xJawn NHL expected goals

← Games

Save a card: Summary · Full card · Game flow · SJS skaters · BOS skaters · SJS lines · BOS lines · Matchups

SJS 4 – 6 BOS

San Jose Sharks at Boston Bruins

Final · Oct 24, 2026
2026-27 · regular season
The call
BOS 65.1% ✓
expected 2.72–3.69 · BOS won 4–6
actual xG
2.17–5.52
xG share, predicted → actual
SJS 42% → 28%58% → 72% BOS
Today's puzzle Remember Some Guys — name the skater from the shape of his career. Three clues, one guess a day. Play →
On the ice
Adjusts with rink filters

Strength and score are read from SJS's side, the same minutes at both ends: PP = SJS power play · PK = BOS power play · Leading = SJS ahead · ST = each club's own power play.

SJS attacks◀ all strengths
BOS attacksall strengths ▶
× goal• on net ◦ missed· blocked hover any attempt for the shooter, its xG and everything the model saw
How to read this map

One rink, both teams: SJS attacks the left net, BOS the right. Every attempt is a Gaussian bump of height = its model xG. The controls switch the surface (xG heatmap ↔ vs league) and the markers; vs league compares this game against a typical NHL team-game under the same filter (2026-27 regular season, 283 games), so a 5v5 view is measured against league 5v5.

A strength or score filter is read from SJS's side and mirrored for BOS: “SJS PP” shows SJS's power-play attempts on the left and BOS's shorthanded attempts on the right — the same minutes of the game at both ends. Empty-net attempts are excluded unless you include them. The Player control narrows the map and the rows beneath it to the attempts by either club while one player was on the ice (for a goalie, while he was in net); his own attempts wear a blue ring. vs league switches off while a player is picked — the league baseline is a whole team-game, which one player's slice is not. Hover any attempt for the shooter, the result, its xG, and the inputs behind it: clock, strength, score, shot type, distance, angle, handedness, rush/rebound, what happened just before, and the goalie or the blocker.

What each side produced

all strengths · this game
SJS BOS
bars share a scale within each row · the longer bar is the row's leader
Goalson the map
4 5
Expected goals
2.17 5.52
xG%share of xG
28% 72%
High-dangerattempts ≥ 0.20 xG
2 5
Shots on goal
27 34
Attempts
43 64
xG by period · whole game 1st0.9–2.62nd0.7–1.73rd0.5–1.2

The Bruins beat the Sharks 6–4 at home, and the chances agreed: BOS out-created SJS 5.5–2.2 in expected goals. The Bruins power play made 1.2 xG on 10 attempts.

Counts come from the shot table behind the map: empty-net attempts and the shootout are excluded, so the goals here can trail the official final by an empty-netter or the shootout's deciding goal. Same numbers as the post-game cards.

As the game went

all situations · this game
cumulative SJS − BOS xG · bands = power plays · lines = goals
1ST2ND3RD+1−1+2−2+3−3+4−4SJS AHEAD ▲BOS AHEAD ▼
How to read this

One line: cumulative SJS minus BOS expected goals. Above zero SJS is ahead on chances, below zero BOS is. Shaded bands are power plays in the side's colour; vertical lines are goals.

Goals

this game
xG = the chance, before it went in
TeamScorerPeriodTimexG
SJSMichael Misa 1st5:54 PP 0.04
SJSKiefer Sherwood 2nd13:34 SH 0.27
SJSDmitry Orlov 3rd4:03 PP 0.03
SJSWill Smith 3rd12:27 0.10
BOSCasey Mittelstadt 1st3:08 0.42
BOSMarat Khusnutdinov 2nd8:20 0.12
BOSDavid Pastrnak 3rd8:27 0.03
BOSJames Hagens 3rd9:07 0.07
BOSFraser Minten 3rd12:00 PP 0.35
BOSWilliam Borgen 3rd19:32 EN 0.37
Who

Skaters

all · whole game · this game
on-ice xG for and against, his own attempts, the net
strength
period
sort
How to read this

Every skater: on-ice xG against to the left of zero, for to the right, his own attempts as the solid bar, a hash at the net. The slim track under the name is ice time. The chart opens sorted by net, best first; pick another key to re-order it, and click the same key again to flip it. A name opens the player's page. Pick a period and every bar re-lays for that period alone on the same scale as the whole game, so the three periods add up to it; a skater who did not play in it fades to the bottom.

SJS
against for own net ice time
0.50.5111.51.5222.52.5333.53.50Mason MarchmentF17:07+0.26Tyler ToffoliF13:56-0.15Ivar StenbergF17:03-0.16Michael MisaF14:25-0.21Adam GaudetteF10:12-0.21Dmitry OrlovD19:24-0.21Jacob TroubaD23:32-0.26Ty DellandreaF12:30-0.34Kiefer SherwoodF15:00-0.34Nolan AllanD13:57-0.45Barclay GoodrowF11:30-0.50Sam DickinsonD19:59-0.71Zack OstapchukF10:51-0.73Will SmithF20:09-1.70Collin GrafF15:43-2.29Macklin CelebriniF21:38-2.36Darnell NurseD20:04-2.62Michael KesselringD14:58-3.00
0.50.5111.51.5222.52.5330Sam DickinsonD15:49-0.07Mason MarchmentF11:04-0.07Michael MisaF10:18-0.20Kiefer SherwoodF10:22-0.23Jacob TroubaD14:43-0.24Ty DellandreaF11:07-0.26Tyler ToffoliF9:54-0.28Zack OstapchukF6:30-0.28Barclay GoodrowF7:45-0.29Adam GaudetteF7:22-0.33Nolan AllanD13:09-0.35Ivar StenbergF10:14-0.36Dmitry OrlovD13:50-0.43Will SmithF12:52-2.03Collin GrafF13:09-2.16Macklin CelebriniF13:31-2.29Darnell NurseD15:28-2.38Michael KesselringD10:22-2.39
0.250.250.50.50Mason MarchmentF4:43+0.33Ivar StenbergF4:31+0.33Macklin CelebriniF4:50+0.23Will SmithF4:40+0.23Dmitry OrlovD4:55+0.22Tyler ToffoliF2:44+0.13Michael MisaF2:59+0.12Kiefer SherwoodF2:58+0.12Adam GaudetteF2:50+0.12Jacob TroubaD2:57+0.03Darnell NurseD0:12+0.00Ty DellandreaF0:08+0.00Michael KesselringD0:03+0.00Nolan AllanD0:05-0.10
0.250.250.50.50.750.75110Nolan AllanD0:43+0.00Dmitry OrlovD0:26+0.00Will SmithF0:25+0.00Mason MarchmentF0:02+0.00Ty DellandreaF1:15-0.08Jacob TroubaD3:43-0.15Collin GrafF2:09-0.20Barclay GoodrowF3:20-0.21Kiefer SherwoodF1:40-0.23Darnell NurseD3:35-0.29Zack OstapchukF4:05-0.45Macklin CelebriniF0:42-0.47Sam DickinsonD2:19-0.59Michael KesselringD2:54-0.61
BOS
against for own net ice time
0.50.5111.51.5222.52.5333.53.50Casey MittelstadtF15:18+2.93James HagensF12:17+2.87Nikita ZadorovD18:17+2.20William BorgenD17:49+2.13Elias LindholmF17:27+2.01JJ PeterkaF17:50+1.11Mason LohreiD17:05+0.95Fraser MintenF18:15+0.88David PastrnakF20:24+0.58Morgan GeekieF15:38+0.27Hampus LindholmD21:04+0.23Charlie McAvoyD24:51+0.22Matthew PoitrasF7:07+0.20Pavel ZachaF19:46+0.19Frederic BrunetD14:38+0.16Tanner JeannotF7:16+0.09Marat KhusnutdinovF16:00+0.08Mark KastelicF8:38+0.08
0.50.5111.51.5222.52.5330Nikita ZadorovD12:57+2.47William BorgenD12:42+2.40Casey MittelstadtF12:04+2.23James HagensF9:57+2.08Elias LindholmF9:52+2.06Pavel ZachaF11:47+0.49David PastrnakF13:55+0.44Hampus LindholmD15:51+0.42JJ PeterkaF14:25+0.37Tanner JeannotF5:50+0.32Charlie McAvoyD15:02+0.30Mark KastelicF5:48+0.25Matthew PoitrasF7:07+0.20Fraser MintenF12:40+0.18Morgan GeekieF10:15+0.15Frederic BrunetD12:47+0.15Mason LohreiD13:47+0.12Marat KhusnutdinovF10:39-0.00
0.250.250.50.50.750.75110James HagensF2:16+0.79Mason LohreiD1:32+0.76Casey MittelstadtF1:56+0.71JJ PeterkaF1:54+0.71Fraser MintenF1:54+0.71Pavel ZachaF4:55+0.12David PastrnakF4:53+0.12Charlie McAvoyD4:51+0.12Morgan GeekieF4:49+0.12Elias LindholmF4:19+0.03Nikita ZadorovD0:18-0.00Frederic BrunetD0:28-0.06
0.250.250.50.50Marat KhusnutdinovF4:53+0.19Elias LindholmF2:03+0.02Mason LohreiD0:37+0.00Frederic BrunetD0:10+0.00JJ PeterkaF0:08+0.00Hampus LindholmD3:47-0.01Charlie McAvoyD3:19-0.01Fraser MintenF1:48-0.04Mark KastelicF2:50-0.17Tanner JeannotF1:26-0.24William BorgenD3:51-0.33Nikita ZadorovD3:47-0.33Pavel ZachaF2:13-0.44

Lines & pairs

all · whole game · this game
most-used units · when they played · on-ice xG lines are by strength · 5v5 shown
strength
period
sort
How to read this

The units that actually played together most at the chosen strength — forward lines and defence pairs at 5v5, the whole group on the ice on the power play or the kill — each with when it was on the ice at that strength across the game clock (period and power-play bands behind the strip) and on-ice xG against / for while the whole unit was out, at that strength only. Sorted by time together; pick another key to re-order, and a name opens the player's page. Pick a period and the strip veils the rest of the game while the bars re-lay for that period alone, on the whole game's scale.

SJS
on ice power play penalty kill xGA xGF
BOS
on ice power play penalty kill xGA xGF

Matchups

5v5 · this game
every skater against every skater, goalies first · hover a cell
order
SJS won the chances BOS won them full colour = a margin of 0.75 xG or more taller = more time together (full height at 12:00) on together, dead even never on together G = goalie: his row or column is each skater against the whole other team
SwaymanPastrnakZachaPeterkaLindholmMittelstadtHagensGeekieKhusnutdinovMintenJeannotKastelicPoitrasLindholmMcAvoyLohreiBrunetZadorovBorgenGL1L2L3L4D1D2D3GL1L2L3L4D1D2D3NedeljkovicSmithCelebriniGrafSherwoodMisaStenbergToffoliMarchmentDellandreaGoodrowGaudetteOstapchukTroubaDickinsonOrlovAllanNurseKesselring
How to read this

Rows are SJS's skaters, columns BOS's, grouped the way they played: forward lines (L1 = the line that played together most), then defence pairs. Each cell covers the five-on-five time those two players shared the ice. Its colour is the club that out-chanced the other in that time — expected goals for minus against — and the stronger the colour, the bigger the margin. Each cell is also raised: the taller the block, the longer the two shared the ice, up to full height at 12:00 of five-on-five time. A grey cell means they met and it came out even; an open, flat one means they never met at five-on-five.

The first row and column are the goalies. A goalie is in net for every five-on-five second, so a skater's cell against the other side's goalie is all of that skater's five-on-five time against that team — the rest of his row or column added up — and the corner where the two goalies meet is the game's five-on-five. Those cells cover far more time than any pair, so they reach full colour sooner and stand at full height, a wall along each edge of the grid. A goalie change adds a second goalie row or column, each covering his own time.

Linemates share the ice, so a line against a line reads as a block. The margin is a total, not a rate: a long matchup has room to build a big gap and a thirty-second one does not — which is what the height is there to show: a tall, strong cell is the game's story; a short, strong one is a moment. Hover (or tap) any cell for the exact time together, the xG each way, attempts and goals. One game — a strong cell is what happened, not what would happen again.

The model

The prediction, scored

🔒 pregame · this game

Before puck drop the engine made BOS a 65.1% favorite, expecting a 2.72–3.69 game — BOS won 4–6, so the call landed. Every number in this section was issued before the game and is never re-graded.

pred. xGactual xG pred. 5v5actual 5v5 pred. STactual PP
SJS 2.722.17 1.751.05 0.690.57
BOS 3.695.52 2.563.97 0.891.17

Predicted 5v5 / special-teams portions come from the predicted map's strength splits (one shared scale per team pins the all-strengths total to its expected goals), so they don't sum exactly — the remainder is 4v4, 3v3, and other mixed states. The actual columns are the card's own counts (empty-net attempts excluded); the actual PP column is power-play xG only, the same bucket the predicted map's special-teams view draws.

The pregame score grid

🔒 pregame · this game

The likeliest finals the engine saw before the game, with what actually happened marked — ■ SJS · ■ BOS.

Likeliest finals (SJS–BOS)probability
3–3 6.6% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
2–2 5.9% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
2–4 4.9%
4–4 4.1% tied after regulation — OT/SO decides
1–3 3.9%
4–6 1.4% what happened
6.7%2.5%018.1%9.3%124.3%16.9%221.9%20.6%314.9%19.1%48.1%14.4%53.7%9.0%61.5%4.8%70.7%3.5%8+

Scoreline odds are the engine's own grid: each team's goals as a Poisson count, with the fitted adjustment for how often games end tied after regulation (ρ = 0.35), so these odds and the headline win probability come from the same numbers. The OT/SO layer is a separate fitted model and is already inside the headline win probability.

The pregame read

🔒 pregame · this game

The engine made BOS a 65.1% favorite — BOS controls 57.5% of the predicted xG. Of SJS's 2.72 expected goals, 1.75 should come at 5v5 and 0.69 on the power play; BOS projects 2.56 at 5v5 and 0.89 on the power play. The logistic challenger put the home side at 64.5%, Elo at 66.9%.

Why BOS 65.1%
win chance× expected goals
5v5 play +4.5 BOS ×1.07 · SJS ×0.98
home ice +3.7 BOS ×1.08 · SJS ×1.00
finishing +3.4 BOS ×1.09 · SJS ×1.02
goaltending +2.8 BOS ×1.00 · SJS ×0.94
schedule +1.0 BOS ×1.01 · SJS ×0.98
special teams −0.6 BOS ×1.00 · SJS ×1.02

Win chance is in points toward BOS (bars right of the line push toward BOS, left toward SJS). Each win-chance number is one-at-a-time: that piece reset to league average (neutral ice, a typical night's rest) on both sides and the game re-priced; the pieces interact, so they don't add up to the call. The multipliers are exact: a league-average team on neutral ice, on a typical night's rest, would expect 2.88 goals in this game, and each side's expected goals is that times its column of multipliers. Special teams reads small because the engine's power-play terms fit near zero, not because special teams don't matter.

Where the engine expected the goals

🔒 pregame · this game

The predicted surface, issued before puck drop — not this game's shots (those are the card's map above). SJS attacks the left net, BOS the right; each end multiplies where the attacking team generates xG this season by where its opponent concedes it, scaled so each end totals the engine's expected goals. Actual shots lays the game's unblocked attempts on top: × goals, • on net, ◦ missed.

Context

Tale of the tape

season to date

How each team fares on its own, season to date: per-game xG rates with league rank (of 32). Rank 1 is best on every row — orange ranks sit in the top third of the league, gray in the bottom third.

SJSBOS
2.70 (26th) Offense
xG for / game
3.01 (15th)
3.74 (32nd) Defense
xG against / game
2.93 (15th)
0.74 (19th) Power play
PP xG / game
0.63 (26th)
1.12 (32nd) Penalty kill
PP xG conceded / game
0.70 (12th)

Season-to-date form as of the site's latest build, shown for context — the ratings the engine actually used were its own as-of-game-day state. Replay this matchup in the lab →