The Ducks earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.
Anaheim's 7–1 victory masked an even more complete dominance: the Ducks controlled 86% of expected goals (6.41–1.08), a gulf that actual goals barely captured.
The Blackhawks never got the quality looks their shot total suggested. They fired 20 shots but generated just 1.08 expected goals—a rate of 0.032 xG per shot. Anaheim, meanwhile, rifled 53 shots at a devastating 0.074 xG per shot, tripling Chicago's efficiency. That chasm—quality over quantity—is why goals skewed so extreme.
High-danger chances told an even starker story: 12–0. The Ducks created chances the Blackhawks couldn't manufacture. They were lethal rushing, converting six goals from 45 rush attempts. The power play added another layer of dominance, scoring twice on 15 shots with 1.78 expected goals behind it.
A. Soderblom (CHI) faced an impossible task, posting a 0.868 save percentage that still underperformed expectations by 0.59 goals—a goalie surrendering inevitable outcomes. V. Husso (ANA) needed only to stay clean, stopping 19 of 20 at 0.950 SV%.
The Ducks buried three low-danger goals that any goaltender should stop, then added four more from the premium areas. That's not luck; that's execution against a defense giving up second-chance opportunities. Anaheim crashed the net with purpose, converting one of eight rebound chances but creating the chaos that forces mistakes.
Chicago generated pockets of danger—their limited offensive looks were higher-quality than their volume suggested—but it didn't matter. When one team controls the game this decisively, marginal performances don't survive.