Backcheck
Recap · DAL at SJS

Stars hold off the Sharks

The Stars stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.50–4.71 and won anyway.

By the ModelJul 11, 8:58 PMxG: xgboost-0.758Edited for clarity
Away
DAL
Dallas Stars
5
Home
SJS
San Jose Sharks
3
FINAL
Process vs result

The underlying story

3.50Expected goals4.71
57% share for the better side
30Shot attempts (SOG)37
4High-danger chances7
53Corsi (all attempts)70
Score-adjusted: 39% / 61%
Source · NHL play-by-play · XGBoost xG

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.

How the game was won

The danger ladder

shotsgoalsexpected
High dangerslot & crease
DAL2 / 4 · 1.39 xG
SJS0 / 7 · 1.72 xG
Medium dangermid-range
DAL2 / 12 · 1.42 xG
SJS1 / 21 · 2.38 xG
Low dangerperimeter & point
DAL1 / 37 · 0.69 xG
SJS2 / 42 · 0.62 xG

SJS went 0-for-7 from high danger on 1.72 expected goals — 1.7 left on the table.

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

Finishing vs expected

expectedactual
DAL
5 G · 3.50 xG · +1.5
SJS
3 G · 4.71 xG · -1.7
0123456
Goalies · GSAx (goals saved above expected)
J. OettingerDAL
+1.7
A. NedeljkovicSJS
-0.5

DAL finished +1.5 against expected, SJS -1.7 — J. Oettinger (DAL) saved 1.7 goals above expected.

Source · Backcheck xG model
What they shot — and what went in

Shot diet

goalsshots
DAL
WRIST5/28
SLAP0/4
TIP IN0/6
BACKHAND0/2
DEFLECTED0/0
SNAP0/0
OTHER0/13
SJS
WRIST2/29
SLAP1/9
TIP IN0/4
BACKHAND0/4
DEFLECTED0/2
SNAP0/1
OTHER0/21
DAL
SJS
Off the rush
4 G on 22 · 1.92 xG
1 G on 25 · 2.39 xG
Off rebounds
0 G on 4 · 0.56 xG
1 G on 10 · 1.65 xG

Wrist shots carried the volume: DAL went 5-for-28, SJS 2-for-29. DAL scored 4 of theirs off the rush.

Source · Backcheck xG model · NHL shot types
Three stars · computed, not voted
E. Lindell
#23 · D · DAL
0 G · 2 A · 1 SOG · 25:46 TOI · +2
M. Celebrini
#71 · C · SJS
0 G · 2 A · 8 SOG · 24:04 TOI
C. Graf
#51 · R · SJS
2 G · 0 A · 4 SOG · 19:29 TOI
Ranked from the box score — points first · Backcheck
What the model flagged
  • 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.
Before the game — the model's pre-game read
Preview · DAL at SJS · 10:00 PM ET

Stars at Sharks: a genuine coin flip

By the ModelJul 11, 8:57 PMEdited for clarity
Win probability

The model's lean

51%
DAL
Model favorite
51%
49%
DAL50SJS

DAL by 2 points of win probability — effectively a coin flip. Projected score DAL 2.52.4 SJS; 19% chance it's tied after 60.

Source · Backcheck Poisson projection · season scoring rates
Season profile · edge from the spine

Tale of the tape

DAL← edge
edge →SJS
51.0%5v5 xG%48.0%
47.0%Corsi%47.0%
2.36xGF / 602.33
2.29xGA / 602.56
2.07Goals for / gm1.99
1.68Goals against / gm2.32
1.024PDO — luck, not skill0.998

DAL holds 5 of 6 process categories — and PDO (1.024 vs 0.998) says DAL has run hotter.

Source · MoneyPuck season tables · 5v5

Dallas and San Jose are too evenly matched to pick. The model projects a 2.5-2.4 Stars advantage with Dallas at 50% win probability—as close to a pick'em as projections get.

Dallas owns the underlying play. The Stars post 51.0% xG to the Sharks' 48.0%, yet both teams share 47.0% Corsi. That modest edge comes with a caveat: Dallas runs 1.024 PDO, meaning they're outscoring their chances. Expect regression.

Goaltending adds uncertainty. Y. Askarov arrives on a back-to-back, which could mean a backup start or a fatigued starter.

Jason Robertson drives Dallas's attack with 0.96 xG/60 and 25G 21A, including 2 high-danger goals on 12.4% shooting. Michael Bunting provides secondary scoring at 0.83 xG/60, 8G 14A, and 7.6% shooting.

San Jose counters with Pavol Regenda, who leads at 1.10 xG/60 despite 5G 1A. He's converted high-danger looks at elite efficiency—2 high-danger goals on 16.1% shooting. Igor Chernyshov offers another threat at 0.91 xG/60, 6G 8A, and 15.0% shooting, with 1 high-danger goal.

Tyler Myers represents Dallas's defensive weakness. Chernyshov's defensive exposure for San Jose partially offsets his offensive value.

This is chaos dressed as matchup analysis. Two evenly staffed teams, one slight underlying edge, one regression looming, and a goalie in uncertain condition. The 50% line holds.

Computed danger · scouting

Players to watch

DAL
Jason Robertson25G 21A
0.96 xG/60 · 2 HD · 12.4% sh
Michael Bunting8G 14A
0.83 xG/60 · 0 HD · 7.6% sh
SJS
Pavol Regenda5G 1A
1.10 xG/60 · 2 HD · 16.1% sh
Igor Chernyshov6G 8A
0.91 xG/60 · 1 HD · 15.0% sh
Source · MoneyPuck skaters