Motion-blurred skater in a blue sweater
Breakdown · BOS at NYR

Rangers edge the Bruins in overtime

The verdict · earned

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

BOS 3 · NYR 4
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 2:43 AMxG: 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' high-danger defense belied the final score. They recorded a perfect 6-for-6 save rate on the Rangers' high-danger chances—a display that would normally preserve a close game—yet the Rangers still won 4-3 in overtime. New York's overwhelming advantage in volume shot past New England's surgical efficiency.

The Rangers dominated the underlying metrics. They held 54% of shot attempts (28 to 24) and a 55-45 split in expected goals (3.52 to 2.93). High-danger chances went 6-2 in their favor, yet they couldn't convert a single one of those premium looks. The Bruins' goaltending—J. Korpisalo's wall in the crease—kept the game tied despite being heavily outchanced.

Both teams found success on the rush, each scoring three goals from rush chances, which explains how the Bruins stayed alive despite the volumetric disadvantage. The Rangers were lethal converting 3 goals on 28 rush chances; the Bruins matched that output on just 23, a slight efficiency edge that kept Boston competitive.

Matthew Robertson's wrist shot from the high slot at 03:53 of overtime ended it—a finish the underlying metrics had penciled in for New York all along.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · OT · Jan 26
BOS
3
NYR
4

Rangers edge the Bruins in overtime

Chances 2.9 – 3.5Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Rangers earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
BOS
2.93
NYR
3.52
45% of the chances55%

The board read BOS 3, NYR 4. The chances read BOS 2.9, NYR 3.5.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
NYR
+0.5
goals above expected
NYR3.52 expected · 4 scored
Expected
Scored
BOS2.93 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 09:45NYRW. Cuylle0–1
  2. P1 12:09BOSE. Lindholm1–1
  3. P1 12:35NYRJ. Miller1–2
  4. P2 03:18BOSE. Lindholm2–2
  5. P2 08:52BOSM. Geekie3–2
  6. P3 13:43NYRW. Borgen3–3
  7. OT 03:53NYRM. Robertson3–4
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
BOS
38 shots
3
Final
81 shots
NYR
43 shots
4
BOS attackNYR attack
BOS NYR Goal
38
shots · 3 in
43
shots · 4 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
BOSNYR
0 / 2
0.49 xG
High danger
0 / 6
1.35 xG
2 / 18
1.87 xG
Medium
3 / 18
1.80 xG
1 / 30
0.57 xG
Low
1 / 33
0.37 xG

High-danger looks: BOS 0 of 2, NYR 0 of 6.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
C
J. Quick
−0.1
NYR · 21/24
D
J. Korpisalo
−0.5
BOS · 24/28
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

Rangers edge the Bruins in overtime

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 7–10
  1. 09:45NYRW. Cuylle(U. Vaakanainen, N. Laba)0–1
  2. 12:09BOSE. Lindholm(D. Pastrnak)1–1
  3. 12:35NYRJ. Miller(G. Perreault, M. Zibanejad)1–2
2ndshots 9–9
  1. 03:18BOSE. Lindholm(D. Pastrnak, C. McAvoy)2–2
  2. 08:52BOSM. Geekie(D. Pastrnak, M. Lohrei)3–2
3rdshots 8–8
  1. 13:43NYRW. Borgen(A. Panarin, A. Lafrenière)3–3
OTshots 0–1
  1. 03:53NYRM. Robertson(J. Quick, V. Trocheck)3–4

score reads BOS–NYR

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

The numbers

XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
3.52
NYR chances
Goals their shots were worth
+0.5
Finishing
Goals above what those chances were worth
1.010
NYR puck luck
About 1.000 — a normal night for bounces
53.3%
Shot attempts
Over half — they had the puck more
Split by club

Who controlled the game

2.93Expected goals3.52
NYR 55% of the chance quality
24Shots on goal28
2High-danger chances6
50All attempts (Corsi)57
Adjusted for score: BOS 46% · NYR 54%
Faceoffs · NYR won67%off47%neu36%def
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
BOS0 / 2 · 0.49 xG
NYR0 / 6 · 1.35 xG
Medium dangermid-range
BOS2 / 18 · 1.87 xG
NYR3 / 18 · 1.80 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
BOS1 / 30 · 0.57 xG
NYR1 / 33 · 0.37 xG

NYR went 0-for-6 from high danger on 1.35 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
BOS
3 G · 2.93 xG · +0.1
NYR
4 G · 3.52 xG · +0.5
012345

BOS finished +0.1 against expected, NYR +0.5.

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

Shot diet

goalsshots
BOS
WRIST3/12
SNAP0/11
SLAP0/8
TIP IN0/4
BACKHAND0/1
DEFLECTED0/2
BAT0/0
OTHER0/12
NYR
WRIST2/22
SNAP1/4
SLAP0/6
TIP IN1/5
BACKHAND0/3
DEFLECTED0/1
BAT0/2
OTHER0/14
BOS
NYR
Off the rush
3 G on 23
2.09 xG
3 G on 28
2.66 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 0
0.00 xG
0 G on 2
0.46 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: BOS went 3-for-12, NYR 2-for-22. BOS scored 3 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. Korpisalo
BOS · 24/28 · .857
-0.5
saved above expected
D
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/61.4+1.4
Medium3/181.8-1.2
Low1/330.4-0.6

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. Quick
NYR · 21/24 · .875
-0.1
saved above expected
C
the night
By dangerG/attxGsaved
High danger0/20.5+0.5
Medium2/181.9-0.1
Low1/300.6-0.4

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

81 shots · press play to watch the game back

Where the shots came from

NHL play-by-play coordinates
BOS
38 shots
3
Final
81 shots
NYR
43 shots
4
BOS attackNYR attack
BOS NYR Goal

Each club shoots toward its own end — BOS left, NYR 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
0 G · 3 A · 2 SOG · 22:30 on ice
E. Lindholm
#28 · C · BOS
2 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 20:43 on ice · +1
V. Trocheck
#16 · C · NYR
0 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 25:06 on ice · +1
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model said beforehand

Before the game

Written Mon, Jan 26
Open the pre-game read
Written from the numbers

The read

Edited for clarity
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 2:42 AMEdited 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 goal spread with the Rangers at 53% win probability—a genuine coin flip that leaves little room for conviction either way.

Boston has the form advantage. The Bruins are 8–2–0 in their last 10, while the Rangers sit at minus-16 goal differential over the same stretch. That's not just scoring less; it's getting outshot and outmaneuvered over a meaningful sample.

The underlying season metrics narrow the gap. Boston's 47.0% expected-goals share matches the Rangers' 48.0%; both sit at 49.0% Corsi%. These numbers suggest the teams are evenly matched in shot quality and puck possession. Where Boston breaks ahead is repeatability: the Bruins' 1.023 PDO means they're running hot, and regression is coming.

Goaltending complexity adds uncertainty. J. Swayman works a back-to-back, which could mean a backup start or a tired starter—either way, a vulnerability for Boston.

On offense, Viktor Arvidsson is Boston's pressure point. He's generating 1.04 expected goals per 60 minutes with an unsustainable 13.0% shooting rate, backing up 18 goals and 24 assists. Tanner Jeannot complements that threat at 0.75 xG/60, though his 8.3% shooting on 6 goals and 14 assists suggests more stable production. New York needs to contain both.

The Rangers counter with Adam Sykora, posting a 20.0% shooting rate on 3 goals and 1 assist—a recipe for positive regression given his 0.91 xG/60. Gabe Perreault adds secondary punch at 0.79 xG/60 with 8 goals, 11 assists, and a 13.1% shooting rate—mark him as someone New York will feed.

Defensively, neither team is built for lockdown hockey. Boston's Elias Lindholm represents a structural weak point; New York's Vincent Iorio carries similar vulnerability. In a close game, those liabilities compound.

This is variance masquerading as competition. The model's near-even projection is honest—two teams with overlapping talent, separated mainly by recent momentum and the unknown of Swayman's workload.

What the model said beforehand

The model's lean

NYR 53%
53%
NYR
Model favorite
47%
53%
BOS50NYR

NYR by 6 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score BOS 2.4–2.6 NYR; 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 →NYR
47.0%48.0%
49.0%49.0%
2.392.26
2.672.40
2.221.88
1.821.90
1.0231.009

The season numbers split 3–3 — no clear process edge — and the luck row (1.023 vs 1.009) says BOS has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
Form · Last 10
BOS
8-2-0
+15 GD · 1d rest
NYR
2-7-1
-16 GD · 2d rest
1.023
BOS PDO
Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
1.009
NYR 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
  • J. Swayman is on a back-to-back — watch for a backup start or a tired starter.
  • The Bruins are the hotter team by points pace (8-2-0 in their last 10).
  • The Rangers are underwater at -16 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
back-to-back.880 last start
Backup Jeremy Swayman · +28.8 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.

NYR
Expected in goal
S. Martin
2 days rest.906 last start
Backup Igor Shesterkin · +21.3 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
NYR
Adam Sykora3G 1A
0.91 xG/60 · 0 HD · 20.0% sh
Gabe Perreault8G 11A
0.79 xG/60 · 2 HD · 13.1% sh
Keep going

Where to next