Wed, Oct 20, 2010·Nationwide Arena, Columbus
Anaheim Ducks 1, Columbus Blue Jackets 3
Expected result
Based on shot quality alone, Columbus Blue Jackets win this game 63% of the time.
By period
Goals and shots on goal in each period.
| Team | P1 | P2 | P3 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANA | 012 | 08 | 112 | 132 |
| CBJ | 010 | 26 | 16 | 322 |
Goals, with shots on goal in grey.
Scoring
Every goal, with the change it made to the home team's win probability.
- P2 3:32CBJDerek MacKenzieUnassisted · Wrist, 0.16 xG0–1
- P2 4:43CBJRick NashGWGAssists: Kristian Huselius, Antoine Vermette · Wrist, 0.07 xG0–2
- P3 0:58ANATeemu SelanneAssists: Jason Blake, Lubomir Visnovsky · Snap, 0.12 xG1–2
- P3 19:32CBJRick NashENUnassisted · Wrist, 0.57 xG1–3
Penalties (8)
- P1 9:27ANARyan Carter: Holding2 min
- P1 18:24CBJEthan Moreau: Interference2 min
- P2 5:58CBJNikita Filatov: Delaying game puck over glass2 min
- P2 10:48CBJRick Nash: Interference2 min
- P2 17:31CBJSamuel Pahlsson: Holding2 min
- P3 6:02ANASaku Koivu: Interference2 min
- P3 12:59ANAJason Blake: Hooking2 min
- P3 13:17CBJDerick Brassard: Interference2 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 20:00Pahlsson won the faceoff against Getzlaf
- 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.
Anaheim Ducks
Forward lines
- bestRyan – Carter – Sexton4:54
xG 0.35–0.14 (72%)attempts 5–2goals 0–0
- Marchant – Parros – Chipchura3:51
xG 0.34–0.18 (65%)attempts 11–2goals 0–1
- Getzlaf – Perry – Beleskey5:08
xG 0.10–0.00 (100%)attempts 4–1goals 0–0
- Selanne – Koivu – Blake5:48
xG 0.24–0.21 (54%)attempts 6–4goals 1–0
Defence pairs
- bestBrookbank – Syvret10:56
xG 0.55–0.35 (61%)attempts 18–3goals 0–1
- Mara – Lilja12:06
xG 0.07–0.12 (36%)attempts 7–3goals 0–0
- Lydman – Visnovsky15:46
xG 0.59–0.86 (41%)attempts 12–19goals 1–1
Columbus Blue Jackets
Forward lines
- bestClark – MacKenzie – Dorsett4:40
xG 0.20–0.11 (64%)attempts 3–6goals 1–0
- Clark – Brassard – Voracek2:14
xG 0.08–0.04 (71%)attempts 2–2goals 0–0
- Huselius – Vermette – Nash9:53
xG 0.46–0.49 (49%)attempts 7–9goals 1–1
- Brassard – Voracek – Filatov5:47
xG 0.08–0.14 (36%)attempts 2–7goals 0–0
Defence pairs
- bestGuenin – Hejda3:49
xG 0.25–0.08 (77%)attempts 4–1goals 1–0
- Hejda – Holden6:55
xG 0.26–0.12 (68%)attempts 5–10goals 1–0
- Tyutin – Guenin8:27
xG 0.33–0.33 (50%)attempts 6–10goals 0–1
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.
CBJ's chance of winning through the game. Above the middle line CBJ is favoured, below it ANA. 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, Columbus Blue Jackets win this game 63% of the time.
Simulated goal difference (CBJ − ANA), 10,000 replays
The outlined bar is the actual result (excluding the shootout).