The Canucks beat the Bruins 5-4 in a shootout despite losing the expected-goals battle 5.38–2.56. Boston had 68% of the xG at 5v5 and still lost — this was a heist.

The Bruins dominated shot volume, landing 43 attempts to Vancouver's 23. Expected goals told the same story: 68–32 split in Boston's favor. High-danger chances went 9–3 to Boston. By every process metric, the Bruins were superior.

The Canucks won anyway. K. Lankinen made 39 saves on 43 shots with a 0.907 save percentage, outperforming his expected performance by 1.38 goals. J. Swayman, meanwhile, stopped only 19 of 23, posting an 0.826 save percentage — 1.44 goals worse than expected. Variance tilted hard toward Vancouver's goaltender.

Boston's efficiency numbers were elite: they generated 0.073 expected goals per shot compared to Vancouver's 0.054. Yet they failed to convert. The Bruins scored three goals from low-danger chances, the kind a goaltender must steal. They were lethal in transition, too — three goals on 28 rush chances — but Vancouver matched that intensity with four goals on just 20 rush opportunities.

The sequence that decided it came in the shootout. Liam Ohgren's backhander from the doorstep sent Vancouver home with the win.

The model calls this pick'em: Vancouver 2.4–2.7 goals, Boston 55% to win. When you look at underlying strength, there's almost no separation.

Vancouver is minus-5 in goal differential over its last 10. The Canucks' 44.0% xG% trails Boston's 47.0%, and the Corsi split (46.0% vs. 49.0%) confirms it: the Bruins create more chances and control the puck. But Vancouver's PDO of 0.974 is running cold, and regression is available. Boston's PDO sits at 1.023—the inverse. The Bruins are running hot, and some of that luck evaporates.

Rest tips the scale slightly toward Vancouver: the Bruins have 1 day off; the Canucks have 3. That's meaningful for a team whose underlying metrics suggest it's close enough to win with fresh legs.

J. Swayman, though, is on a back-to-back. Watch for Boston to start a backup, or a tired starter who doesn't have his usual edge. That's a wildcard.

The matchups are tight. Vancouver's Filip Chytil generates 1.03 xG per 60 and has 3 goals on 15.0% shooting—elite volume and precision. He clears space for Drew O'Connor, who has 13 goals and shoots 11.8%. Boston counters with Viktor Arvidsson: 1.04 xG per 60, 18 goals, and the rare player who both creates and finishes at scale. Tanner Jeannot (0.75 xG/60, 6 goals, 8.3% shooting) operates in the secondary tier.

Boston's defensive weak link is Elias Lindholm. Vancouver's is Victor Mancini. The Bruins' puck possession edge—49.0% Corsi—matters most when Lindholm is on his heels. Conversely, Mancini can be exploited by the Canucks' more aggressive forecheck.

PDO favors Vancouver. Rest favors Vancouver. Puck possession, goaltending health, and top-line punch favor Boston. The edges cancel. Flip.