Canucks steal one from the Kings against the run of play
The Canucks stole one. They lost the expected-goals battle 3.41–2.43 and won anyway.
The underlying story
The Canucks won 4–3 in overtime despite losing the expected-goals battle 3.41–2.43. The Kings controlled 58% of expected goals at 5v5 — a decisive advantage that typically carries winners. Vancouver's goaltending and finishing closed a gap that should have been insurmountable.
Shot attempts and high-danger chances told the same story. Los Angeles out-shot Vancouver 34–25 and dominated the crease 5–2. K. Lankinen stopped 31 of 34 (0.912 SV%). D. Kuemper had 21 saves on 25 (0.840 SV%), underperforming his expected value by 1.57 goals. Vancouver overperformed their xG by 1.57 — either elite finishing or lucky bounces.
Jake DeBrusk's wrist shot from the doorstep at 02:58 of overtime sent the Canucks home.
In transition, both teams found their rhythm. Vancouver converted 3 of 24 rush attempts; Los Angeles managed 2 of 27. The margin was thin but decisive when it mattered most.
The danger ladder
LAK went 2-for-5 from high danger on 1.05 expected goals — 0.9 above expected.
Finishing vs expected
LAK finished -0.4 against expected, VAN +1.6 — D. Kuemper (LAK) allowed 1.6 more goals than expected.
Shot diet
Wrist shots carried the volume: LAK went 0-for-19, VAN 2-for-28. VAN scored 3 of theirs off the rush.
- VAN won despite being outplayed by xG (42%). Goaltending or finishing carried them.
- D. Kuemper (LAK) gave up 1.6 goals more than expected — well below their workload.
- LAK was clinical in the high-danger zone — 2/5 on HD chances (40%).
- VAN was lethal off the rush — 3 goals on 24 rush chances.
- LAK was lethal off the rush — 2 goals on 27 rush chances.
- LAK created 6 rebound opportunities (1 converted) — crashing the net effectively.
- VAN outperformed their expected goals by 1.6 — elite finishing or lucky bounces.