San Jose Sharks
Sharks Locker Room: San Jose Leads NHL in This Stat, Sign of Better Things To Come?
The San Jose Sharks lead the NHL in one or two-goal losses.
They’ve got 29 such losses, a league-leading 15 one-goal defeats and second-most 14 two-goal losses.
49 percent of their 59 losses have been of this close variety, including Friday night’s 4-2 loss at the Edmonton Oilers.
Last year, they had 21 one or two-goal losses, and just nine one-goal defeats.
Just 33 percent of their 63 losses last season were this kind of “close”.
Is this progress for the rebuilding franchise?
The San Jose Sharks hope so. So how do they start to convert these close losses into wins?
Macklin Celebrini, Will Smith, William Eklund and company being another year older will help.
“We have some guys in positions, some young players, especially, that are just growing and they’re learning…To play in this league, you need to be consistent,” head coach Ryan Warsofsky said. “The more you get experience doing it and being in these positions, the more and more comfortable you get, and that’s how you grow. That’s how we’ll grow as a team.”
A few whistles in their favor would help too.
“I think we got respect back from our opponent,” Warsofsky said, of the Sharks’ progress this season. “I don’t know if we got it from the rest of the league yet, [the officials].”
Case in point?
Wennberg trips up Bouchard. That's another #SJSharks penalty. pic.twitter.com/ch05O5IeZu
— TEAL TOWN USA – A San Jose Sharks Podcast (@TEALTOWNUSA) April 12, 2025
“I don’t love the last call on Wennberg. I’ve watched it a few times now,” Warsofsky admitted.
Edmonton had five power plays to San Jose’s two, and two power play goals to the Sharks’ zero. To add insult to injury, Corey Perry’s game-winner came off the Wennberg call.
Perhaps the Sharks can look to south to another rebuilding franchise, the Anaheim Ducks, as a model?
Last year, the Ducks led the NHL with 28 one or two-goal losses. Anaheim, the third-worst team in the league with a .360 Points % last season, has raised their Points % to .494.
San Jose would certainly consider that progress, if they’re able to improve their record by that much next year.
“Right now, we’re just a play here and play there that’s costing us a game,” Warsofsky said. “We’ve made some big strides here individually in this group.”
Ryan Warsofsky
Warsofsky, on Jack Thompson missing the first five minutes of the second period:
He’s dealing with a lower-body thing.
Warsofsky, on how the San Jose Sharks can avoid all those stick penalties:
A little bit of it is using our legs, instead of getting into tough positioning with our bodies. Having some focus and understanding of where our stick is, the high sticks.
I don’t love the last call on Wennberg. I’ve watched it a few times now. When you give a good team five times [on the [power play]…I think we got respect back from our opponent. I don’t know if we got it from the rest of the league yet, [the officials].
See the full interview here
Henry Thrun
Thrun, on Jan Rutta’s return:
I was super-excited for him. He’s been grinding and kind of plugging away to get back in and help us out. He’s so steady, it’s so hard to come back in the line-up, especially against a fast team like that. He’s a big right-handed defenseman that can play minutes, and those are hard to come by. He’s such a steady presence. I love playing with him, and a lot of guys enjoy being able to be his D-partner.
William Eklund
Eklund, on Georgi Romanov:
He was great today. Gave us a chance to win. Great performance.
See the full interview here
Alex Wennberg
Wennberg, on playing through an injury:
I have no comment on it. Right now, we have the last couple games here…all good.
See the full interview here
I love Wennberg, hope he gets Re-upped for a couple of years.
I agree he’s slick with the puck. Great hands and 200 ft player. Keep him please. Can teach kids the right way to play. We need to get better on the dot. I feel like we always lose faceoffs but Wenny is good there too.
You’re funny.
For those not trolling, Wennberg is signed to The Wennberg and is under contract for next year already. For those who are skeptical that the Sharks can bring in free agents, The Wennberg is proof that players like money and if the Sharks offer more money to good players, they can sign those players.
And everyone and their mother knows Wennberg is a prime candidate to be moved for future assets at next year’s deadline. The young kids are coming. It’ll be fine, folks.
However, Grier has said that the team was going to (and needed to be) a mix of the young guys and some solid vets. You can’t make the entirety of the team solid youngsters and prospects you are hoping on, Toffoli notwithstanding.
It’s true you can sign just about anybody if you throw enough money at them, but for a rebuilding team in a salary cap league you have to be very careful about that. Overpaying a bunch of mid free agents that don’t move the needle enough can be a pitfall. I think Grier has been pretty saavy, though. He’ll overpay, but the contracts are short enough he can get out from under (and maybe acquire some assets by trading them as pending UFAs.) This off-season will be very tricky. Grier does need to add. But I suspect the rising salary… Read more »
I hope by mid season he’s been replaced by a young player and they move him for a 1st or a good prospect.
He’ll be moved, for a 1st? Highly unlikely. He netted a 2nd and a 4th w/ salary retrained, and while GMMG will have 1 retention slot available, unsure if he’ll use it on the 21 trade or not. 21 also has a partial NTC kicking in next year.
Other potentials on the move that have value: 37, 38
Separately, “sign of better things to come?” Depends on who’s on the blueline.
SJS arguably has the worst current top 6 as of today.
Askarov coming in will def help in those 1 goal games, but he’ll need help defending 😀
No one thought Granny was bringing back a first last season either. Might have to add a 3rd or a 4th but it’s possible.
I like the poise he has when the puck is on his stick… There doesn’t seem to be any panic in his game.
To add onto this stat, the Sharks have 35 one-goal losses if you exclude empty net goals. In addition to that, there was the game where Asky was on his way to the bench when the other team got the puck…if he’d finished getting off the ice instead of trying and failing to get back when Macklin turned the puck over, it’d be 36.
So essentially if the Sharks had gone .500 in those games they’d be a bubble team sitting just below Calgary in the west.
It depends which games. 11 of those games are overtime/shootout losses, so they already got one point out of them. If we say 12 extra wins instead of regulation losses (24 points) and five or six wins instead of OTL (5-6 extra points) that puts us at 80-81 points, or just ahead of Anaheim.
Of course that doesn’t factor into calculations subtracting points from the other teams, nor does it factor in that we DID win some of our one-goal games. Also, some of the regulation losses could’ve been improved to OT losses.
One of the reasons I think they can be in the playoff conversation next season. If they kept Granlund, Ceci & Blackwood until the trade deadline they might have been close this season.
Obviously better times are coming but it sure as hell isn’t because they lead the league in close losses. The team with the most losses in the league is gonna do that quite often. The Sharks didn’t “beat out” the friggin’ Jets or somebody to be the “best” at losing. Only very bad teams can lead the league in this.
It doesn’t need any more context added, like that there would be even more one-goal losses if not for some empty netters. True of every team, ever.
While I agree with you that the context you mentioned is important, the improvement from last season is worth bringing up.
With regards to your last point, I did mention in the comments above that we have 35 and a half one-goal losses excluding ENG (the half is the one where Asky was on his way to the bench when Macklin turned it over so it wasn’t technically an ENG).
I think the close games are a positive sign, but Sharks do have a -101 goal diff. For reference, Blackhawks are next worst at -72. The point being, there are reasons to believe the -101 is not as bad as it looks, but even so it’s still a very long way up.