Rush defense leaked all night
Gave up 25 rush shots worth 2.55 xG (3 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.
Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.

Edmonton beat San Jose 3-1, and the scorelines hide how one-sided the chances were. The Oilers scored three times off the rush, and the Sharks' only goal came late, in the third.
The biggest disagreement with the scoreboard belongs to San Jose. The Sharks finished 0.81 goals below their expected goals, the model's estimate of how many goals a team's chances should have produced. Their chances were worth more than the single goal they got.
Edmonton's edge was real too. At even strength the Oilers took 68% of expected goals, the clearest sign of who was creating better chances. Shot volume tells a different story. San Jose held 50% of shot attempts, so the Sharks were not outworked. They were out-chanced.
M. Ekholm opened the scoring with a slap shot from 49 feet. The model rated that chance at 3%, a long shot that landed. V. Podkolzin made it 2-0 early in the third. A. Formenton's backhander from 8 feet put Edmonton up 3-0 in the opening minutes of the period, and the model rated that one at 20%.
Macklin Celebrini's wrist shot from 33 feet made it 3-1 for San Jose. It came 10 seconds after a takeaway by M. Misa, and it was the turning point the Sharks needed and never got.
T. Jarry stopped 19 of 20 shots for Edmonton. Y. Askarov stopped 17 of 20 for San Jose, a .850 save percentage that tells you where the Sharks' margin went.
The numbers can't say whether the finishing was luck or skill, or what was said in the room. That part belongs to the beat, and it is worth reading.
Data: NHL play-by-play and shift charts, Backcheck xG model
What the numbers can't tell you. Whether the finishing was luck or skill, why the benches were run the way they were, who was hurt, and anything said in the room. That is the beat's story, and it is worth reading.
Oilers run the Sharks off the ice on the underlying numbers
The Oilers earned this one.
The board read EDM 3, SJS 1. The chances read EDM 3.9, SJS 1.8.
Both sides finished close to what their chances were worth. This one was earned on the ice.
M. Ekholm makes it 1–0.
High-danger looks: EDM 1 of 8, SJS 0 of 1.
Oilers run the Sharks off the ice on the underlying numbers
A model, not a newsroom. Every number on these frames comes from the NHL's play-by-play and our own models. Nothing was watched, guessed or heard from anyone.
Read the full breakdownSlap shot from 49 feet, a 3% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past Y. Askarov. Win probability moved 17 points.On the ice: M. Ekholm, L. Draisaitl, C. McDavid, E. Bouchard, V. Podkolzin · against D. Nurse, A. Wennberg, K. Sherwood, M. Kesselring, I. Stenberg
Slap shot from 38 feet, a 10% chance (off the rush), past Y. Askarov. Win probability moved 16 points.On the ice: C. Murphy, J. Dickinson, K. Kapanen, R. Shea, F. Hallander · against T. Toffoli, J. Trouba, S. Dickinson, C. Graf, M. Misa
Backhander from 8 feet, a 20% chance (off the rush), past Y. Askarov. Win probability moved 5 points.On the ice: J. Dickinson, K. Kapanen, T. Emberson, F. Hallander, S. Mukhamadullin · against T. Toffoli, J. Trouba, S. Dickinson, C. Graf, M. Misa
Wrist shot from 33 feet, a 5% chance, a shot that rarely goes in (off the rush), past T. Jarry. 10s after a SJS takeaway by M. Misa.On the ice: D. Orlov, L. Cagnoni, W. Smith, M. Celebrini, I. Chernyshov · against C. Murphy, J. Dickinson, K. Kapanen, R. Shea, F. Hallander
score reads EDM–SJS
SJS went 0-for-14 from medium danger on 1.29 expected goals — 1.3 left on the table.
EDM finished -0.9 against expected, SJS -0.8.
Wrist shots carried the volume: EDM went 0-for-17, SJS 1-for-23. EDM scored 3 of theirs off the rush.
Two things happened in this game: who created the better chances, and who put the puck in the net. They are not the same thing, and this page separates them on purpose.
The one to watch is expected goals— the best single read on who deserved to win. When it disagrees with the scoreboard, that disagreement is usually the story. Nothing here is a projection; every figure is computed from this game's play-by-play. Full glossary →
A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5
A+ ≥ +2.5 saved above expected · A ≥ +1.5 · B+ ≥ +0.75 · B ≥ +0.25 · C ≥ −0.25 · D ≥ −0.75 · F below −1.5
Best skater on the ice by our rating: C. McDavid (EDM), 24:04 of ice, 0-1, 96% of the expected goals while he was out.
| Skater | TOI | G-A | SOG | ixG | xG% | PD/PT | Impact | /60 | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C. McDavidC | 24:04 | 0-1 | 4 | 1.24 | 96 | 0/0 | 2.37 | 5.92 | A+ |
| M. EkholmD | 22:46 | 1-0 | 2 | 0.49 | 97 | 0/0 | 1.84 | 4.85 | A+ |
| V. PodkolzinR | 20:48 | 1-0 | 1 | 0.10 | 97 | 0/1 | 1.64 | 4.72 | A+ |
| E. BouchardD | 24:07 | 0-1 | 1 | 0.10 | 97 | 0/0 | 1.67 | 4.16 | A |
| L. DraisaitlC | 21:49 | 0-0 | 3 | 0.65 | 97 | 1/0 | 1.53 | 4.21 | A |
| A. FormentonL | 14:02 | 1-0 | 2 | 0.27 | 32 | 0/0 | 0.96 | 4.13 | A |
| I. HowardL | 8:59 | 0-1 | 0 | 0.00 | 55 | 0/0 | 0.76 | 5.04 | A |
| J. SamanskiC | 6:19 | 0-1 | 0 | 0.04 | 33 | 0/0 | 0.53 | 5.01 | B |
| M. JosephR | 14:42 | 0-1 | 1 | 0.06 | 32 | 0/0 | 0.63 | 2.57 | B |
| K. KapanenR | 17:30 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.29 | 80 | 0/0 | 0.62 | 2.11 | B |
| T. FredericC | 9:53 | 0-0 | 3 | 0.60 | 55 | 0/0 | 0.45 | 2.73 | B |
| F. HallanderC | 14:11 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.01 | 80 | 0/0 | 0.37 | 1.56 | B |
| C. MurphyD | 24:23 | 0-1 | 0 | 0.00 | 27 | 0/0 | 0.30 | 0.75 | C |
| R. SheaD | 24:01 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.01 | 44 | 1/0 | 0.11 | 0.27 | C |
| J. DickinsonC | 13:43 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.06 | 47 | 0/0 | 0.07 | 0.30 | C |
| T. EmbersonD | 11:10 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.01 | 40 | 0/0 | 0.01 | 0.06 | D |
| S. MukhamadullinD | 11:18 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.00 | 40 | 0/0 | -0.09 | -0.48 | D |
| O. MichaelsR | 14:15 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.00 | 10 | 0/0 | -0.17 | -0.72 | D |
| Skater | TOI | G-A | SOG | ixG | xG% | PD/PT | Impact | /60 | Grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M. CelebriniC | 21:59 | 1-0 | 3 | 0.23 | 49 | 1/1 | 1.04 | 2.84 | A |
| D. OrlovD | 18:20 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.04 | 84 | 0/0 | 0.48 | 1.57 | B |
| I. ChernyshovL | 11:03 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.20 | 72 | 0/0 | 0.38 | 2.06 | B |
| L. CagnoniD | 20:21 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.01 | 84 | 0/0 | 0.35 | 1.03 | C |
| W. SmithC | 20:11 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.06 | 74 | 0/0 | 0.27 | 0.81 | C |
| M. MisaC | 12:44 | 0-1 | 0 | 0.06 | 15 | 0/0 | 0.19 | 0.91 | C |
| I. StenbergL | 18:09 | 0-0 | 2 | 0.22 | 42 | 0/0 | 0.20 | 0.65 | C |
| M. MarchmentL | 17:44 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.12 | 63 | 0/0 | 0.15 | 0.51 | C |
| Z. OstapchukC | 8:01 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.14 | 49 | 0/0 | 0.04 | 0.28 | D |
| T. ToffoliC | 11:25 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.15 | 37 | 0/0 | 0.01 | 0.03 | D |
| A. WennbergC | 20:32 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.00 | 42 | 0/0 | -0.07 | -0.20 | D |
| S. DickinsonD | 16:40 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.00 | 38 | 0/0 | -0.11 | -0.40 | D |
| K. SherwoodL | 16:15 | 0-0 | 0 | 0.00 | 40 | 0/1 | -0.20 | -0.72 | D |
| J. TroubaD | 20:41 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.09 | 23 | 0/0 | -0.34 | -0.99 | F |
| B. GoodrowC | 10:15 | 0-0 | 2 | 0.20 | 22 | 0/0 | -0.30 | -1.78 | F |
| M. KesselringD | 19:03 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.02 | 10 | 0/0 | -0.47 | -1.47 | F |
| D. NurseD | 21:56 | 0-0 | 5 | 0.16 | 11 | 0/0 | -0.66 | -1.81 | F |
| C. GrafR | 14:13 | 0-0 | 1 | 0.10 | 14 | 0/0 | -0.74 | -3.11 | F |
xG% = share of expected goals while on the ice · PD/PT = penalties drawn / taken · “in N min” = a per-60 rate far above the raw total. Impact = 0.75 G + 0.7 A1 + 0.55 A2 + 0.075 SOG + 0.05 BLK + 0.15 penalties drawn − 0.15 taken + 0.01 faceoff wins − 0.01 losses + 0.3 individual xG + 0.5 on-ice xG for − 0.5 on-ice xG against. Rating = 65% impact + 35% impact per 60, as a percentile among the skaters in this game.
Scratched, EDM: Z. Hyman, J. Walman, M. Jones. Scratched, SJS: A. Gaudette, T. Dellandrea, N. Allan. Referees Trevor Hanson and Graedy Hamilton; linesmen Ryan Gibbons and Ben O'Quinn.
EDM Created 3.92 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 8 high-danger shots (1.96 xG) and 25 rush shots (2.55 xG).
SJS Created 1.81 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; 1 high-danger shots (0.20 xG) and 22 rush shots (1.55 xG).
EDM Allowed 1.81 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 1 high-danger shots (0.20 xG) and 22 rush shots (1.55 xG).
SJS Allowed 3.92 xG against a ~2.70 league-average game; conceded 8 high-danger shots (1.96 xG) and 25 rush shots (2.55 xG).
EDM Rush shots 25–22, rush xG 2.55–1.55 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).
SJS Rush shots 22–25, rush xG 1.55–2.55 (rush-based; public data has no zone entries).
EDM 0-for-2 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 1.29 PP xG.
SJS 0-for-1 on the power play (0%; league ≈21%) with 0.00 PP xG.
EDM +0.81 goals saved above expected on 20 shots against.
SJS +0.92 goals saved above expected on 20 shots against.
EDM Took 1 penalties for 2 PIM vs 2 for 4 on the other side.
SJS Took 2 penalties for 4 PIM vs 1 for 2 on the other side.
Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral
EDM Finishing -0.92 goals vs xG plus +0.81 GSAx of save luck = -0.11 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.
SJS Finishing -0.81 goals vs xG plus +0.92 GSAx of save luck = +0.11 total. This grades luck, not skill — C is neutral, A is very lucky.
Gave up 25 rush shots worth 2.55 xG (3 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.
Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.
3 goals on 25 rush shots worth 2.55 xG.
The Oilers controlled 68% of expected goals (3.92–1.81) and won 3-1 — result matched process.
Gave up 22 rush shots worth 1.55 xG (1 goals) — transition gaps were there every period.
Tighten neutral-zone structure and keep D gaps closed on entries.
1 goals on 22 rush shots worth 1.55 xG.
Macklin Celebrini's wrist shot from the top of the circles in P3 swung the game.
Each club shoots toward its own end — EDM left, SJS right — the way you would watch it. A dot's size is how dangerous the look was, from distance and angle; it is a proxy for shot quality, not the xG model the article is written from. Hover a dot for the shooter and the clock.