The Bruins earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.
The Bruins won 4-3, but the story was written in efficiency, not volume. Montreal fired 25 shots to Boston's 20—and lost. The real metric: the Bruins generated 60% of expected goals (5.00–3.30), a split that predicted the scoreline before the puck dropped.
Boston's 10 high-danger chances to Montreal's 4 shows the quality gap. The Canadiens generated better-looking chances relative to their shot volume, but positioning advantage didn't translate to points.
The Bruins underperformed their xG by 1.00 goals; they should have won 5-3. S. Montembeault bore responsibility, stopping 16 of 20 shots (0.800 SV%) while posting +1.00 above expected—elite goaltending in defeat. J. Swayman's 22 saves on 25 shots (0.880 SV%) was steady if unremarkable.
Montreal's power play should have won them the game: two goals on 15 PP shots, generating 1.53 xG. Boston's three power-play goals on 13 shots (2.44 xG) was better execution, but Montreal's volume went to waste.
The rush was a second story. Boston converted twice on 22 rush attempts; Montreal converted three on 27. Where Boston pulled ahead: rebound pursuit. The Bruins created five rebound chances and converted one; Montreal created three and converted none.
Morgan Geekie's slap shot from the top of the circles (14:07, third period) was the mechanical turning point—but the game was decided by chance quality and finishing efficiency.
