Motion-blurred skater in a Edmonton Oilers sweater
Breakdown · EDM at SJS

Oilers run the Sharks off the ice on the underlying numbers

The verdict · earned

The Oilers earned it — the game and the expected-goals battle both.

EDM 3 · SJS 1
◆ By the ModelOct 10, 6:40 PMxG: xgboost-0.765Edited for clarityDrafted from NHL play-by-play by Backcheck's model, worded for clarity by an AI editor that may not change a number. Nobody at Backcheck was at the rink. How this works

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

The goals

  • EDM 1–0, 12:37 of the first. M. Ekholm, slap shot from 49 feet, a 3% chance by the model (off the rush), past Y. Askarov. Assists: I. Howard, J. Samanski. Win probability moved 17 points.
  • EDM 2–0, 03:13 of the third. V. Podkolzin, slap shot from 38 feet, a 10% chance by the model (off the rush), past Y. Askarov. Assists: C. McDavid, E. Bouchard. Win probability moved 16 points.
  • EDM 3–0, 05:40 of the third. A. Formenton, backhander from 8 feet, a 20% chance by the model (off the rush), past Y. Askarov. Assists: M. Joseph, C. Murphy. Win probability moved 5 points.
  • SJS 3–1, 11:19 of the third. M. Celebrini, wrist shot from 33 feet, a 5% chance by the model (off the rush), past T. Jarry. Assists: M. Misa. 10 seconds after a SJS takeaway by M. Misa.

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.

The breakdown in twelve frames

Swipe it

Every number is from this page
Final · Oct 10
EDM
3
SJS
1

Oilers run the Sharks off the ice on the underlying numbers

Chances 3.9 – 1.8Did they deserve it? →
Did they deserve it?

The Oilers earned this one.

Expected goals · chance value
EDM
3.92
SJS
1.81
68% of the chances32%

The board read EDM 3, SJS 1. The chances read EDM 3.9, SJS 1.8.

Our xG model · NHL play-by-play · all situations
Luck check
EDM
−0.9
goals above expected
EDM3.92 expected · 3 scored
Expected
Scored
SJS1.81 expected · 1 scored
Expected
Scored

Both sides finished close to what their chances were worth. This one was earned on the ice.

PDO = sh% + sv% · drifts to 1.000 over a season
The swing
+17
win-probability points
46% → 63% for EDM
SJS 100%the game, start to finish
EDM 100%P1 · P2 · P3
EDMP1 12:37

M. Ekholm makes it 1–0.

In-game win model · fitted on 5,248 games
Every goal, in order
  1. P1 12:37EDMM. Ekholm3%1–0
  2. P3 03:13EDMV. Podkolzin10%2–0
  3. P3 05:40EDMA. Formenton20%3–0
  4. P3 11:19SJSM. Celebrini5%3–1
NHL play-by-play · chance value from our xG model
Where the shots came from
EDM
37 shots
3
Final
70 shots
SJS
33 shots
1
EDM attackSJS attack
EDM SJS Goal
37
shots · 3 in
33
shots · 1 in
Every unblocked shot · press play to replay it
Chances by danger
EDMSJS
1 / 8
1.96 xG
High danger
0 / 1
0.20 xG
1 / 17
1.66 xG
Medium
0 / 14
1.29 xG
1 / 25
0.30 xG
Low
1 / 28
0.33 xG

High-danger looks: EDM 1 of 8, SJS 0 of 1.

Danger tiers by our xG model · high ≥ 20% chance
In the net
B+
T. Jarry
+0.8
EDM · 19/20 · 60:00
Best save · a 20% chance, wrist from 19 ft · P3 08:14
B
Y. Askarov
+0.3
SJS · 17/20 · 56:28
Best save · a 32% chance, wrist from 4 ft · P3 10:55
Best skater on the ice
A+
EDM
C. McDavid
C · impact 2.37
24:04
Ice time
0–1
G – A
1.24
Own xG
96%
xG share
Impact · top 4
C. McDavid2.4A+
M. Ekholm1.8A+
V. Podkolzin1.6A+
E. Bouchard1.7A
Report card
EDMSJS
OffenseA+D
DefenseBF
TransitionBD
Special teamsCF
GoaltendingBB
DisciplineB-C-
LuckCC
Seven dimensions, A+ to F · basis on the breakdown
Why it went the way it went
Why EDM won
  1. 01Dangerous off the rush
  2. 02Won on the merits
  3. 03Quality over quantity
Why SJS lost
  1. 01Rush defense leaked all night
  2. 02Cold finishing night
  3. 03Rebound control was shaky
Our storyline model · reasoning on the breakdown
The numbers, checked
BACKCHECK

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 breakdown
backcheckreport.com
01 / 12 · Final
Every goal, in order

How it happened

NHL play-by-play
1stshots 5–5
  1. 12:37EDMM. Ekholm(I. Howard, J. Samanski)1–0

    Slap 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

2ndshots 3–7no goals
    3rdshots 12–8
    1. 03:13EDMV. Podkolzin(C. McDavid, E. Bouchard)2–0

      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

    2. 05:40EDMA. Formenton(M. Joseph, C. Murphy)3–0

      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

    3. 11:19SJSM. Celebrini(M. Misa)3–1

      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

    Source · NHL play-by-play (api-web.nhle.com)
    Process vs result

    The numbers

    XGBoost xG · NHL play-by-play
    3.92
    EDM chances
    Goals their shots were worth
    −0.9
    Finishing
    Goals below what those chances were worth
    1.037
    EDM puck luck
    Above 1.000 — the bounces went their way
    53.8%
    Shot attempts
    Over half — they had the puck more
    Split by club

    Who controlled the game

    3.92Expected goals1.81
    EDM 68% of the chance quality
    20Shots on goal20
    8High-danger chances1
    50All attempts (Corsi)43
    Adjusted for score: EDM 49% · SJS 51%
    Faceoffs · SJS won36%off48%neu38%def
    Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG
    How the game was won

    The danger ladder

    shotsgoalsexpected
    High dangerslot & crease
    EDM1 / 8 · 1.96 xG
    SJS0 / 1 · 0.20 xG
    Medium dangermid-range
    EDM1 / 17 · 1.66 xG
    SJS0 / 14 · 1.29 xG
    Low dangerperimeter & point
    EDM1 / 25 · 0.30 xG
    SJS1 / 28 · 0.33 xG

    SJS went 0-for-14 from medium danger on 1.29 expected goals — 1.3 left on the table.

    Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL play-by-play
    The luck layer

    Finishing vs expected

    expectedactual
    EDM
    3 G · 3.92 xG · -0.9
    SJS
    1 G · 1.81 xG · -0.8
    012345

    EDM finished -0.9 against expected, SJS -0.8.

    Source · Backcheck xG model
    Shot types · rush and rebound chancesopen +
    What they shot — and what went in

    Shot diet

    goalsshots
    EDM
    WRIST0/17
    SLAP2/7
    SNAP0/2
    TIP IN0/5
    BACKHAND1/6
    OTHER0/13
    SJS
    WRIST1/23
    SLAP0/3
    SNAP0/6
    TIP IN0/1
    BACKHAND0/0
    OTHER0/10
    EDM
    SJS
    Off the rush
    3 G on 25
    2.55 xG
    1 G on 22
    1.55 xG
    Off rebounds
    0 G on 5
    0.69 xG
    0 G on 1
    0.14 xG

    Wrist shots carried the volume: EDM went 0-for-17, SJS 1-for-23. EDM scored 3 of theirs off the rush.

    Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
    New to these numbers?

    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 →

    xG
    Expected goals. Every shot scored by how often that exact look goes in. 2.5 xG means the chances were worth about two and a half goals.
    HD
    High-danger chances — shots from the slot and the crease, where shots actually become goals.
    Corsi
    Every shot attempt, including the ones that missed or got blocked. A rough read on who had the puck.
    Adj.
    Score-adjusted. Teams that trail shoot more and teams that lead sit back, so this corrects the attempt count for the scoreboard.
    GSAx
    Goals saved above expected. A positive number means the goalie stopped more than an average goalie would have on those shots.
    PDO
    Shooting % plus save % — a luck gauge. It sits near 1.000 over a season, so a game far from it usually means the bounces decided it.
    Shot by shot

    In the net

    Graded on goals saved above expected
    T. Jarry
    EDM · 19/20 · .950
    started · 60:00 · win
    +0.8
    saved above expected
    B+
    the night
    Attempts faced
    33
    Avg chance faced
    5.5%
    Stopped vs expected
    0.970 vs 0.945
    Rebounds allowed
    1
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger0/10.2+0.2
    Medium0/141.3+1.3
    Low1/180.3-0.7
    Shorthanded0/50.3+0.3
    Tips & deflections0/10.1+0.1
    The save
    20% chance stopped, a wrist from 19 ft · P3 08:14
    The one to have back
    5% chance went in, a wrist from 33 ft · P3 11:19

    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

    Y. Askarov
    SJS · 17/20 · .850
    started · 56:28 · loss
    +0.3
    saved above expected
    B
    the night
    Attempts faced
    35
    Avg chance faced
    9.5%
    Stopped vs expected
    0.914 vs 0.905
    Rebounds allowed
    5
    By dangerG/attxGsaved
    High danger1/61.4+0.4
    Medium1/171.7+0.7
    Low1/120.3-0.7
    Shorthanded0/91.3+1.3
    Tips & deflections0/50.3+0.3
    The save
    32% chance stopped, a wrist from 4 ft · P3 10:55
    The one to have back
    3% chance went in, a slap from 49 ft · P1 12:37

    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

    Every skater who dressed

    Who played

    Rated on what they produced and how fast

    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.

    EDM18 skaters
    SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
    C. McDavidC24:040-196A+
    M. EkholmD22:461-097A+
    V. PodkolzinR20:481-097A+
    E. BouchardD24:070-197A
    L. DraisaitlC21:490-097A
    A. FormentonL14:021-032A
    I. HowardL8:590-155A
    J. SamanskiC6:190-133B
    M. JosephR14:420-132B
    K. KapanenR17:300-080B
    T. FredericC9:530-055B
    F. HallanderC14:110-080B
    C. MurphyD24:230-127C
    R. SheaD24:010-044C
    J. DickinsonC13:430-047C
    T. EmbersonD11:100-040D
    S. MukhamadullinD11:180-040D
    O. MichaelsR14:150-010D
    SJS18 skaters
    SkaterTOIG-AxG%Grade
    M. CelebriniC21:591-049A
    D. OrlovD18:200-084B
    I. ChernyshovL11:030-072B
    L. CagnoniD20:210-084C
    W. SmithC20:110-074C
    M. MisaC12:440-115C
    I. StenbergL18:090-042C
    M. MarchmentL17:440-063C
    Z. OstapchukC8:010-049D
    T. ToffoliC11:250-037D
    A. WennbergC20:320-042D
    S. DickinsonD16:400-038D
    K. SherwoodL16:150-040D
    J. TroubaD20:410-023F
    B. GoodrowC10:150-022F
    M. KesselringD19:030-010F
    D. NurseD21:560-011F
    C. GrafR14:130-014F

    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.

    Graded against a league-average game

    Report card

    Seven dimensions · A+ to F
    DimensionEDMSJS
    Offense
    ▸Basis

    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).

    A+
    98
    D
    66
    Defense
    ▸Basis

    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).

    B
    84
    F
    52
    Transition
    ▸Basis

    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).

    B
    86
    D
    64
    Special teams
    ▸Basis

    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.

    C
    74
    F
    48
    Goaltending
    ▸Basis

    EDM +0.81 goals saved above expected on 20 shots against.

    SJS +0.92 goals saved above expected on 20 shots against.

    B
    83
    B
    84
    Discipline
    ▸Basis

    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.

    B-
    80
    C-
    70
    Luck

    Grades bounces, not skill — C is neutral

    ▸Basis

    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.

    C
    74
    C
    76
    Source · NHL play-by-play · xG engine · luck graded separately
    What the model flagged
    WARNINGSJS

    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.

    STRENGTHEDM

    Dangerous off the rush

    3 goals on 25 rush shots worth 2.55 xG.

    STRENGTHEDM

    Won on the merits

    The Oilers controlled 68% of expected goals (3.92–1.81) and won 3-1 — result matched process.

    WARNINGEDM

    Rush defense leaked all night

    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.

    STRENGTHSJS

    Dangerous off the rush

    1 goals on 22 rush shots worth 1.55 xG.

    TACTICALEDM

    The moment it turned

    Macklin Celebrini's wrist shot from the top of the circles in P3 swung the game.

    70 shots · press play to watch the game back

    Where the shots came from

    NHL play-by-play coordinates
    EDM
    37 shots
    3
    Final
    70 shots
    SJS
    33 shots
    1
    EDM attackSJS attack
    EDM SJS Goal

    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.

    Ranked from the box score

    Three stars

    Points first
    Three stars · computed, not voted
    C. Murphy
    #5 · D · EDM
    0 G · 1 A · 0 SOG · 24:23 on ice
    E. Bouchard
    #2 · D · EDM
    0 G · 1 A · 1 SOG · 24:07 on ice · +2
    C. McDavid
    #97 · C · EDM
    0 G · 1 A · 4 SOG · 24:04 on ice · +1
    Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
    Keep going

    Where to next