Tue, Oct 19, 2010·Bridgestone Arena, Nashville
Calgary Flames 1, Nashville Predators 0 (OT)
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Nashville Predators win this game 59% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | OT | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CGY | 012 | 06 | 014 | 13 | 135 |
| NSH | 012 | 012 | 010 | 00 | 034 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- OT 2:10CGYRene BourqueGWGAssists: Brendan Morrison, Ian White · Wrist, 0.39 xG1–0
Penalties (7)
- P1 3:52CGYNiklas Hagman: High sticking2 min
- P2 2:51CGYTim Jackman: Tripping2 min
- P2 7:10NSHSteve Sullivan: Hooking2 min
- P2 12:30CGYJay Bouwmeester: Interference2 min
- P2 14:23NSHJ-P Dumont: Too many men on the ice2 min
- P2 16:37CGYIan White: Tripping2 min
- P3 14:12CGYCurtis Glencross: Interference goalkeeper2 min
Replay
Watch the game unfold on the ice: every shot, hit, turnover and faceoff appears as it happened, then fades. Drag the timeline to jump; goals are marked on it.
20:00
P1
- P1 20:00Jokinen won the faceoff against O'Reilly
- Goal
- Shot
- Miss
- Block
- Hit
- Takeaway
- Giveaway
- Faceoff
- Penalty
The numbers
Team totals, side by side.
Line combinations that worked
Model-basedEach team's forward lines and defence pairs at 5-on-5 (two minutes or more together), best first by expected goals for minus against.
Calgary Flames
Forward lines
- bestMorrison – Jokinen – Hagman11:30
xG 0.43–0.16 (73%)attempts 15–5goals 0–0
- Conroy – Jackman – Meyer4:51
xG 0.09–0.01 (90%)attempts 5–1goals 0–0
- Iginla – Stajan – Bourque3:27
xG 0.05–0.02 (74%)attempts 2–3goals 0–0
- Glencross – Bourque – Backlund7:55
xG 0.35–0.38 (48%)attempts 13–5goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestRegehr – White12:53
xG 0.40–0.20 (67%)attempts 20–8goals 0–0
- Staios – Bouwmeester14:30
xG 0.34–0.27 (55%)attempts 14–8goals 0–0
- Regehr – Bouwmeester2:00
xG 0.00–0.07 (0%)attempts 0–3goals 0–0
Nashville Predators
Forward lines
- bestSmithson – Kostitsyn – Spaling7:57
xG 0.26–0.06 (81%)attempts 6–3goals 0–0
- Dumont – Erat – Wilson6:24
xG 0.42–0.29 (59%)attempts 6–11goals 0–0
- Legwand – Ward – Tootoo12:04
xG 0.24–0.20 (54%)attempts 8–15goals 0–0
- Sullivan – O'Reilly – Hornqvist11:27
xG 0.11–0.35 (25%)attempts 7–13goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestKlein – O'Brien10:32
xG 0.29–0.13 (69%)attempts 11–12goals 0–0
- Bouillon – Franson3:00
xG 0.23–0.09 (71%)attempts 4–3goals 0–0
- O'Brien – Franson6:23
xG 0.23–0.15 (61%)attempts 2–7goals 0–0
How the game flowed
Model-basedChance quality for each side, minute by minute, with pressure underneath.
Running total of expected goals for each team. Steep climbs are spells of pressure; dots are goals. Shaded bands mark power plays (team colour), 4-on-4 or 3-on-3 (grey) and empty nets.
Tempo: attempts, hits and takeaways per minute
Win probability
Model-basedHow each goal and each minute changed the likely winner.
NSH's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line NSH is favoured, below it CGY. Dots are goals.
Did the better team win?
Every shot replayed 10,000 times, scoring with its expected-goal probability.
Based on shot quality alone, Nashville Predators win this game 59% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (NSH − CGY), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).