M. DiPietro stole it
M. DiPietro stopped 30 of 32 (0.938) — +3.56 goals saved above expected in a 1-goal game.

Split squads and prospects, not the club that will take the ice in October. The shots and grades below describe this game only: nothing here counts toward season records, form, rankings or player numbers.
The Bruins beat the Capitals 3-2 in a shootout, and the final score barely tells you what actually happened. Washington carried this game. Boston walked away with the two points anyway, thanks to a goaltender playing out of his mind and a shootout winner from James Hagens.
J. Brodzinski put the Capitals up first, scoring in the opening period off feeds from I. Miroshnichenko and J. Dunne. Boston tied it on the power play in the second when J. Schmaltz scored with an assist from R. Duran. Miroshnichenko struck again on his own in the third to put Washington back ahead, only for C. McAvoy to answer on Boston's own power play late in the same period, assisted by F. Minten and M. Poitras, to force overtime and eventually a shootout. That's where it turned: Hagens's backhander from the doorstep won it for Boston.
Here's the part the scoreboard hides. Washington finished with 60% of expected goals at 5-on-5, and the overall expected-goals split for the game went the Capitals' way 5.56 to 3.63 — a 60-40 split that says Washington was clearly the better team on the night. They out-attempted Boston too, and generated more rush shots. By any measure of who created the better, more dangerous chances, this was Washington's game to win.
It didn't happen because of two goaltenders on opposite ends of the same night. M. DiPietro stopped 30 of 32 shots for Boston and finished at +3.56 goals saved above his expected workload — meaning he stopped nearly four more goals than a league-average goaltender would have on the same shots he faced. That's the number that decided this game. On the other side, Washington's L. Thompson was also sharp, saving 28 of 30 and finishing above expected himself, including a perfect night on high-danger chances. He just didn't get enough help, or enough puck luck, to hold the lead.
Washington's power play didn't help their cause — they went 0-for-7 with the man advantage despite generating real quality with it, a rough finishing night on top of an already unlucky one. Boston's penalty-killed chances, by contrast, turned into real offense: McAvoy's power-play tally was the difference between overtime and a regulation loss.
The read here isn't that Boston stole a game they didn't deserve to be in — DiPietro's game was that good, full stop. But nothing about Tuesday suggests Washington needs to change anything. They controlled play for the majority of five-on-five hockey, generated more expected goals, and ran into a goaltender who simply refused to lose. Washington's real concern isn't process — it's finishing. Boston, meanwhile, got the exact kind of game good goaltending is supposed to buy you: a night where you were outplayed and won anyway.
Bruins steal one from the Capitals against the run of play
The Capitals deserved better.
The board read WSH 2, BOS 3. The chances read WSH 5.6, BOS 3.6.
The Capitals left 3.6 goals on the table against what their chances were worth.
The Capitals went 0 for 4 from the slot.
Bruins steal one from the Capitals against the run of play
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 breakdownscore reads WSH–BOS
WSH went 2-for-33 from medium danger on 4.16 expected goals — 2.2 left on the table.
WSH finished -3.6 against expected, BOS -0.6.
Snap shots carried the volume: WSH went 1-for-30, BOS 0-for-21.
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 →
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
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
WSH Created 5.56 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 4 high-danger shots (0.91 xG) and 34 rush shots (3.26 xG).
BOS Created 3.63 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 5 high-danger shots (1.12 xG) and 25 rush shots (2.37 xG).
WSH Allowed 3.63 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 5 high-danger shots (1.12 xG) and 25 rush shots (2.37 xG).
BOS Allowed 5.56 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 4 high-danger shots (0.91 xG) and 34 rush shots (3.26 xG).
WSH Rush shots 34–25, rush xG 3.26–2.37 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).
BOS Rush shots 25–34, rush xG 2.37–3.26 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).
WSH 0-for-7 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 3.44 PP xG.
BOS 1-for-6 on the power play (17%; league ≈21%) with 1.08 PP xG.
WSH +1.63 goals saved above expected on 30 shots against.
BOS +3.56 goals saved above expected on 32 shots against.
WSH Took 7 penalties for 14 PIM vs 8 for 16 on the other side.
BOS Took 8 penalties for 16 PIM vs 7 for 14 on the other side.
Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral
WSH Finishing -3.56 goals vs xG plus +1.63 GSAx of save luck = -1.93 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.
BOS Finishing -1.63 goals vs xG plus +3.56 GSAx of save luck = +1.93 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.
M. DiPietro stopped 30 of 32 (0.938) — +3.56 goals saved above expected in a 1-goal game.
Scored 2 on 5.56 xG — -3.56 vs expected. The looks were there; the finish will come back.
The Bruins took it 3-2 in a shootout with only 40% of expected goals (3.63–5.56).
Gave up 34 rush shots worth 3.26 xG (0 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.
Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.
0 goals on 34 rush shots worth 3.26 xG.
The Capitals controlled 60% of expected goals (5.56 to 3.63) and still lost — the process was there, the finish wasn't.
Change nothing structurally — this loss was variance, not process.