Real data. Everything on this page is computed from actual games.
Spare Line Change
Numbers from
Hits and takeaways
at

EDM

Edmonton Oilers

3-0-1

SJS

San Jose Sharks

3-1-0

Has last change

Saturday, October 10

4:00 PM ET · SAP Center at San Jose

The short version

How it looks for Edmonton

The matchup suits Edmonton

Edmonton has controlled the play far better over recent games and San Jose has home ice. San Jose can make it interesting if they pounce on loose pucks.

How it looks for San Jose

San Jose faces a real test

Edmonton has controlled the play far better over recent games and San Jose has home ice. San Jose can pull it off if they pounce on loose pucks.

From this site’s win model, which rates each team on how well they have controlled the chances lately, who is in their lineup (including the league’s injury news), home ice and rest. We don’t publish the number before the game; the post-game page shows it and what went into it.

  1. Penalties could cost the Sharks

    The Sharks’ penalty kill sits 24th in the league, and the Oilers’ power play is 1st (9.5 expected goals per 60). Discipline matters more than usual for the Sharks tonight.

    The call The Oilers’ power play creates at least their usual 9.5 expected goals per 60.

    Style fingerprint · this season blended with last · 4 and 4 games this season

  2. The Sharks’ goalie is in for some dangerous shots

    The Oilers make their shots count (10th in the league: a 6.6% chance of scoring on the average shot), and the Sharks are 29th at preventing dangerous shots. Expect the Oilers to get some real chances.

    The call The Oilers’ average shot has at least their usual 6.6% chance of going in.

    Style fingerprint · this season blended with last · 4 and 4 games this season

  3. Bodies will fly

    The Oilers have a hit score of 110 (8th in the league) and the Sharks 116 (4th), where 100 is league average after adjusting for each arena’s scorer. Keep your head up.

    The call The two teams’ combined hit score reaches their usual 113.

    Style fingerprint · this season blended with last · 4 and 4 games this season

  4. Don’t blink and you still might miss the shots

    Edmonton plays some of the league’s slowest games (24th for pace: 80.1 shots per 60 at 5-on-5, both teams combined), and so does San Jose (29th). We think this one is even quieter than either team’s usual.

    The call The game runs at fewer than 78.3 shots per 60 at 5-on-5, slower than either team’s usual.

    Style fingerprint · this season blended with last · 4 and 4 games this season

Worth knowing

  • Edmonton M. Savoie has not played this season. L. Draisaitl is in his usual spot beside C. McDavid and V. Podkolzin. That line is getting 12:18 a game at 5-on-5, up from 9:11 with Savoie.
  • Edmonton K. Kapanen has started playing on the power play: on the ice for 56% of the team’s power-play time in 4 games, up from 6% last season.

These calls are written by fixed rules from the numbers below, and saved as they stand at puck drop. After the game, each one will be checked against what happened.

Style fingerprints

How Edmonton and San Jose play, trait by trait, on the same scales.

Edmonton OilersSan Jose SharksLeague averageLikely range

Each scale runs from the league’s lowest team on the left to its highest on the right. Numbers blend last season with the 4 and 4 games played so far; traits that take longer to settle lean more on last season.

This season only: 4 games for Edmonton, 4 for San Jose. Expect these to swing a lot, which is why the likely ranges are so wide.

The biggest differences

Show all 18 traitsHide the full set

Offense

  • Shot volume
    SelectiveRelentless

    • Edmonton: 56.5 shot attempts per 6016th of 32

      Edmonton: 56.7 shot attempts per 6015th of 32

    • San Jose: 47.4 shot attempts per 6029th of 32

      San Jose: 43.5 shot attempts per 6029th of 32

  • Shot quality
    HopefulDangerous

    • Edmonton: a 6.6% chance of scoring on the average shot10th of 32

      Edmonton: a 6.6% chance of scoring on the average shot17th of 32

    • San Jose: a 6.2% chance of scoring on the average shot22nd of 32

      San Jose: a 5.1% chance of scoring on the average shot31st of 32

  • Second chances
    One-and-doneCrashers

    • Edmonton: 9.8% of chances come from rebounds31st of 32

      Edmonton: 5.5% of chances come from rebounds28th of 32

    • San Jose: 10.3% of chances come from rebounds12th of 32

      San Jose: 2.4% of chances come from rebounds31st of 32

  • Off-turnover offense
    PatientOpportunist

    • Edmonton: 6.8% of chances come right after a turnover28th of 32

      Edmonton: 7.1% of chances come right after a turnover19th of 32

    • San Jose: 7.0% of chances come right after a turnover24th of 32

      San Jose: 11.0% of chances come right after a turnover10th of 32

  • Shots from defensemen
    Forward-ledActive D

    • Edmonton: 35.9% of shot attempts come from defensemen9th of 32

      Edmonton: 33.3% of shot attempts come from defensemen19th of 32

    • San Jose: 35.3% of shot attempts come from defensemen15th of 32

      San Jose: 38.7% of shot attempts come from defensemen1st of 32

  • Shots from in close
    From distanceIn close

    • Edmonton: 30.5% of shots come from within 20 feet18th of 32

      Edmonton: 26.4% of shots come from within 20 feet26th of 32

    • San Jose: 30.5% of shots come from within 20 feet17th of 32

      San Jose: 24.8% of shots come from within 20 feet30th of 32

Defense

  • Shot suppression
    PorousStingy

    • Edmonton: 53.8 shot attempts allowed per 6010th of 32

      Edmonton: 49.9 shot attempts allowed per 607th of 32

    • San Jose: 59.9 shot attempts allowed per 6025th of 32

      San Jose: 63.2 shot attempts allowed per 6027th of 32

  • Quality allowed
    ExposedSheltered

    • Edmonton: a 6.5% chance of scoring on the average shot against25th of 32

      Edmonton: a 6.3% chance of scoring on the average shot against16th of 32

    • San Jose: a 6.7% chance of scoring on the average shot against29th of 32

      San Jose: a 7.9% chance of scoring on the average shot against31st of 32

  • Breakdowns avoided
    Fire drillComposed

    • Edmonton: 0.45 defensive breakdowns per 6029th of 32

      Edmonton: 0.33 defensive breakdowns per 6014th of 32

    • San Jose: 0.44 defensive breakdowns per 6025th of 32

      San Jose: 0.93 defensive breakdowns per 6029th of 32

  • Goaltending
    SieveWall

    • Edmonton: +0.04 goals saved above expected per 6027th of 32

      Edmonton: −1.47 goals saved above expected per 6030th of 32

    • San Jose: +0.02 goals saved above expected per 6031st of 32

      San Jose: +0.52 goals saved above expected per 6011th of 32

Tempo and edge

  • Pace
    SlogTrack meet

    • Edmonton: 80.1 shots per 60, both teams combined24th of 32

      Edmonton: 74.8 shots per 60, both teams combined24th of 32

    • San Jose: 78.3 shots per 60, both teams combined29th of 32

      San Jose: 74.2 shots per 60, both teams combined25th of 32

  • Forecheck pressure
    PassiveHounding

    • Edmonton: forecheck score 109 (100 is league average)7th of 32Edmonton: 26.0 forecheck plays recorded per 607th of 32

      Edmonton: forecheck score 125 (100 is league average)6th of 32Edmonton: 32.5 forecheck plays recorded per 602nd of 32

    • San Jose: forecheck score 102 (100 is league average)14th of 32San Jose: 22.5 forecheck plays recorded per 6016th of 32

      San Jose: forecheck score 102 (100 is league average)14th of 32San Jose: 24.4 forecheck plays recorded per 6015th of 32

  • Physicality
    FinesseBruising

    • Edmonton: hit score 110 (100 is league average)8th of 32Edmonton: 30.6 hits recorded per 604th of 32

      Edmonton: hit score 132 (100 is league average)2nd of 32Edmonton: 41.0 hits recorded per 602nd of 32

    • San Jose: hit score 116 (100 is league average)4th of 32San Jose: 29.1 hits recorded per 608th of 32

      San Jose: hit score 118 (100 is league average)7th of 32San Jose: 33.1 hits recorded per 609th of 32

  • Depth
    Top-heavyDeep

    • Edmonton: 40.3% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six29th of 32

      Edmonton: 40.8% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six24th of 32

    • San Jose: 42.2% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six15th of 32

      San Jose: 43.9% of forward ice time at 5-on-5 goes to the bottom six8th of 32

Special teams

  • Power play
    HarmlessLethal

    • Edmonton: 9.5 expected goals per 60 on the power play1st of 32

      Edmonton: 8.3 expected goals per 60 on the power play8th of 32

    • San Jose: 7.0 expected goals per 60 on the power play26th of 32

      San Jose: 7.1 expected goals per 60 on the power play17th of 32

  • Penalty kill
    LeakyAirtight

    • Edmonton: 8.1 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded25th of 32

      Edmonton: 6.2 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded11th of 32

    • San Jose: 8.0 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded24th of 32

      San Jose: 9.9 expected goals allowed per 60 shorthanded30th of 32

  • Power kill
    BunkeredPredatory

    • Edmonton: 1.1 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded5th of 32

      Edmonton: 1.0 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded13th of 32

    • San Jose: 0.8 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded19th of 32

      San Jose: 1.0 expected goals created per 60 shorthanded12th of 32

  • Discipline
    RecklessClean

    • Edmonton: 0.04 more penalties drawn than taken per 6013th of 32

      Edmonton: 0.99 more penalties drawn than taken per 604th of 32

    • San Jose: 0.02 more penalties drawn than taken per 6016th of 32

      San Jose: 0.24 more penalties taken than drawn per 6018th of 32

Forecheck pressure and physicality are arena-adjusted scores; switch “Hits and takeaways” to Raw in the settings to see the numbers as recorded. How the arena adjustment works.

Lines and deployment

San Jose is at home, so their coach changes last and chooses who plays against whom.

How good, against the same line or pair on other teamsHow much, low to high (not good or bad)

Lines and pairs are numbered by 5-on-5 ice time together over each team’s last 10 games (4 and 4 so far), with each older game counting half as much as the one after it, so the latest combinations come first. With so few games, each group’s results are pulled toward the average for its line number.

Edmonton Oilers

San Jose Sharks

Who San Jose is likely to send against whom

Each strip shows how one San Jose group’s 5-on-5 time at home has been split across opponents’ four forward lines. Tonight those lines are Edmonton’s, named in each box.

Edmonton’s lines tonightL1 Draisaitl · McDavid · PodkolzinL2 Joseph · Formenton · MichaelsL3 Kapanen · Jones · DachL4 Frederic · Howard · Samanski

San Jose forward lines against Edmonton forward lines

  • L1Marchment · Smith · ChernyshovEDM L132%EDM L232%EDM L335%EDM L42%
  • L2Wennberg · Sherwood · StenbergEDM L157%EDM L220%EDM L322%EDM L40%
  • L3Toffoli · Graf · MisaEDM L117%EDM L250%EDM L327%EDM L46%
  • L4Goodrow · Dellandrea · OstapchukEDM L139%EDM L220%EDM L315%EDM L426%

San Jose defense pairs against Edmonton forward lines

  • P1Nurse · KesselringEDM L132%EDM L229%EDM L333%EDM L46%
  • P2Orlov · CagnoniEDM L121%EDM L251%EDM L321%EDM L47%
  • P3Trouba · DickinsonEDM L163%EDM L26%EDM L328%EDM L43%

Based on 2 San Jose home games this season, so treat it as a habit forming, not a certainty. Faded rows have under ten minutes. With no line matching, each group would face an opposing line about as often as that line is on the ice; a number well above that means the coach is sending that group out against it on purpose.

Special teams

Each power play set against the penalty killers it will face.

Show

Edmonton power play against San Jose penalty kill

  • Edmonton power play

    9.5 expected goals per 60 · 1st of 32

  • San Jose penalty kill

    8.0 expected goals allowed per 60 · 24th of 32

Edmonton power play

PP168% of the time

Creates 8.4 expected goals per 60

  • E. BouchardQuarterback
  • L. DraisaitlDistributor
  • C. McDavidTrigger
  • V. PodkolzinNet-front
  • K. Kapanen

PP232% of the time

Creates 6.5 expected goals per 60

  • J. WalmanQuarterback
  • I. Howard
  • T. Frederic
  • R. Shea
  • C. Dach

 

Where Edmonton’s last 140 power-play shots came from. Bigger dots are more dangerous.

San Jose penalty kill

Starts the kill

Second wave

Spot duty

Units and penalty-kill roles use each team’s last 10 games; power-play role tags use this season and last, counting only games with the player’s current team; the map shows the last 140 power-play shots. Point at a power-play name to see his shots on the map.

Goaltending

Is each goalie stopping more than he should, and what is his team asking him to face?

Showagainst

D. Levi3 starts · 73 shots, this season and last

−2.2 goals saved above expected too few starts to rate

Low-danger save %
.974 38 shots
Medium-danger save %
.750 24 shots
High-danger save %
.727 11 shots
Shots faced per 60
24.4
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0
Quality starts
67%

Helping, or hung out to dry?

System and goalie both goodGoalie bailing them outGoalie giving back what the system earnsTrouble everywhereTeam allows fewer chances ← → more chancesD. LeviT. JarryY. AskarovA. Nedeljkovic

Y. Askarov45 starts · 1429 shots, this season and last

−16.3 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.963 722 shots
Medium-danger save %
.855 511 shots
High-danger save %
.653 196 shots
Shots faced per 60
30.8
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.34
Quality starts
42%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • D. Levi: −2.2 goals saved above expected in 3 starts (too few starts to place)
    • Y. Askarov: −16.3 goals saved above expected in 45 starts
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • D. Levi: 24.4 shots faced per 60 (too few starts to place)
    • Y. Askarov: 30.8 shots faced per 60
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • D. Levi: the average shot he faces has a 6.9% chance of going in (too few starts to place)
    • Y. Askarov: the average shot he faces has a 7.1% chance of going in
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • D. Levi: 0 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60 (too few starts to place)
    • Y. Askarov: 0.34 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • D. Levi: a typical wait of 90 seconds between shots (too few starts to place)
    • Y. Askarov: a typical wait of 65 seconds between shots
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • D. Levi: a quality start 67% of the time (too few starts to place)
    • Y. Askarov: a quality start 42% of the time

D. Levi, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

Y. Askarov, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

D. Levi3 starts · 73 shots, this season

−2.2 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.974 38 shots
Medium-danger save %
.750 24 shots
High-danger save %
.727 11 shots
Shots faced per 60
24.4
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0
Quality starts
67%

Helping, or hung out to dry?

System and goalie both goodGoalie bailing them outGoalie giving back what the system earnsTrouble everywhereTeam allows fewer chances ← → more chancesD. LeviT. JarryY. AskarovA. Nedeljkovic

Y. Askarov3 starts · 87 shots, this season

+0.2 goals saved above expected

Low-danger save %
.955 44 shots
Medium-danger save %
.828 29 shots
High-danger save %
.643 14 shots
Shots faced per 60
28
Defensive breakdowns per 60
0.64
Quality starts
0%
Show the full goalie comparisonHide the full goalie comparison
  • Stopping more than expected
    SieveWall
    • D. Levi: −2.2 goals saved above expected in 3 starts
    • Y. Askarov: +0.2 goals saved above expected in 3 starts
  • How busy he is
    QuietUnder siege
    • D. Levi: 24.4 shots faced per 60
    • Y. Askarov: 28 shots faced per 60
  • How dangerous the shots are
    ShelteredExposed
    • D. Levi: the average shot he faces has a 6.9% chance of going in
    • Y. Askarov: the average shot he faces has a 8.1% chance of going in
  • Breakdowns in front of him
    RareConstant
    • D. Levi: 0 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
    • Y. Askarov: 0.64 defensive breakdowns in front of him per 60
  • Waiting between shots
    Steady workLong waits
    • D. Levi: a typical wait of 90 seconds between shots
    • Y. Askarov: a typical wait of 82 seconds between shots
  • Night-to-night steadiness
    StreakySteady
    • D. Levi: a quality start 67% of the time
    • Y. Askarov: a quality start 0% of the time

D. Levi, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

Y. Askarov, night to night: goals saved above expected in each start

−3 (bad night)0+3 (stole it)

The menus list every goalie on each team, busiest this season first; the site does not yet know who will start. Expected-goal models can’t see passes before a shot, so a goalie whose team gives up many cross-ice passes looks worse here than he really is.

Where the goals come from

How each team’s goals are scored, or allowed, against the league average.

Show goals
EdmontonSan JoseLeague average
  • Everyday even-strength play54%54.4%
  • Power play23.1%21.5%
  • Rebound5.9%8.8%
  • Empty net5.6%4.6%
  • Off a turnover3.4%5.4%
  • Goalie pulled2.5%2.3%
  • Shorthanded2.2%1.5%
  • Off a faceoff win3.4%1.5%

324 Edmonton goals and 261 San Jose goals scored this season and last. Each row has its own scale.

  • Everyday even-strength play50%58.3%
  • Power play13.6%16.7%
  • Rebound4.5%0%
  • Empty net4.5%0%
  • Off a turnover4.5%16.7%
  • Goalie pulled4.5%0%
  • Shorthanded9.1%8.3%
  • Off a faceoff win9.1%0%

22 Edmonton goals and 12 San Jose goals scored this season. Each row has its own scale.

These mixes are mostly luck: over three seasons, teams’ goals came from much the same places, and most of the differences here didn’t last. Each team page shows how much luck alone can move each row.

Data notes

Team pages: Edmonton Oilers · San Jose Sharks