Motion-blurred skater in a Florida Panthers sweater
Breakdown · BOS at FLA

S. Bobrovsky stands tall as the Panthers edge the Bruins

The verdict · earned

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

BOS 1 · FLA 2
◆ By the ModelJul 12, 9:55 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 Panthers escaped with a 2-1 victory that the underlying numbers suggest could easily have gone the other way. Expected goals finished 4.99–4.37 in Florida's favor, and the Bruins actually won the high-danger chances battle, 9–8. Yet Boston left empty-handed, undone by its own inefficiency and Bobrovsky's extraordinary composure.

The crux: both teams massively underperformed their xG. The Bruins fell 3.37 goals short of expected; the Panthers fell 2.99 short. In that wasteland, Bobrovsky emerged as the swing. He stopped 28 of 29 shots for a 0.966 save percentage, outperforming expectations by 3.37 goals. J. Swayman posted a 0.917 save percentage against 24 shots, also exceeding expectations but by a smaller margin (2.99).

The Panthers' path to victory relied on conversion when it mattered. They generated slightly better shot quality (0.086 xG per attempt vs. Boston's 0.063) and proved lethally efficient on the rush, netting two goals from 22 chances off the transition game. Yet paradoxically, they went 0-for-8 on high-danger opportunities—a miss-rate that rarely repeats.

Boston mirrored that theme in reverse. The Bruins crashed the net relentlessly, recording 10 rebound chances, but converted only one. D. Pastrnak generated the game's most dangerous play from the perimeter, earning an assist in 24:12, yet the team couldn't find the net despite near-parity in both volume and quality.

The open, lateral game favored the side that simply finished: the Panthers, by the thinnest margin.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Apr 2
BOS
1
FLA
2

S. Bobrovsky stands tall as the Panthers edge the Bruins

Chances 4.4 – 5.0Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Panthers earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
BOS
4.37
FLA
4.99
47% of the chances53%

The board read BOS 1, FLA 2. The chances read BOS 4.4, FLA 5.0.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
FLA
−3.0
goals above expected
FLA4.99 expected · 2 scored
Expected
Scored
BOS4.37 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

The Bruins left 3.4 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 04:20FLAM. Samoskevich0–1
  2. P1 07:39FLAS. Bennett0–2
  3. P1 19:33BOSF. Minten1–2
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
BOS
50 shots
1
Final
88 shots
FLA
38 shots
2
BOS attackFLA attack
BOS FLA Goal
50
shots · 1 in
38
shots · 2 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
BOSFLA
1 / 9
2.07 xG
High danger
0 / 8
3.38 xG
0 / 16
1.69 xG
Medium
1 / 10
1.02 xG
0 / 44
0.61 xG
Low
1 / 40
0.59 xG

High-danger looks: BOS 1 of 9, FLA 0 of 8.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
A+
S. Bobrovsky
+3.4
FLA · 28/29
A+
J. Swayman
+3.0
BOS · 22/24
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

S. Bobrovsky stands tall as the Panthers edge 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 9–7
  1. 04:20FLAM. Samoskevich0–1
  2. 07:39FLAS. Bennett(A. Greer)0–2
  3. 19:33BOSF. Minten(M. Khusnutdinov, D. Pastrnak)1–2
2ndshots 5–12no goals
    3rdshots 15–5no goals

      score reads BOS–FLA

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

      The numbers

      XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
      4.99
      FLA chances
      Goals their shots were worth
      −3.0
      Finishing
      Goals below what those chances were worth
      1.020
      FLA puck luck
      Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
      45.7%
      Shot attempts
      Under half — they were outshot
      Split by club

      Who controlled the game

      4.37Expected goals4.99
      FLA 53% of the chance quality
      29Shots on goal24
      9High-danger chances8
      69All attempts (Corsi)58
      Adjusted for score: BOS 59% · FLA 41%
      Faceoffs · FLA won36%off33%neu39%def
      Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
      How the game was won

      The danger ladder

      shotsgoalsexpected
      High dangerslot & crease
      BOS1 / 9 · 2.07 xG
      FLA0 / 8 · 3.38 xG
      Medium dangermid-range
      BOS0 / 16 · 1.69 xG
      FLA1 / 10 · 1.02 xG
      Low dangerperimeter & point
      BOS0 / 44 · 0.61 xG
      FLA1 / 40 · 0.59 xG

      FLA went 0-for-8 from high danger on 3.38 expected goals — 3.4 left on the table.

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

      Finishing vs expected

      expectedactual
      BOS
      1 G · 4.37 xG · -3.4
      FLA
      2 G · 4.99 xG · -3.0
      0123456

      BOS finished -3.4 against expected, FLA -3.0.

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

      Shot diet

      goalsshots
      BOS
      SNAP1/4
      WRIST0/29
      TIP IN0/6
      BACKHAND0/6
      SLAP0/5
      OTHER0/19
      FLA
      SNAP2/33
      WRIST0/2
      TIP IN0/2
      BACKHAND0/0
      SLAP0/1
      OTHER0/20
      BOS
      FLA
      Off the rush
      0 G on 24
      2.46 xG
      2 G on 22
      2.57 xG
      Off rebounds
      1 G on 10
      1.47 xG
      0 G on 1
      0.24 xG

      Snap shots carried the volume: BOS went 1-for-4, FLA 2-for-33. FLA scored 2 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 · 22/24 · .917
      +3.0
      saved above expected
      A+
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger0/83.4+3.4
      Medium1/101.0+0.0
      Low1/400.6-0.4

      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

      S. Bobrovsky
      FLA · 28/29 · .966
      +3.4
      saved above expected
      A+
      the night
      By dangerG/attxGsaved
      High danger1/92.1+1.1
      Medium0/161.7+1.7
      Low0/440.6+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

      88 shots · press play to watch the game back

      Where the shots came from

      NHL play-by-play coordinates
      BOS
      50 shots
      1
      Final
      88 shots
      FLA
      38 shots
      2
      BOS attackFLA attack
      BOS FLA Goal

      Each club shoots toward its own end — BOS left, FLA 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 · 1 A · 5 SOG · 24:12 on ice
      S. Bennett
      #9 · C · FLA
      1 G · 0 A · 7 SOG · 19:52 on ice
      A. Greer
      #10 · L · FLA
      0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 16:37 on ice · +2
      Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
      What the model said beforehand

      Before the game

      Written Thu, Apr 2
      Open the pre-game read
      Written from the numbers

      The read

      Edited for clarity
      ◆ By the ModelJul 12, 9:54 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 sees this as close to even as it gets: a 2.5–2.7 projection puts the Panthers at 54% win probability. This is a coin flip.

      Boston's recent run—7-1-2 in its last 10—looks impressive on paper, but Florida's underlying metrics suggest a tighter match. The Panthers drive play at 52.0% Corsi and control expected goals at 49.0% xG%, compared to the Bruins' 49.0% Corsi and 47.0% xG%. Yet Boston is also running hot: a 1.023 PDO indicates the Bruins have gotten lucky. Regression awaits.

      Florida's -7 goal differential over its last 10 games looks dire, but it masks territorial dominance. The Panthers' 0.989 PDO suggests they've underperformed their underlying metrics—positive variance is coming their way, even if recent results say otherwise.

      For Boston, Viktor Arvidsson drives the offense: 18 goals, 24 assists, 1.04 expected goals per 60 minutes, 2 high-danger goals, 13.0% shooting. Tanner Jeannot, at 0.75 xG/60, carries 6 goals, 14 assists, 2 high-danger goals, and an 8.3% shooting rate.

      For Florida, Sam Bennett generates 0.97 xG/60 with 18 goals, 19 assists, 6 high-danger goals, and 13.1% shooting. Brad Marchand operates at 0.93 xG/60 with 17 goals, 9 assists, 3 high-danger goals, and a 19.5% shooting percentage—though he hasn't played in 27 days and is likely out.

      The fundamental tension: Florida owns play, territory, and expected goals; Boston owns recent results and PDO variance. The Panthers' territorial edge should sustain, while the Bruins' shooting luck should reverse. Marchand's absence tips the balance further toward Florida. The Panthers remain slight favorites not because the underlying play diverges wildly, but because the math and lineup converge in their favor.

      What the model said beforehand

      The model's lean

      FLA 54%
      54%
      FLA
      Model favorite
      46%
      54%
      BOS50FLA

      FLA by 8 points of win probability — a modest lean. Projected score BOS 2.5–2.7 FLA; 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 →FLA
      47.0%49.0%
      49.0%52.0%
      2.392.48
      2.672.56
      2.221.98
      1.822.21
      1.0230.989

      FLA holds 4 of 6 process categories — and the luck row (1.023 vs 0.989) says BOS has been getting the bounces, which tends not to last.

      Source · NHL stats API + our xG · 5v5
      Form · Last 10
      BOS
      7-1-2
      +12 GD · 2d rest
      FLA
      4-6-0
      -7 GD · 2d rest
      1.023
      BOS PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      0.989
      FLA PDO
      Luck gauge · drifts to 1.000
      What decides it

      Keys to the game

      Where the edges live
      • The Panthers drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
      Regression watch
      • The Bruins' PDO is 1.023 — running hot, expect some regression.
      Things to watch
      • The Panthers drive Corsi at 52.0% — expect territorial tilt.
      • The Bruins are the hotter team by points pace (7-1-2 in their last 10).
      • The Panthers 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. Korpisalo
      2 days rest.813 last start
      Backup Jeremy Swayman · +28.8 GSAx this season

      No completed game on file for this club yet.

      FLA
      Expected in goal
      D. Tarasov
      2 days rest.885 last start
      Backup Sergei Bobrovsky · -12.2 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
      FLA
      Sam Bennett18G 19A
      0.97 xG/60 · 6 HD · 13.1% sh
      Brad Marchand17G 9A
      0.93 xG/60 · 3 HD · 19.5% sh
      Keep going

      Where to next