Backcheck
Recap · BOS at SJS

Y. Askarov stands tall as the Sharks edge the Bruins

The Sharks won a genuine coin flip — neither side controlled the run of play.

By the ModelJul 11, 5:26 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
BOS
Boston Bruins
1
Home
SJS
San Jose Sharks
3
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.99Expected goals3.82
51% share for the better side
35Shot attempts (SOG)31
7High-danger chances6
70Corsi (all attempts)50
Score-adjusted: 62% / 38%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

Askarov was the difference. The Bruins held a slight expected-goals edge (3.99 vs 3.82) but underperformed it by 2.99 goals—squandering quality chances while Askarov turned back 34 of 35 shots, outperforming his expected output by the same margin.

San Jose's attack was narrower but sharper. Though the Sharks held 47% of shot attempts (31–35 on goal), they generated more dangerous looks per shot (0.076 xG vs 0.057). The Bruins built more high-danger opportunities (7 vs 6) and crashed the net with six rebound chances, yet couldn't convert.

Boston created the chances but couldn't convert. J. Swayman kept the Bruins within reach with a 0.933 save percentage, outperforming his expected output by 1.82 goals, yet Askarov was simply better.

The turning point came at 18:53 of the first period when Collin Graf's wrist shot from a sharp angle beat Swayman and set the tone for an evening where the Bruins controlled territory but couldn't convert chances.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
BOS1 / 7 · 1.72 xG
SJS1 / 6 · 2.03 xG
Medium dangermid-range
BOS0 / 13 · 1.44 xG
SJS1 / 10 · 1.13 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
BOS0 / 50 · 0.84 xG
SJS1 / 34 · 0.66 xG

BOS went 0-for-13 from medium danger on 1.44 expected goals — 1.4 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
BOS
1 G · 3.99 xG · -3.0
SJS
3 G · 3.82 xG · -0.8
012345
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
J. SwaymanBOS
+1.8
Y. AskarovSJS
+3.0

BOS finished -3.0 against expected, SJS -0.8 — Y. Askarov (SJS) saved 3.0 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
BOS
WRIST1/32
SLAP0/17
SNAP0/3
TIP IN0/2
BACKHAND0/0
OTHER0/16
SJS
WRIST2/30
SLAP0/4
SNAP1/3
TIP IN0/1
BACKHAND0/2
OTHER0/10
BOS
SJS
Off the rush
1 G on 25 · 1.89 xG
1 G on 21 · 1.90 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 6 · 1.37 xG
0 G on 1 · 0.15 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: BOS went 1-for-32, SJS 2-for-30.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
M. Celebrini
#71 · C · SJS
1 G · 1 A · 5 SOG · 19:32 TOI · +2
M. Ferraro
#38 · D · SJS
0 G · 1 A · 2 SOG · 22:05 TOI · +1
D. Pastrnak
#88 · R · BOS
0 G · 1 A · 6 SOG · 21:29 TOI
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • J. Swayman (BOS) stopped 1.8 goals above expected.
  • SJS generated far more dangerous chances — 0.076 xG/shot vs 0.057. Quality over quantity.
  • BOS created 6 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
  • BOS underperformed xG by 3.0 — wasted quality chances.
  • J. Swayman (BOS) saved 1.8 goals above expected — stole the show.
  • Y. Askarov (SJS) saved 3.0 goals above expected — stole the show.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · BOS at SJS · 8:00 PM ET

Bruins at Sharks: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 5:24 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

52%
SJS
Model favorite
48%
52%
BOS50SJS

SJS by 4 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score BOS 2.52.6 SJS; 18% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

BOS← edge
edge →SJS
47.0%5v5 xG%48.0%
49.0%Corsi%47.0%
2.39xGF / 602.33
2.67xGA / 602.56
2.22Goals for / gm1.99
1.82Goals against / gm2.32
1.023PDO — luck, not skill0.998

BOS holds 4 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.023 vs 0.998) says BOS has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

This is as close to a pick'em as you'll find. The model projects a 2.5–2.6 goal game favoring San Jose, which translates to 52% win probability for the Sharks—essentially a toss-up.

The underlying metrics justify the uncertainty. Boston's 47.0% expected goals share trails San Jose's 48.0%, but the Bruins edge in shot metrics: 49.0% Corsi% to the Sharks' 47.0%. Boston's PDO of 1.023 signals unsustainable luck; regression risk is real. San Jose sits at a healthier 0.998.

J. Swayman faces a back-to-back and could see a backup start or a tired starter—either scenario matters in a contest this narrow.

Viktor Arvidsson carries Boston's offensive weight at 1.04 expected goals per 60 minutes and 18 goals. His 2 high-danger goals and 13.0% shooting rate reveal a finisher capitalizing at an elite rate. Tanner Jeannot (0.75 xG/60, 6 goals, 2 HD goals, 8.3% shot percentage) provides secondary punch, though at lower volume. Elias Lindholm anchors Boston's defensive weakness.

San Jose's attack hinges on availability. Pavol Regenda led the team in expected goals per 60 at 1.10 with a 16.1% shooting rate across 5 goals, but is marked inactive and likely unavailable. Igor Chernyshov (0.91 xG/60, 6 goals, 1 HD goal, 15.0% shooting) becomes the primary threat—he's also San Jose's defensive liability.

Neither team generates second-chance opportunities: both sit at 0% rebound goal rates and 0% high-danger goal rates.

San Jose's edge is real but slim. A 52% win probability is not confidence; it's an admission that this game could go either way.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

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
SJS
Pavol Regenda5G 1A
1.10 xG/60 · 2 HD · 16.1% sh
Igor Chernyshov6G 8A
0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters