What went wrong for the Boston Bruins in the playoffs, and what happens next

BOSTON — The Boston Bruins believe they came up short in a six-game Round 1 against the Buffalo Sabres. The Bruins submitted a remarkable 2025-26 season.

Both statements are facts.

Statistically, the Bruins were a postseason long shot. According to Natural Stat Trick, they had an expected goal share of 46.66 percent during regular-season five-on-five play. Only four clubs (the Chicago Blackhawks, Seattle Kraken, Vancouver Canucks and Toronto Maple Leafs) were worse. None of them made the playoffs.

In comparison, the Colorado Avalanche and Carolina Hurricanes finished 1-2 in xGF%. It is no surprise that both swept their first-round opponents.

Yet through a blend of airtight goaltending, timely scoring, stout rush defense and a top-10 power play, the Bruins charged through the first 82 games to record 100 points. Their 24-point year-over-year improvement signaled the organization’s A-plus execution of an on-the-fly rebuild: the keenness of general manager Don Sweeney’s work at the 2025 deadline, the first-year coaching of Marco Sturm, the excellence of the three foundational players (Charlie McAvoy, David Pastrnak and Jeremy Swayman) and the complementary nature of the rest of the roster. Sweeney and president Cam Neely can trademark the template of an ideal turnaround.

Part of the 2025-26 story, however, is how you could literally call them the Above Expected Bruins. Case in point: their No. 2 PDO (save percentage plus shooting percentage), which shows how sharply they scored more goals than they should have and how regularly Swayman, a Vezina Trophy finalist, pulled out pucks that should have been in his net.

All of this set the Bruins up for what happened against the Sabres: The Great Regression.

None of this is to say there was no value in advancing to the postseason. Just the opposite. James Hagens, Marat Khusnutdinov and Fraser Minten, among others, have a better understanding of how hard the playoffs are. The three youngsters, who project to be part of a long-term core, are better off with postseason scar tissue than without. One day after the 6-1 Game 4 calamity, Sturm underscored the value of the loss, as curious as that might sound.

“That’s why it’s so good to make the playoffs,” said Sturm. “It feels s—– right now. I know. But it’s so good for those kids. Even for David and someone like that. It’s so good to go through games like that. Because it’s just going to help you as a player, as an individual, as a group, to move forward. And you have to fail.”

Sturm knows this firsthand. When he was traded to the Bruins from the San Jose Sharks in 2005, he joined a down-and-out franchise. At year’s end, the Bruins cleaned out the front office and the bench. In retrospect, first-year GM Peter Chiarelli erred in hiring Dave Lewis to coach the club in 2006-07. The Bruins continued to spin their tires under Lewis.

But after Chiarelli replaced Lewis with Claude Julien, the reversal began. Sturm and the Bruins made the playoffs, perhaps earlier than projected. They lost to the Montreal Canadiens in Round 1. Three years later, Boston won the Stanley Cup.

“You just learn from it,” Sturm said of growing pains. “You get better. You’re getting more comfortable. Look at our lineup. There’s some guys that have never been through it. They have to go through it. They’ve got to experience it first. I can’t expect them to be the difference already. No. It’s not fair.”

One of the reasons Sweeney declined to pay a high cost for a 2026 deadline acquisition was his acknowledgment that the Bruins were not a Cup contender yet. Sweeney knows better than anyone how much more work is required to design a roster that can play into June, not just late April. The GM’s offseason focus will be on the blue line.

Neither McAvoy nor Hampus Lindholm played their best against the Sabres. But they are credible blocks of a defensive foundation. So is Nikita Zadorov. Jonathan Aspirot is a good depth defenseman.

But Andrew Peeke is just under two months out from being an unrestricted free agent. Mason Lohrei did well to adjust to playing his off-side, but it remains to be seen whether he’s a long-term solution. Henri Jokiharju, a healthy scratch for the first four games, has two years left at $3 million annually. The right side requires major construction.

Up front, Elias Lindholm averaged 1.4 points per 60 minutes of five-on-five play during the regular season. That placed him 11th among team forwards with at least 400 five-on-five minutes. He has five years left on his deal at $7.75 million annually. Lindholm is not a No. 1 center. In fact, Sturm bumped him from the first line for the last two games of Round 1.

On the flip side, Pavel Zacha finished third with a 2.38 points per 60 rate. He has one year left on his deal. The 29-year-old is due a big-time bump from his $4.75 million average annual value. He will be eligible to sign an extension on July 1.

Perhaps Zacha could take some of Lindholm’s shifts. Ditto for Hagens, who played most of 2025-26 at left wing as a pro and collegian. Maybe Matt Poitras can make a full-time transition after scoring 44 points in 69 AHL games.

The Bruins are ahead of schedule with their U-turn. Just about everything went right in the first 82 games. But the last six games prove that they are several players short.