The Sharks stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.92–4.56 and won anyway.
The Sharks beat the Bruins 4–2, but the expected-goal metric suggested Boston deserved better—a 4.56–3.92 xG advantage for the visitors. The underlying game belonged to the Bruins; the scoresheet didn't.
Boston controlled play with 59% of shot attempts (41–28). Expected goals split 54–46 in their favor. High-danger chances went 7–9, a narrow edge to San Jose. Yet despite a stronger process, the Bruins left the ice with a loss.
The culprit: goaltending variance. A. Nedeljkovic was exceptional. He stopped 39 of 41 shots for a 0.951 save percentage—2.56 goals above expected. On high-danger opportunities, he was perfect, stopping all seven chances against him. Meanwhile, J. Swayman (24/28, 0.857 SV%) couldn't match that ceiling, and Boston's ability to finish dried up. The Bruins went 0 for 7 on high-danger chances—a shooting drought that explained the scoreline better than any underlying metric.
San Jose converted at better rates elsewhere. The Sharks were lethal off the rush, scoring twice on 22 rush attempts. They also cashed in on rebound opportunities, converting two of six (versus Boston's zero of three). The Sharks' shot quality was sharper too: 0.085 xG per shot versus Boston's 0.058. Fewer chances, better ones.
David Pastrnak's slap shot from the top of the circles (19:07, third period) was the game's turning point—a moment when the Bruins' dominance might have shifted. It didn't.
