C. Ingram (EDM) stole the show: a 0.967 save percentage and 2.93 goals saved above expected. The Oilers won 4-1, but that scoreline masks what nearly happened. The Blackhawks generated 3.93 expected goals while converting just one—leaving 2.93 goals unrealized.

The Oilers controlled 5v5 play at 58% expected goals (5.44 to 3.93). Their 37-30 shot-attempt advantage was substantial, but the gap that mattered was quality: 0.086 xG per shot versus Chicago's 0.062. That differential compounds across a full game.

The Blackhawks generated genuine chances. They had six high-danger opportunities (combined 16 between the teams), but couldn't finish: 0-for-6 on those looks. That conversion rate won't happen often. S. Knight (CHI) played well with a 0.917 save percentage—2.44 goals better than expected—but faced lower-quality volume overall.

Leon Draisaitl's wrist shot from the doorstep (P3, 19:15) proved the turning point. The Oilers spread scoring across the lineup: E. Bouchard (2G, 1A in 24:31), Z. Hyman (1G, 1A in 19:28), and C. McDavid (2A in 21:18). The Blackhawks created four rebound opportunities and converted one; the Oilers created four and converted zero. None of it mattered once Ingram locked in—100% save percentage on six high-danger shots. That performance sealed the gap.

The model favors Edmonton decisively, projecting a 2.8–2.4 win at 56% confidence. The case rests on superior underlying play: the Oilers generate 52.0% of expected goals at even strength while allowing 42.0%, and they control 50.0% of shot attempts against Chicago's 46.0%. That territorial advantage translates to sustained pressure.

The critical wrinkle: Edmonton's PDO sits at 0.982, meaning the Oilers are converting at rates colder than league average, while Chicago runs at 0.996. Regression favors Edmonton. Hot goaltending can mask weak possession; Edmonton is the opposite. Given more time and league-average luck, the Oilers' margin widens.

Goaltending adds uncertainty: both D. Commesso and C. Ingram are on back-to-backs, raising questions about fatigue or backup usage. Either team could face a tired starter or see a third-stringer take the crease.

On the ice, Zach Hyman anchors Edmonton's attack at 1.23 expected goals per 60, with 14 goals and 13 assists—though only 1 has come as a high-danger chance, a sign he's succeeding through positioning and shot selection rather than volume of prime opportunities. His 13.0% shooting rate, slightly above league average, compounds the effect. Connor McDavid operates at a lower expected-goal rate of 0.92 per 60 but carries 25 goals and 33 assists, with 5 high-danger goals reflecting clutch finishing.

Chicago counters with Tyler Bertuzzi at 0.85 expected goals per 60, combining 20 goals and 15 assists, though 7 of those goals come as high-danger chances—suggesting elite conversion on his looks. His 18.0% shooting rate is among the league's best. Connor Bedard contributes 0.82 expected goals per 60 across 17 goals and 27 assists, with 5 high-danger goals, his 11.8% shooting rate reflecting near-average efficiency on limited prime chances.

The Oilers' edge in shot volume and expected goals, paired with room for positive PDO regression, points to a decisive result. Edmonton should win.