stolen

The Kraken stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 5.03–4.53 and won anyway.

BOS 4 · SEA 7
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 11:38 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 Kraken beat the Bruins 7–4 in a game the underlying numbers called nearly even — expected goals split 4.53–5.03, a slight edge to Boston. Seattle overperformed their xG by 2.47 goals while Boston underperformed by 1.03, a divergence that explained the final margin.

The Kraken controlled play modestly: 43% of shot attempts (27–36 on goal) and an 8–11 disadvantage in high-danger chances. J. Daccord stopped 1.0 goals above expected (32/36 saves, 0.889 SV%); J. Swayman allowed 1.5 more than expected (20/26 saves, 0.769 SV%). Both teams managed two low-danger goals apiece—the kind of bounce-dependent scoring that separates the scoreboard from the numbers.

Seattle's power play was the outlier: 3 goals on 9 shots (0.77 xG). The Kraken were equally lethal off the rush, with 6 goals on 23 chances. Boston managed only 2 goals from 32 rush attempts, squandering a high-volume offensive system. Seattle created 3 rebound opportunities and converted none; Boston created 7 and did the same, suggesting both teams crashed the net effectively but neither capitalized.

K. Kakko's wrist shot from the top of the circles in the third period (19:48) marked the moment Seattle pulled clear.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Jan 6
BOS
4
SEA
7

Kraken pull away from the Bruins

Chances 5.0 – 4.5Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Bruins deserved better.

Expected goals · chance value
BOS
5.03
SEA
4.53
53% of the chances47%

The board read BOS 4, SEA 7. The chances read BOS 5.0, SEA 4.5.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
SEA
+2.5
goals above expected
SEA4.53 expected · 7 scored
Expected
Scored
BOS5.03 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored

The Kraken scored 2.5 more than their chances were worth. That does not repeat.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 08:50SEAJ. EberlePP0–1
  2. P1 12:47BOSD. Pastrnak1–1
  3. P2 02:48SEAB. Catton1–2
  4. P2 06:28BOSD. Pastrnak2–2
  5. P2 18:23SEAB. Meyers2–3
  6. P2 19:59SEAJ. McCannPP2–4
  7. P3 10:21SEAK. Kakko2–5
+4 more on the full breakdown
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
BOS
61 shots
4
Final
101 shots
SEA
40 shots
7
BOS attackSEA attack
BOS SEA Goal
61
shots · 4 in
40
shots · 7 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
BOSSEA
2 / 11
2.66 xG
High danger
2 / 8
2.29 xG
0 / 16
1.48 xG
Medium
3 / 14
1.66 xG
2 / 51
0.89 xG
Low
2 / 33
0.57 xG

The Kraken buried 2 of 8 high-danger looks.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
J. Daccord
+1.0
SEA · 32/36
D-
J. Swayman
−1.5
BOS · 20/26
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Kraken pull away from 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 5–7
  1. 08:50SEAJ. Eberlepower play(M. Beniers, V. Dunn)0–1
  2. 12:47BOSD. Pastrnak(N. Zadorov, M. Khusnutdinov)1–1
2ndshots 17–14
  1. 02:48SEAB. Catton(J. McCann, R. Evans)1–2
  2. 06:28BOSD. Pastrnak(C. McAvoy, E. Lindholm)2–2
  3. 18:23SEAB. Meyers(T. Kartye)2–3
  4. 19:59SEAJ. McCannpower play(V. Dunn, M. Beniers)2–4
3rdshots 14–6
  1. 10:21SEAK. Kakko(F. Gaudreau, C. Stephenson)2–5
  2. 14:20SEAB. Cattonpower play(F. Gaudreau, K. Kakko)2–6
  3. 14:50BOSM. Lohrei(P. Zacha, V. Arvidsson)3–6
  4. 17:38BOSV. Arvidssonpower play(C. Mittelstadt, A. Steeves)4–6
  5. 19:48SEAK. Kakkoempty net4–7

score reads BOS–SEA

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
4.53
SEA chances
Goals their shots were worth
+2.5
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.076
SEA puck luck
Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
41.4%
Shot attempts
Under half — they were outshot
Split by club

Who controlled the game

5.03Expected goals4.53
BOS 53% of the chance quality
36Shots on goal27
11High-danger chances8
78All attempts (Corsi)55
Adjusted for score: BOS 61% · SEA 39%
Faceoffs · SEA won40%off59%neu67%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
BOS2 / 11 · 2.66 xG
SEA2 / 8 · 2.29 xG
Medium dangermid-range
BOS0 / 16 · 1.48 xG
SEA3 / 14 · 1.66 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
BOS2 / 51 · 0.89 xG
SEA2 / 33 · 0.57 xG

BOS went 0-for-16 from medium danger on 1.48 expected goals — 1.5 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
BOS
4 G · 5.03 xG · -1.0
SEA
7 G · 4.53 xG · +2.5
012345678

BOS finished -1.0 against expected, SEA +2.5.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
BOS
WRIST4/39
SLAP0/9
TIP IN0/7
SNAP0/3
BACKHAND0/2
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/17
SEA
WRIST3/23
SLAP2/8
TIP IN0/3
SNAP1/2
BACKHAND1/3
DEFLECTED0/1
OTHER0/15
BOS
SEA
Off the rush
2 G on 32
2.90 xG
6 G on 23
3.14 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 7
1.23 xG
0 G on 3
0.38 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: BOS went 4-for-39, SEA 3-for-23. SEA scored 6 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 · 20/26 · .769
-1.5
saved above expected
D-
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/82.3+0.3
Medium3/141.7-1.3
Low2/330.6-1.4

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. Daccord
SEA · 32/36 · .889
+1.0
saved above expected
B+
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger2/112.7+0.7
Medium0/161.5+1.5
Low2/510.9-1.1

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

101 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
BOS
61 shots
4
Final
101 shots
SEA
40 shots
7
BOS attackSEA attack
BOS SEA Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — BOS left, SEA 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
K. Kakko
#84 · R · SEA
2 G · 1 A · 3 SOG · 16:02 on ice · +1
D. Pastrnak
#88 · R · BOS
2 G · 0 A · 7 SOG · 21:09 on ice · +1
F. Gaudreau
#89 · C · SEA
0 G · 2 A · 2 SOG · 18:50 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Tue, Jan 6
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 11, 11:37 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 2.5–2.5 final with Seattle at 51% win probability — a true pick'em. When the math says this close to even, both teams are genuinely competitive.

Seattle is hotter: 6-3-1 in their last 10. Boston is cold, at -11 in goal differential over the same span. Form favors Seattle when talent is balanced.

Boston owns possession (49.0% Corsi%, 47.0% xG%), while Seattle sits below neutral (45.0% Corsi%, 46.0% xG%). This means Boston should dictate space and pace. But Boston's 1.023 PDO is running hot; some regression is inevitable. Seattle's 1.011 is closer to baseline, a hidden advantage when your opponent is due for variance correction.

Viktor Arvidsson drives Boston's offense: 1.04 xG per 60 and 13.0% shooting yield 18 goals and 24 assists. He has 2 high-danger goals, marking him as dangerous in the areas that matter most. Tanner Jeannot (0.75 xG/60, 8.3% shooting) is the secondary threat, also with 2 high-danger tallies. Seattle will game-plan to disrupt both.

Seattle counters with Shane Wright (0.77 xG/60, 8G 10A, 4 HD goals) and Berkly Catton (0.68 xG/60, 6G 8A, 5 HD goals). Wright's conversion on high-danger chances is the differentiator — four goals from prime scoring areas. Catton mirrors that reliance with five HD goals.

Scoring is expected to come from primary sources: both teams project 0% of goals from high-danger chances and 0% from rebounds. Boston's defensive weak link is Elias Lindholm. Seattle's is Chandler Stephenson. Whoever can attack through those weak points gains an edge.

Boston dictates structure. Seattle rides form. Both are legitimate. The coin flip stands.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

SEA 51%
51%
SEA
Model favorite
49%
51%
BOS50SEA

SEA by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score BOS 2.5–2.5 SEA; 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 →SEA
47.0%46.0%
49.0%45.0%
2.392.13
2.672.51
2.221.87
1.821.95
1.0231.011

BOS holds 5 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.023 vs 1.011) says BOS has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
BOS
3-5-2
-11 GD · 2d rest
SEA
6-3-1
+5 GD · 3d rest
1.023
BOS PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.011
SEA 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.
  • The Kraken are the hotter team by points pace (6-3-1 in their last 10).
  • The Bruins are underwater at -11 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.941 last start
Backup Jeremy Swayman · +28.8 GSAx this season

No completed game on file for this club yet.

SEA
Expected in goal
J. Daccord
3 days rest.875 last start
Backup Joey Daccord · -6.2 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
SEA
Shane Wright8G 10A
0.77 xG/60 · 4 HD · 10.4% sh
Berkly Catton6G 8A
0.68 xG/60 · 5 HD · 8.8% sh
Keep going

Where to next