Stars hold off the Sharks
The Stars stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.50–4.71 and won anyway.
The underlying story
Dallas won a heist: the Sharks dominated expected goals 57–43 and controlled 55% of shot attempts with 7–4 high-danger chances, yet lost 5–3. By every metric that predicts outcomes, San Jose should have won.
J. Oettinger was the difference. The Dallas goaltender stopped 34 of 37 shots for a 0.919 save percentage, beating his expected performance by 1.71 goals—that surplus is the gap between a Sharks victory and this result. A. Nedeljkovic (0.862 SV%, 25–29 saves) couldn't compensate.
San Jose's collapse in close quarters decided the game. The Sharks went 0 for 7 on high-danger chances while Dallas buried 2 of 4. Dallas's rush game was equally lethal—4 goals on 22 chances.
Jamie Benn's wrist shot from the high slot in the third period (18:42) was the turning point, when Dallas's precision punished San Jose's wasteful finish.
San Jose underperformed their expected goals by 1.71; Dallas overperformed by 1.50. That variance gap is unsustainable, but it's all that separated these teams tonight.
The danger ladder
SJS went 0-for-7 from high danger on 1.72 expected goals — 1.7 left on the table.
Finishing vs expected
DAL finished +1.5 against expected, SJS -1.7 — J. Oettinger (DAL) saved 1.7 goals above expected.
Shot diet
Wrist shots carried the volume: DAL went 5-for-28, SJS 2-for-29. DAL scored 4 of theirs off the rush.
- DAL stole this one. SJS owned 57% of the xG and lost.
- J. Oettinger (DAL) stopped 1.7 goals above expected.
- SJS couldn't convert — 0/7 on high-danger chances. That won't happen often.
- DAL was clinical in the high-danger zone — 2/4 on HD chances (50%).
- SJS scored 2 goals from low-danger spots — the opposing goalie needs to have those.
- DAL was lethal off the rush — 4 goals on 22 rush chances.
- SJS created 10 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
- DAL created 4 rebound opportunities (0 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
- SJS underperformed xG by 1.7 — wasted quality chances.
- DAL outperformed their expected goals by 1.5 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.